SR 06-14-2022 6B
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 14, 2022
Agenda Item: 6.B
1 of 24
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Administration
Subject: Appeal of Determination by Landmarks Commission to Designate 631
Colorado Avenue as a City Landmark
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve Appeal 22ENT-0015, appeal of the Landmarks Commission’s decision
to designate the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue as a City Landmark;
and
2. Deny Designation Application 21ENT-0125 to designate the property located at
631 Colorado Avenue as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.
3. If the City Council disapproves the appeal and approves the designation
application to designate the property as either a City Landmark or Structure of
Merit, as described in Alternative Actions, adopt the alternative findings under
“California Environmental Quality Act Compliance”.
Summary
On March 19, 2021, 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc., the owner of the property at 631 Colorado
Avenue, filed a demolition permit application. On May 20, 2021, Nina Fresco, on behalf
of the Santa Monica Conservancy, submitted historic resource designation application
21ENT-0125 to nominate the property at 631 Colorado Avenue as either a Landmark or
a Structure of Merit, with a revised application submitted on January 9, 2022. The
designation application includes information to support designating the property as a
Landmark based on Landmark designation criteria #1 and #4 as listed in Santa Monica
Municipal Code (“SMMC”) Section 9.56.100(A). Staff contracted with GPA Consulting
Group (“GPA”) to prepare a landmarks assessment report for the property. GPA’s
report found that the property does not appear to meet the criteria necessary to
designate the property as a Santa Monica Landmark pursuant to SMMC Section
6.B
Packet Pg. 1403
2 of 24
9.56.100(A) or as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit pursuant to SMMC Section
9.56.080.
On January 10, 2022, in accordance with Interim Zoning Ordinance 2643 (“IZO”)
establishing interim demolition review procedures, the Landmarks Commission held a
public hearing to discuss the property’s potential eligibility as a Landmark or Structure of
Merit. The Commission determined that the property met Landmark designation criteria
9.56.100(A)(1): “It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political or architectural history of the City” as a pioneer of the industrial
commercial phase of development in downtown, and representative of the City’s
evolution from the 1930s to the present. Under the IZO, if the Commission designates a
property as a Landmark, it is then automatically determined that the building does not
merit designation as a Structure of Merit.
On January 20, 2022, 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. filed a timely appeal (Appeal 22ENT-
0015) of the Landmarks Commission’s decision. The appellant’s statement is attached
and is further discussed in this report. Based on the findings outlined in the GPA report,
evidence received prior to and during the Commission’s public hearing on January 10,
2022, and review of the appeal statement, staff recommends that the property be
determined as ineligible as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.
Background
Historic Resource Designation Application
The applicant for the designation application submitted information to support
designating the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue as a City Landmark. The
application asserts that the property meets SMMC Section 9.56.100(A)(1) as an early
example of industrial development in the downtown area and the first “beer outlet” in the
city. The application further contends that the site is eligible because buildings that
existed before the current development, but have since been demolished completely,
were associated with Etta Vena Moxley, a prominent African American community
member and activist, beginning in the early 1900s. Finally, the application states that
the property is also eligible for Landmark designation under SMMC Section
6.B
Packet Pg. 1404
3 of 24
9.56.100(A)(4) due to the use of Groutlock brick, a technical innovation that occurred
after the Long Beach earthquake in 1933, and it’s Streamline Moderne/Art Deco styling.
City of Santa Monica Landmark and Historic District Ordinance Santa Monica Municipal
Code (SMMC) 9.56
Adopted in 1976, the stated purpose of the City’s Landmark and Historic District
Ordinance (the “Ordinance”) is:
[T]o promote the public health, safety and general welfare by establishing such
procedures and providing such regulations as are deemed necessary to:
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.
C. Foster civic pride in the beauty and noble accomplishments of the past.
D. Protect and enhance the City’s aesthetic and historic attractions to residents,
tourists, visitors and others, thereby serving as a stimulus and support to
business and industry.
E. Promote the use of Landmarks, Structures of Merit and Historic Districts for
the education, pleasure and welfare of the people of this City.
The Ordinance further establishes procedures and standards intended to achieve these
purposes. Among these procedures, the SMMC grants the Landmarks Commission the
power to designate Landmarks and Structures of Merit. The Commission has the option
to designate an improvement as a Landmark or Structure of Merit to allow the City to
protect and enhance improvements that are found to meet certain criteria to support
either designation. Currently, there are 134 designated City Landmarks, 13 designated
Structures of Merit, and 5 Historic Districts within the City.
To guide the exercise of discretion by the Landmarks Commission in designating
Landmarks and the Council in approving or disapproving the actions of the Landmarks
6.B
Packet Pg. 1405
4 of 24
Commission, the Ordinance, SMMC 9.56.100(A), sets forth six Landmark Designation
Criteria:
[T]he Landmarks Commission may approve the landmark designation of a
structure, improvement, natural feature, or an object if it finds that it meets 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. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or
value.
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.
A Structure of Merit is an improvement that has been designated as and determined to
be appropriate for official recognition by the Landmarks Commission. A Structure of
Merit contributes to Santa Monica’s cultural identity but is not sufficiently distinguished
to merit designation as a City Landmark. A key difference between Landmark and
Structure of Merit designations is the level of historic significance based on their
respective designation criterion, as the Landmark criterion are more elevated in
comparison. Also, upon an owner’s request to demolish a designated Structure of
Merit, the City may negotiate with the property owner in an effort to agree to a means of
historically preserving the designated property. However, if no such agreement can be
reached within this 180-day period which can be extended by the Landmarks
Commission for an additional 180 days, the Structure of Merit could be demolished.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1406
5 of 24
Further, a Structure of Merit designation can also be used for a potential contributor to a
potential Historic District. However, the intent of using a potential district as the basis of
a Structure of Merit designation initiates a 90-day period where a historic district
application must be filed. If such application is not received, then the Structure of Merit
designation is automatically nullified. In this manner, the Structure of Merit designation
does not provide certainty in the protections of a property that a Landmark designation
provides.
The Landmarks Ordinance, SMMC 9.56.080, sets forth the following Structure of Merit
Criteria:
A. The property has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.
B. The subject building is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the
following criteria:
1) It is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical
type.
2) It is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.
3) The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
In accordance with the Landmarks Ordinance, the City Council reviews the
Commission’s designation of a Landmark, as well as any related decisions de novo.
The Council may review and take action on all determinations, interpretations,
decisions, judgments or similar actions taken that were in the purview of the
Commission, and the Council may approve, in whole or in part, or disapprove the prior
determinations and decisions of the Commission.
Discussion
Property Information and Architectural Description
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is located on a corner parcel bound by Colorado
Avenue to the south, 7th Street to the east, a separate parcel to the north, and 6th Court
alleyway to the west. The parcel contains two buildings, the Main Building located on
the eastern side of the parcel and the Auxiliary Building located in the western corner.
The property features limited landscaped areas with mature trees and hedges planted
6.B
Packet Pg. 1407
6 of 24
directly along the Colorado Avenue property line and around the main entrance of the
Main Building and Auxiliary Building for added privacy. The remainder of the parcel is
covered in asphalt paving that has been divided into parking spaces which are not
visible from the public-right-of way due to the mature landscaping and modern fence
with Art Deco-inspired piers and wrought iron posts that runs along Colorado Avenue.
Figure 1: Main Building
The Main Building was built in 1937 on the corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street as
an industrial vernacular warehouse with Streamline Moderne influences. It is
rectangular in plan with its shorter elevation facing Colorado Avenue. The building is
one story in height with a two-story addition and barrel truss roof partially obscured by a
raised parapet. The building is rectilinear and primarily of brick construction with
reinforced concrete piers and divided lite steel windows. While the original brick largely
remains, it has been sandblasted twice, and the grout has been poorly repointed,
significantly reducing the integrity of workmanship. The building is largely vernacular
with minimal adornment related to the Streamline Moderne architectural style; the GPA
6.B
Packet Pg. 1408
7 of 24
analysis finds the property is also influenced by the Art Deco style but there does not
appear to be sufficient stylistic influence to identify it as such.
The second-story addition runs the entire length of the north elevation. The north
elevation abuts the neighboring property and is not fully visible. The west elevation of
the Main Building facing the interior of the property features a projecting one-story
addition that was completed c. 1980. The top of the addition is a flat roof deck
surrounded by a metal railing. The second-story addition opens onto the roof deck.
Overall, the building appears to be in good condition.
Figure 2: 631 Colorado Avenue
As Viewed from Colorado As Viewed from 7th Street
Auxiliary Building
The Auxiliary Building was originally constructed in 1941 as a loading canopy for the
Aztec Brewing Company’s operations. It is a one-story building that is rectangular in
plan with a flat, composition roof. Overall, this modified Auxiliary Building appears to be
in good condition.
Historic Context
Prior to the construction of 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property contained four
residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa Monica Designation
Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley lived in one of the four
cottages. Moxley was a prominent African American Santa Monica resident who was
6.B
Packet Pg. 1409
8 of 24
heavily involved in various organizations, clubs, and philanthropic endeavors for the
betterment of the African American community throughout her lifetime.
Black settlement in Santa Monica generally followed Los Angeles County-wide trends,
including the early establishment of community institutions, residential segregation
based on discriminatory practices, and the impacts of the civil rights movement. In the
past, African Americans have represented the largest of the ethnic minorities residing in
Santa Monica, and the community has a rich history and deeply entrenched roots within
the City. The construction of the Santa Monica Freeway (Interstate 10) and the
development of the Civic Center all but decimated the postwar African American
community, and therefore many resources relating to this theme are no longer extant.
The majority of the extant resources related to this theme are found in the Pico and
Ocean Park neighborhoods of the city.
The displacement and removal of African American communities is not unique to Santa
Monica and was a pervasive practice throughout the United States with long-lasting and
devastating consequences. This property appears to have been sold by the Moxley
family and purchased by the Aztec Brewing Company in 1937 for the construction of a
50 by 100-foot brick building, the main building currently occupying the site. None of
the buildings or improvements from the time that the Moxley family owned the property
remain. Since the existing buildings were constructed after the demolition of the
residential cottages, Etta Moxley does not have any association with the subject
property at this time. In accordance with national standards, a property can be
designated for the existing structures, and not for structures that no longer exist.
Historic preservation planning is just one of many tools for recognizing social, cultural,
and historical value. Other strategies to employ may include historical markers, mapping
programs, oral history projects, public art, events, walking tours, and close collaboration
with advocacy groups. The Belmar History + Art Project is one example of
commemoration of the African American Community in recognition of the largely black
neighborhood that was razed through eminent domain in the 1950s in order to make
way for the Civic Auditorium and Civic Center Campus.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1410
9 of 24
In the 1920s, Santa Monica’s population jumped from 15,000 to 37,000, the largest
increase in the city’s history. Santa Monica had been a distinctly non-industrial city until
the 1930s. The aviation industry played a significant role in the growth and
development of Santa Monica in the early 20th century. A 1924 map of the Los Angeles
area showed no industries in Santa Monica with more than twenty-five employees.
However, beginning in the 1920s, aircraft companies established or relocated
operations to Southern California, which offered expanses of open, undeveloped land,
favorable climatic conditions, and adequate infrastructure, including water, power, and
transportation systems to support development of factories, testing facilities, and new
housing for a rapidly expanding workforce. Though most resources from this period no
longer exist, Santa Monica’s industrial development during this period provided the
foundation for rampant expansion during and after World War II.
In addition to industrial buildings associated with the aviation industry, other light
industrial uses from the period can be found in the industrially zoned portions of the city.
These buildings are typically vernacular in style, and early factory buildings may include
daylight or controlled-condition factory buildings, warehouse buildings, and other types
that support light industrial uses. While there are not many similar industrial buildings in
the downtown area, there are many similar buildings remaining in other areas of the city
where industrial buildings have been more prevalent throughout the City’s history.
Property History
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is currently occupied by the main,
industrial warehouse (Main Building, for the purposes of this report) on the eastern
portion of the parcel and an auxiliary building (Auxiliary Building, for the purposes of this
report) to the west, which were built in 1937 and 1941, respectively. The property
originally featured a Wine Storage Building, a wood framed platform, and a wooden
addition to the Main Building’s west elevation, forming a U-shaped configuration with
open space along Colorado Avenue.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1411
10 of 24
Figure 3: 1950 Sanborn Map, 631 Colorado Avenue.
The building permit for the Main Building was issued to the “A.B.C. Distribution Co.”
(Aztec Brewing Company) in 1937 for the construction of a 50 by 100-foot brick building
with composition roofing. Research did not reveal an architect, engineer, or builder. In
1941, the building permit for what is now the Auxiliary Building, located on the corner of
Colorado Avenue and a rear alleyway, was issued for the construction of a 25 by 42-
foot loading canopy with composition roofing. The maps also indicate that a small
wooden platform with composite roofing was present on the fifth bay of the west
elevation of the Main Building. In 1947, the canopy that is now the Auxiliary Building
was altered to include an interior loading platform and exterior doors.
From 1955-1956, the Aerophysics Development Corporation owned the property and
during their ownership, they sandblasted both buildings and made minor interior tenant
improvements that did not alter the exterior of either building or the parcel. The following
owner, Keystone Body Works, owned the property from 1957-1994. During their
ownership, the company added a rear one-story addition to the Main Building along the
alleyway in 1957, a free-standing canopy and signage in 1958, a new privacy wall made
6.B
Packet Pg. 1412
11 of 24
of concrete block along the west elevation of the property against the alleyway in 1959
and removed the small wooden platform from the fifth bay of the Main Building
sometime between 1950-1963. After 1963, a one-story, scored-stucco clad addition with
fenestration consisting of large divided lite windows was added to the rear of the west
elevation of the Auxiliary Building.
The addition and canopy on the Main Building were removed in 1996 during a tenant
improvement project by new owners, Bandit Films. In 1997, both buildings were
sandblasted and in 1998, a 730-square foot, second-story addition was completed
along the entire north elevation of the Main Building as well as a contemporary privacy
fence along Colorado Avenue and the rear alleyway. In 2002, the current owner of the
property, Bay Films (500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.), added landscaping to the north of the
main entrance on the Main Building’s west elevation and along both sides of the fence
along Colorado Avenue.
Reinforced Brick Masonry
Reinforced brick masonry (RBM) refers to brick masonry construction reinforced with
steel to improve the brick’s tensile strength. Different RBM techniques have been
utilized for hundreds of years, but some of the most significant advancements in the
United States occurred after the Long Beach Earthquake in 1933. Safer and more
resilient construction techniques were researched, developed, and later codified in
response to the dangers of unreinforced masonry buildings.
As a part of this research and experimentation, masonry units with new, specialized
shapes were developed and used for construction. Two of those shapes included
Groutlock and Port Costa Key bricks. Groutlock bricks were irregularly shaped with
beveled edges on one side which, when stacked, would allow space for both horizontal
and vertical reinforcements. Port Costa Key bricks featured two centralized notches
along the stretcher. Both types of brick were advertised and used throughout Southern
California for institutional and commercial construction following the 1933 earthquake.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1413
12 of 24
Research indicates that the use of these brick shapes fell out of favor in the 1950s when
research demonstrated that a structurally sound building depended not only the brick,
but the type of mortar used, and proper workmanship and construction techniques. That
is, there was no need for these special shaped bricks so long as a skilled bricklayer
completed the construction.
While the 1937 building permit identifies the Main Building as being built with Groutlock
bricks, no visible Groutlock bricks were observed during a physical assessment of the
property; however, a few examples of what appear to be notched Port Costa Key bricks
were observed although it does not appear to have been used for the whole of the
building. Nevertheless, as the use of this type of brick quickly fell out of favor, this
technique was not particularly influential in Santa Monica or throughout the region.
Landmarks Commission Action
On January 10, 2022, the Landmarks Commission held a public hearing to discuss the
property’s potential eligibility as a Landmark or Structure of Merit. The Commission was
provided with the designation application materials, the GPA landmark assessment
report and staff’s analysis in the staff report. The property owner also engaged a
consultant, ESA, to prepare an independent historic assessment and submitted that
assessment as a part of the record for consideration by the Landmarks Commission.
The assessment concluded that the property does not satisfy the criterion findings as a
City Landmark, or Structure of Merit. The ESA report and the appellant’s demolition
permit application and appeal application materials are provided attached.
In consideration of all written and oral testimony, staff and historic preservation
consultant reports, and materials introduced into the public record, the Commission
voted 4-2 to designate the primary building at the corner of 7th St and Colorado Avenue
and the entire property as a City Landmark and associated Landmark Parcel. The
auxiliary building on the western end of the property was not included in the
designation. The Commission designated the Landmark and Landmark Parcel based on
criteria #1 and #4 pursuant to SMMC Section 9.56.100(A). The Commission’s findings
included:
6.B
Packet Pg. 1414
13 of 24
• Criterion #1: The building exemplifies, symbolizes or manifests elements of the
cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City in that it was
the first light industrial commercial building in the south-east portion of Santa
Monica’s downtown; that the A.B.C. Distributing Company building was the only
building in downtown with characteristics of the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne
style, and for its association with Etta Moxley, a dedicated leader in the African
American Women’s Club movement who lived on the property prior to its current
development.
• Criterion #4: The building embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics
valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction or the use of
indigenous materials or craftmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an
architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study in its use of
Groutlock, a technique developed to respond to the long Beach earthquake, and
for its characteristics of the Art Deco style rare in commercial industrial buildings
in the City.
The Landmarks Commission designated the structure as a City Landmark a process
that was a result of a demolition permit application. In accordance with the IZO, a
building does not merit designation as a Structure of Merit if the building has been
designated as a City Landmark. Therefore, no findings were necessary for the
Structure of Merit criteria.
During its deliberations, the Commissioners had substantial disagreement on whether
or not the property met the Landmark designation criteria, and whether or not there was
sufficient integrity to warrant designation. The Commission focused their discussion on
the artfulness of the corner building’s primary façade, the use of Groutlock brick and its
association with Etta Moxley in the context of criteria for designation as a City
Landmark, and, although no formal vote was taken because none was necessary under
the IZO, determined that it did not appear that the property satisfied any of the criteria
for a Structure of Merit.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1415
14 of 24
The January 10, 2022 Landmarks Commission staff report and approved meeting
minutes, and the approved Statement of Official Action are attached. The audio
recording of the January 10 2022 meeting is posted on the City’s webpage:
https://www.smgov.net/Departments/PCD/Boards-Commissions/Landmarks-
Commission/.
Appeal
The appellant filed a timely appeal on January 20, 2022. The appellant states that the
Landmarks Commission relied on faulty information and did not apply the criteria
correctly for this designation, and that the findings were not supported by substantial
evidence. The appeal also noted that the staff report, the City’s preservation consultant,
and the appellant’s preservation consultant all recommended denial of the property as a
designated Landmark.
Staff has analyzed the application materials, the GPA consultant assessment and
considered all the testimony and Landmarks Commission discussion and designation.
Staff remains in agreement with GPA that the property does not appear eligible for
designation. The property, while one of the first industrial buildings built in this area of
Downtown, does not appear to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of industrial
development in Downtown or in Santa Monica as a whole. There have also been
significant changes to the property over time and currently it is not immediately
recognizable as an industrial building.
Appeal Analysis
1. Appellant states that the staff report, the City’s historic preservation consultant
report (GPA), and the property owner’s historic preservation consultant report
(ESA) finds that the property does not meet the City’s criteria for designation as a
City Landmark or Structure of Merit.
The appellant is correct that City Staff and the historic preservation professionals who
reviewed the property all agreed that the findings for both the Landmark and Structure
6.B
Packet Pg. 1416
15 of 24
of Merit designations could not be met. The reports noted that there are many other
similar buildings in the city and throughout the region, the architectural ornament is not
significant or special, that the association with the important personage of Etta Moxley
could not be made as no trace of the residential buildings she was associated with
currently exist, and there is not sufficient evidence that Groutblock was used or that it
was particularly influential.
2. The appeal states that the Landmarks Commission based their decision on faulty
information and that the decision is not based on substantial evidence.
As discussed, staff found that there was not sufficient evidence to determine whether or
not Groutlock brick was used. While the building permit included reference to
Groutblock, a visual inspection revealed the use of some Port Costa Key bricks. Both
types of bricks would not have been used in the same building. Additionally, this type of
brick construction was not particularly influential in subsequent building. Further, staff
has found that there is no meaningful association with Etta Moxley as there is no trace
of the buildings she owned or lived in. And finally, under the Landmarks Ordinance, only
“improvements” may be designated as either Landmarks or Structure of Merit. For
purposes of the Landmarks Ordinance, structures that have been completely
demolished, do not appear to meet the definition of “improvement”. Therefore, it does
not appear that the Landmarks Ordinance, grants authority to designate buildings that
have been completely demolished as either a Landmark or a Structure of Merit. As a
practical matter, designating the existing buildings may be confusing as the structures
have no connection to Etta Moxley’s residence or contributions to the City.
Eligibility as Landmark or Structure of Merit Designation and Proposed Findings
The Interim Zoning Ordinance that governs the demolition permit review process
requires the City Council, on appeal, to review the building’s eligibility as a Landmark or
Structure of Merit. In order to be designated as a City Landmark, the Council is
required to find that the property meets one or more of the six criteria discussed below.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1417
16 of 24
The City hired GPA Consulting to prepare a landmark assessment report. Based on the
findings as provided in the Landmark Assessment Report, the consultant finds and staff
agrees that the property does not appear eligible as a Landmark or Structure of Merit
under the City of Santa Monica Landmark or Structure of Merit criteria, as outlined
below. Based on a thorough analysis of all this information, the City’s past practice, and
the Secretary of Interior’s Standards, staff respectfully disagrees with the Landmarks
Commission conclusion and recommends the City Council uphold the appeal and deny
the designation. The following draft findings are provided to support this conclusion:
Criterion 1
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(1). It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the
cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
The property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political, or architectural history or development of Santa Monica.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American
residential neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. As
such, the residential and outbuildings related to the cultural and social history of this
area during that period no longer exist, and the buildings located at the subject property
do not share the same association.
The subject property is one of the first industrial buildings built in this specific southeast
area of downtown but does not appear to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of
industrial development in Downtown or Santa Monica as a whole. Industrial buildings
were being built throughout the City in the pre-war era, particularly in the nearby Pico
neighborhood, in large groupings around and adjacent to transportation outlets.
Furthermore, the property’s original use as a distributor for the Aztec Brewing Company
does not exemplify the economic development patterns Santa Monica was experiencing
at this time. As mentioned above, Santa Monica’s aviation industry was the primary
source of industrial development prior to World War II. The City of Santa Monica was
not known for its alcohol distribution nor is this building the headquarters or a notable
6.B
Packet Pg. 1418
17 of 24
location for the Aztec Brewing Company’s operations, which included various
distribution warehouses throughout the Southwest. Additionally, the two existing
buildings on the parcel were built as part of a collection of three buildings with a wood-
framed platform that all served a specific purpose in the distribution of alcoholic
beverages. As a result of the loss of the third building and rear platform, as well as the
infill of the Auxiliary Building that was originally a loading canopy and addition of fencing
along Colorado Avenue, the site no longer reads as an alcohol distribution center.
Constructed in the industrial vernacular style, the Main Building lacks the primary
character defining features that would qualify it as a light industrial building, such as
loading docks and doors, and oversized bays of continuous industrial steel sash on two
or more façades. Both buildings appear to be built in the vernacular style with minimal
Streamline Modern styling, and neither building on the site is a notable example of the
Streamline Moderne style, and there is no evidence to suggest this building was
influential to the architectural development of the city.
Therefore, it does not appear that the property at 631 Colorado satisfies Criterion 1.
Criterion 2
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(2). It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other
noteworthy interest or value.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue were constructed for industrial,
utilitarian purposes. Thousands of industrial buildings were constructed throughout
Southern California during pre- and post-World War II building booms. As such, the
buildings do not possess special aesthetic or artistic interest or value, and it does not
appear that they satisfy Criterion 2.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1419
18 of 24
Criterion 3
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(3). It is identified with historic personages or with important
events in local, state or national history.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American
neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of
Santa Monica Landmark Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta
Moxley, a prominent figure in the African American community, lived in one of the four
residential cottages. Since the residential and outbuildings related to this cultural and
social history are no longer extant, the existing buildings on the property do not share
the same association.
The Aztec Brewing Company obtained the permits for both buildings currently on site.
Following the end of Prohibition, the Aztec Brewing Company had various distribution
warehouses throughout the Southwest. Research did not reveal any evidence to
suggest that the Aztec Brewing Company was owned or operated by any historic
personages. Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the remaining
businesses associated with the site were owned or operated by historically significant
individuals. Research also did not reveal any evidence of association with an important
historic event.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to satisfy Criterion 3.
Criterion 4
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue are examples of industrial vernacular
construction in the years prior and during World War II. Industrial buildings constructed
during this time featured limited exterior details as they were not intended to attract
pedestrians for commercial use and were utilitarian by nature. While the modest use of
6.B
Packet Pg. 1420
19 of 24
Streamline Moderne elements is visible on both buildings, the few features alone do not
make these buildings notable examples of the Streamline Moderne style. The
construction and features of both structures are not notable in any way and have been
modified over time. Lastly, as indicated on 1950 Sanborn Maps around Santa Monica’s
industrial cores, such as along rail lines or present-day freeways, brick industrial
buildings were not a rarity for the City.
On the original permit for the Main Building, the construction material is indicated as
Groutlock brick, a building material produced by the Simons Brick Company. However,
a physical assessment of the site indicates that the brick is not an example of Groutlock,
but rather another type of grouted masonry, described as Port Costa Key. A few
scattered examples of what appear to be the Port Costa Key bricks are visible and have
stepped notching at the top of the brick. Although this building material is visible, it was
not used for the entire building, or if it was, only a few examples of this type of brick are
visible from the exterior. As discussed above, many solutions for increasing the
earthquake resistance of masonry buildings were explored in the aftermath of the Long
Beach Earthquake, including experimentation with new masonry shapes. These shapes
included the Groutlock brick, which had a diagonal or beveled edge, and the Port Costa
Key brick, which had interlocking “notches.” However, subsequent engineering studies
in the decades after World War II revealed that a special masonry shape was not
necessary when good workmanship and an appropriate mortar mix was employed, and
the new masonry shapes ostensibly fell out of use. The Groutlock and Port Costa Key
bricks were a short-lived experiment in construction technology following the Long
Beach earthquake. Research did not indicate that they were ever widely used or
influential to later developments in construction technology. As such, it does not appear
that the use of these brick shapes was an important building technique.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to satisfy Criterion 4.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1421
20 of 24
Criterion 5
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(5). It is a significant or a representative example of the work or
product of a notable builder, designer or architect.
Research into the construction history of 631 Colorado Avenue did not reveal the name
of the architect or the builder for the Main Building. The architect for the Auxiliary
Building was identified on the 1941 building permit as Frederic Barienbrock. Frederick
Barienbrock was a local architect that worked in Santa Monica for 50 years. Barienbrock
was responsible for the designs of 1725 Main Street, 827 6th Street, 829 6th Street, and
the 1951 addition to the Santa Monica Courthouse and County Building wing of the
Santa Monica Civic Center. While Barienbrock appears to have been a successful local
architect, his work is not particularly noteworthy and he is not an important architectural
figure in the history of the city or the region. Additionally, the utilitarian canopy would
not be a notable example of his work, and it no longer conveys its original design intent
due to modifications on all elevations.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to satisfy Criterion 5.
Criterion 6
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is located in a portion of Santa Monica’s
original township that is now referred to as the Downtown neighborhood. The property is
surrounded by residential, commercial, and industrial properties ranging from one to
four stories in height. The subject property is an unremarkable infill site that, although
part of the original township, does not appear to be an established and familiar visual
feature of the neighborhood or City.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to satisfy Criterion 6.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1422
21 of 24
Evaluation for Structure of Merit Designation
The City’s historic preservation consultant, GPA, recommends, and staff agrees, that
the Commission deny the property as a designated Structure of Merit:
9.56.080(A): The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue was individually identified in the 2018 Historic
Resources Inventory (HRI) Update and assigned a status code of 5S3, indicating that
the property appeared to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through
survey evaluation for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown
neighborhood of Santa Monica and being one of one of relatively few extant industrial
buildings in this area from the pre‐World War II period. However, based on the analysis
provided above, the property does not appear to merit designation.
9.56.080(B): The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the
following criteria:
The subject property is a minimum of 50 years of age as it was constructed in 1914.
Therefore, the structure is eligible for further consideration under the following criteria:
(B)(1). The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design,
detail or historical type.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is over fifty years of age, but it is not a
unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type. As
discussed above, the buildings are industrial vernacular buildings with utilitarian
purposes that are ubiquitous throughout Santa Monica’s industrial areas, such as
the Pico neighborhood, and Southern California as a whole. Therefore, it does
not appear that the property satisfies this criterion.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1423
22 of 24
(B)(2). The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer
prevalent.
The subject property represents the industrial vernacular style which is still
represented in the City in large numbers. While the resource is one of the few
remaining industrial buildings in the southeastern portion of the Downtown, it is
not rare when considered with the larger inventory of buildings in the industrial
areas of Santa Monica. Industrial development in this area was not as historically
prevalent in Downtown as other areas in the city, such as the Pico neighborhood.
Further north on Colorado Avenue there are numerous extant examples of
similarly scaled industrial development. Therefore, it does not appear that the
property satisfies this criterion.
(B)(3). The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property is not located within any previously identified potential
historic district, and a historic district is unlikely to exist in the area surrounding
631 Colorado Avenue. The subject property is surrounded by commercial,
industrial, and multi-family buildings of various styles, sizes, and construction
dates. They are not visually or historically unified and do not form a significant or
cohesive grouping. Therefore, it does not appear that the property satisfies this
criterion.
Parcel Designation
The Ordinance grants the Landmarks Commission, and the City Council on appeal, the
power to designate a Landmark Parcel to “preserve, maintain, protect or safeguard” a
Landmark. SMMC 9.56.060(A); 9.56.030(K). Generally, any proposed alteration,
restoration, construction, removal, or relocation that occurs on a Landmark Parcel
requires approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness. SMMC 9.56.140. The Landmarks
Commission, or the City Council on appeal, also has the power to specify the nature of
any alteration, restoration, construction, removal, relocation or demolition of or to a
Landmark or Landmark Parcel which may be performed without a Certificate of
Appropriateness. SMMC 9.56.120(F).
6.B
Packet Pg. 1424
23 of 24
At its January 10, 2022 meeting, the Landmarks Commission designated the property
commonly known as 631 Colorado as an associated Landmark Parcel. Because staff is
not recommending designation of the structures, staff does not recommend designation
of the parcel.
Alternatives
As an alternative to the recommended action, the City Council may consider the
following if supported by the full evidentiary record:
1. Articulate revised findings resulting in the denial of the subject appeal, approving
the subject property as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.
2. Uphold the Landmarks Commission’s decision by adopting the Landmarks
Commission’s findings pursuant to Statement of Official Action 21ENT-0125 and
designate the property as a City Landmark and the property commonly known as
631 Colorado Avenue as an associated Landmark Parcel.
California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15270, CEQA does not apply to projects that a
public agency disapproves. Based on the recommended action, CEQA would not be
applicable.
Alternative findings
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility that disapproving the appeal and designating the property as
either a Landmark or Structure of Merit will result in any significant effect on the
environment. This determination is based on the record as a whole, which includes, but
is not limited to, evidence that the designation of the property as a Landmark or
Structure of Merit will promote the retention and preservation of historic resources, the
designation would not result in any physical change to the property, and any future
physical changes would be subject to subsequent CEQA review.
6.B
Packet Pg. 1425
24 of 24
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action as a result of the recommended
action.
Prepared By: Stephanie Reich, Design and Historic Preservation Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 22ENT-0015 (631 Colorado Ave) APPEAL Application (1)
B. 631 Colorado Designation staff report
C. ColoradoAve631-Application amendment
D. Designation Application 631 Colorado
E. GPA Landmark Assessment Report
F. Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report
G. 631 Colorado Appeal Hearing Notice April 12
H. STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA
I. 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1)
J. Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1)
K. STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation
L. Written Comments
6.B
Packet Pg. 1426
6.B.a
Packet Pg. 1427 Attachment: 22ENT-0015 (631 Colorado Ave) APPEAL Application (1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue
6.B.a
Packet Pg. 1428 Attachment: 22ENT-0015 (631 Colorado Ave) APPEAL Application (1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue
Landmark Commission
Report
DATE: January 10, 2022 6-A
TO: The Honorable Landmarks Commission
FROM: Stephanie Reich, Landmark Commission Secretary
SUBJECT:
631 Colorado Avenue, 21ENT-0125
Public Hearing to consider Landmark Designation Application
21ENT-0125 to determine whether the commercial property, in whole
or in part, should be designated as a City Landmark or Structure of
Merit and, if designated as a Landmark, whether to designate an
associated Landmark Parcel.
PROPERTY OWNER: 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
APPLICANT: Santa Monica Conservancy
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
The property owner filed a demolition permit application with the City of Santa Monica
(City) on March 19, 2021. On May 20, 2021, Nina Fresco, on behalf of the Santa Monica
Conservancy, submitted designation application 21ENT-0125 to nominate the property at
1665 Appian Way. The application included an assessment that found the property
eligible under Criteria 1 as an early example of industrial development in the downtown
area and the first “beer outlet” in the city, and under Criterion 3 for association with Etta
Vena Moxley who was associated with the property prior to the current development
extant on the site. The nomination application is included as Attachment B.
A Landmark Assessment report was prepared for the subject building by GPA Consulting
Group (GPA) provided as Attachment C. Based on the findings as provided in the report,
the consultant finds that the property does not appear eligible for designation under Santa
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1429 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 2 -
Monica Landmark criteria 9.56.100(A) and does not appear eligible for listing as a City of
Santa Monica Structure of Merit criteria S.M.M.C 9.56.080.
Staff has analyzed the application materials and the GPA consultant assessment and
agrees with GPA that the property does not appear eligible for designation. The property,
while one of the first industrial buildings built in this area of Downtown, does not appear
to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of industrial development in Downtown or in
Santa Monica as a whole. There have also been significant changes to the property over
time and currently it is not immediately recognizable as an industrial building.
The application also contends that the site is eligible because buildings that existed before
the current development were associated with a prominent African American community
member and activist, Etta Moxley, beginning in the early 1900s. While Etta Moxley
appears to have been an important figure in the community, the property has no trace of
the development present on the site when she was associated with it.
Finally, the application states that the property is significant due to the use groutlock brick,
a technical innovation that occurred after the Long Beach earthquake in 1933. However,
further inspection has indicated that groutlock brick does not appear to have been used,
A different system, Porta Costa Key Bricks may have been, although a small sampling of
those bricks is apparent throughout the property. Nevertheless, the bricks soon fell out
of favor and were not influential to the construction practice in Santa Monica or the
Southern California region more generally.
As the property does not appear to meet any of the required criteria, staff recommends
the Commission deny the designation of the property at 631 Colorado Avenue as a Santa
Monica Landmark or Structure of Merit.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1430 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 3 -
Historic Resources Inventory Status
The property was most recently identified in the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory
Update as appearing eligible for recognition as a as a Santa Monica Landmark. The
inventory states:
“The property is significant for conveying patterns of industrial
development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica.
Constructed in 1937, it is one of relatively few extant industrial buildings
in the area from the pre‐World War II period.”
However, the property had not been identified in any survey prior to the most recent one,
even though the property is of an age that would have been reviewed in each of the City’s
previous inventories.
The property is at the southwestern edge of Downtown.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1431 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 4 -
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Notice of this hearing was provided as required by Section 9.56.170(c) of the Landmarks
Ordinance, with notice sent to all owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius and a
newspaper notice published in the Santa Monica Daily Press at least 10 calendar days
prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is included as Attachment A.
ANALYSIS
Property Information and Architectural Description
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is located
on a corner parcel bound by Colorado Avenue to
the south, 7th Street to the east, a separate
parcel to the north, and an alleyway to the west.
The parcel contains two buildings, the Main
Building located on the eastern side of the parcel
and the Auxiliary Building located in the western
corner. The property features limited landscaped
areas with mature trees and hedges planted
directly along the Colorado Avenue property line
and around the main entrance of the Main
Building and Auxiliary Building for added
privacy. The remainder of the parcel is covered
in asphalt paving that has been divided into
parking spaces which are not visible from the
public-right-of way due the mature landscaping and modern fence with Art Deco-inspired
piers and wrought iron posts that runs along Colorado Avenue.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1432 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 5 -
Additional description and photos of the property is included in the GPA assessment.
Main Building
The Main Building was built in 1937 on the corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street as
an industrial vernacular warehouse with Streamline Moderne influences. It is rectangular
in plan with its shorter elevation facing Colorado Avenue. The building is one story in
height with a two-story addition and barrel truss roof partially obscured by a raised
parapet. The building is rectilinear and primarily of brick construction with reinforced
concrete piers and divided lite steel windows. The building is largely vernacular with
minimal adornment related to the Streamline Moderne architectural style (GPA finds the
property also influenced by the Art Deco style but there does not appear to be evidence
of this influence).
The second-story addition runs the entire length of the north elevation. The north
elevation abuts the neighboring property and is not fully visible. The west elevation of the
Main Building facing the interior of the property features a projecting one-story addition
that was completed c. 1980. The top of the addition is a flat roof deck surrounded by a
metal railing. The second-story addition opens onto the roof deck. Overall, the building
appears to be in good condition.
Auxiliary Building
The Auxiliary Building was originally constructed in 1941 as a loading canopy for the Aztec
Brewing Company’s operations. It is a one-story building that is rectangular in plan with
a flat, composition roof. Overall, this modified Auxiliary Building appears to also be in
good condition.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1433 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 6 -
Historic Context
Prior to the construction of 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property contained four
residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa Monica Landmark
Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley lived in one of the
four cottages. Moxley was a prominent African American Santa Monica resident who was
heavily involved in various organizations, clubs, and philanthropic endeavors for the
betterment of the African American community throughout her lifetime.
Black settlement in Santa Monica generally followed Los Angeles County-wide trends,
including the early establishment of community institutions, residential segregation based
on discriminatory practices, and the impacts of the civil rights movement. In the past,
African Americans have represented the largest of the ethnic minorities residing in Santa
Monica, and the community has a rich history and deeply entrenched roots within the city.
The construction of the Santa Monica Freeway (Interstate 10) and the development of the
Civic Center all but decimated the postwar African American community, and therefore
many resources relating to this theme are no longer extant. The majority of the extant
resources related to this theme are found in the Pico or Ocean Park neighborhoods of the
city.
The displacement and removal of African American communities is not unique to Santa
Monica and was a pervasive practice throughout the United States with long-lasting and
devastating consequences. This property appears to have been sold by the Moxley family
and purchased by the Aztec Brewing Company in 1937 for the construction of a 50 by
100-foot brick building, the main building currently occupying the site. None of the
buildings or improvements from the time that the Moxley family owned the property
remain extant. Since the existing buildings were constructed after the demolition of the
residential cottages, Etta Moxley does not have any association with the subject property
at this time.
Because the built environment only reflects certain aspects of the importance a
community, space, or neighborhood may have, place-based historic designation
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1434 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 7 -
programs do not fully or accurately capture history that may be intangible or lost. Historic
preservation planning is just one of many tools for recognizing social, cultural, and
historical value. Other strategies to employ may include historical markers, mapping
programs, oral history projects, public art, events, walking tours, and close collaboration
with advocacy groups.
In the 1920s, Santa Monica’s population jumped from 15,000 to 37,000, the largest
increase in the city’s history. Santa Monica had been a distinctly non-industrial city until
the 1930s. The aviation industry played a significant role in the growth and development
of Santa Monica in the early 20th century. A 1924 map of the Los Angeles area showed
no industries in Santa Monica with more than twenty-five employees. However, beginning
in the 1920s, aircraft companies established or relocated operations to Southern
California, which offered expanses of open, undeveloped land, favorable climatic
conditions, and adequate infrastructure, including water, power, and transportation
systems to support development of factories, testing facilities, and new housing for a
rapidly expanding workforce. Though most resources from this period are no longer
extant, Santa Monica’s industrial development during this period provided the foundation
for rampant expansion during and after World War II.
In addition to industrial buildings associated with the aviation industry, other light industrial
uses from the period can be found in the industrially zoned portions of the city. These
buildings are typically vernacular in style, and early factory buildings may include daylight
or controlled-condition factory buildings, warehouse buildings, and other types that
support light industrial uses. While there are not many similar industrial buildings in the
downtown area, there are many similar buildings remaining in other areas of the city
where industrial buildings have been more prevalent throughout the City’s history.
Property History
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is currently occupied by the main, industrial
warehouse (Main Building, for the purposes of this report) on the eastern portion of the
parcel and an auxiliary building (Auxiliary Building, for the purposes of this report) to the
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1435 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 8 -
west which were built in 1937 and 1941, respectively. The property originally featured a
Wine Storage Building, a wood framed platform, and a wooden addition to the Main
Building’s west elevation, forming a U-shaped configuration with open space along
Colorado Avenue.
1950 Sanborn Map, 631 Colorado Avenue.
The building permit for the Main Building was issued to the “A.B.C Distribution Co.” (Aztec
Brewing Company) in 1937 for the construction of a 50 by 100-foot brick building with
composition roofing. Research did not reveal an architect, engineer, or builder. In 1941,
the building permit for what is now the Auxiliary Building, located on the corner of
Colorado Avenue and a rear alleyway, was issued for the construction of a 25 by 42-foot
loading canopy with composition roofing. The maps also indicate that a small wooden
platform with composite roofing was present on the fifth bay of the west elevation of the
Main Building. In 1947, the canopy that is now the Auxiliary Building was altered to include
an interior loading platform and exterior doors.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1436 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 9 -
From 1955-1956, the Aerophysics Development Corporation owned the property and
during their ownership, they sandblasted both buildings and made minor interior tenant
improvements that did not alter the exterior of either building or the parcel. The following
owner, Keystone Body Works, owned the property from 1957-1994. During their
ownership, the company added a rear one-story addition to the Main Building along the
alleyway in 1957, a free-standing canopy and signage in 1958, a new privacy wall made
of concrete block along the west elevation of the property against the alleyway in 1959
and removed the small wooden platform from the fifth bay of the Main Building sometime
between 1950-1963. After 1963, a one-story, scored-stucco clad addition with
fenestration consisting of large divided lite windows was added to the rear of the west
elevation of the Auxiliary Building.
The addition and canopy on the Main Building were removed in 1996 during a tenant
improvement project by new owners, Bandit Films. In 1997, both buildings were
sandblasted and in 1998, a 730-square foot, second-story addition was completed along
the entire north elevation of the Main Building as well as a contemporary privacy fence
along Colorado Avenue and the rear alleyway. In 2002, the current owner of the property,
Bay Films (500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.), added landscaping to the north of the main entrance
on the Main Building’s west elevation and along both sides of the fence along Colorado
Avenue.
Reinforced Brick Masonry
Reinforced brick masonry (RBM) refers to brick masonry construction reinforced with
steel to improve the brick’s tensile strength. Different RBM techniques have been utilized
for hundreds of years, but some of the most significant advancements in the United States
occurred after the Long Beach Earthquake in 1933. Safer and more resilient construction
techniques were researched, developed, and later codified in response to the dangers of
unreinforced masonry buildings.
As a part of this research and experimentation, masonry units with new, specialized
shapes were developed and used for construction. Two of those shapes included
Groutlock and Port Costa Key bricks. Groutlock bricks were irregularly shaped with
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1437 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 10 -
beveled edges on one side which, when stacked, would allow space for both horizontal
and vertical reinforcements. Port Costa Key bricks featured two centralized notches along
the stretcher. Both types of brick were advertised and used throughout Southern
California for institutional and commercial construction following the 1933 earthquake.
Research indicates that the use of these brick shapes fell out of favor in the 1950s when
research demonstrated that a structurally sound building depended not only the brick, but
the type of mortar used, and proper workmanship and construction techniques. That is,
there was no need for these special shaped bricks so long as a skilled bricklayer
completed the construction.
While the 1937 building permit identifies the Main Building as being built with Groutlock
bricks, no visible Groutlock bricks were observed during a physical assessment of the
property; however, a few examples of what appear to be notched Port Costa Key bricks
were observed although it does not appear to have been used for the whole of the
building. Nevertheless, as the use of this type of brick quickly fell out of favor, this
technique was not particularly influential in Santa Monica or throughout the region.
Landmarks Ordinance/Findings for Landmark and Structure of Merit Designations
The Landmarks Ordinance requires the Commission to review the building’s eligibility as
a Landmark based on the six criteria discussed below. In order to be designated as a City
Landmark, the Commission is required to find that the property meets one or more of
these criteria.
Based on the findings as provided in the Landmark Assessment Report, the consultant
finds and staff agrees that the property does not appear eligible as a Landmark or
Structure of Merit under the City of Santa Monica Landmark or Structure of Merit criteria,
as outlined below. The following draft findings are provided to support this conclusion:
Evaluation for Landmark Designation
The Landmarks Ordinance requires the Commission to review the building’s eligibility as
a Landmark based on the six criteria discussed below. In order to be designated as a
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1438 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 11 -
Landmark, the Commission is required to find that the property meets one or more of the
criteria.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(1). It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the
cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
The property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political, or architectural history or development of Santa Monica.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American residential
neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. As such, the
residential and outbuildings related to the cultural and social history of this area during
that period are no longer extant, and the existing buildings do not share the same
association.
The subject property is one of the first industrial buildings built in this specific southeast
area of downtown but does not appear to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of
industrial development in Downtown or Santa Monica as a whole. Industrial buildings
were being built throughout the City in the pre-war era, particularly in the nearby Pico
neighborhood, in large groupings around and adjacent to transportation outlets.
Furthermore, the property’s original use as a distributor for the Aztec Brewing Company
does not exemplify the economic development patterns Santa Monica was experiencing
at this time. As mentioned above, Santa Monica’s aviation industry was the primary
source of industrial development prior to World War II. The City of Santa Monica was not
known for its alcohol distribution nor is this building the headquarters or a notable location
for the Aztec Brewing Company’s operations, which included various distribution
warehouses throughout the Southwest. Additionally, the two existing buildings on the
parcel were built as part of a collection of three buildings with a wood-framed platform
that all served a specific purpose in the distribution of alcoholic beverages. As a result of
the loss of the third building and rear platform, as well as the infill of the Auxiliary Building
that was originally a loading canopy and addition of fencing along Colorado Avenue, the
site no longer reads as an alcohol distribution center.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1439 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 12 -
Constructed in the industrial vernacular style, the Main Building lacks the primary
character defining features that would qualify it as a light industrial building, such as
loading docks and doors, and oversized bays of continuous industrial steel sash on two
or more façades. Both buildings appear to be built in the vernacular style with minimal
Streamline Modern styling, and neither building on the site is a notable example of the
Streamline Moderne style, and there is no evidence to suggest this building was influential
to the architectural development of the city.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado does not appear significant under Criterion 1.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(2). It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other
noteworthy interest or value.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue were constructed for industrial, utilitarian
purposes. Thousands of industrial buildings were constructed throughout Southern
California during pre- and post-World War II building booms. As such, the buildings do
not possess special aesthetic or artistic interest or value, and do not appear to be
significant under Criterion 2.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(3). It is identified with historic personages or with important
events in local, state or national history.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American
neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa
Monica Landmark Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley,
a prominent figure in the African American community, lived in one of the four residential
cottages. Since the residential and outbuildings related to this cultural and social history
are no longer extant, the existing buildings on the property do not share the same
association.
The Aztec Brewing Company obtained the permits for both buildings currently on site.
Following the end of Prohibition, the Aztec Brewing Company had various distribution
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1440 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 13 -
warehouses throughout the Southwest. Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest
that the Aztec Brewing Company was owned or operated by any historic personages.
Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the remaining businesses
associated with the site were owned or operated by historically significant individuals.
Research also did not reveal any evidence of association with an important historic event.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under
Criterion 3.
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue are examples of industrial vernacular
construction in the years prior and during World War II. Industrial buildings constructed
during this time featured limited exterior details as they were not intended to attract
pedestrians for commercial use and were utilitarian by nature. While the modest use of
Streamline Moderne elements are visible on both buildings, the few features alone do not
make these buildings notable examples of the Streamline Moderne style. The
construction and features of both structures are not notable in any way and have been
modified over time. Lastly, as indicated on 1950 Sanborn Maps around Santa Monica’s
industrial cores, such as along rail lines or present-day freeways, brick industrial buildings
were not a rarity for the City.
On the original permit for the Main Building, the construction material is indicated as
Groutlock brick, a building material produced by the Simons Brick Company. However, a
physical assessment of the site indicates that the brick is not an example of Groutlock,
but rather another type of grouted masonry, described as Port Costa Key. A few scattered
examples of what appear to be the Port Costa Key bricks are visible and have stepped
notching at the top of the brick. Although this building material is visible, it was not used
for the entire building, or if it was, only a few examples of this type of brick are visible from
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1441 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 14 -
the exterior. As discussed above, many solutions for increasing the earthquake resistance
of masonry buildings were explored in the aftermath of the Long Beach Earthquake,
including experimentation with new masonry shapes. These shapes included the
Groutlock brick, which had a diagonal or beveled edge, and the Port Costa Key brick,
which had interlocking “notches.” However, subsequent engineering studies in the
decades after World War II revealed that a special masonry shape was not necessary
when good workmanship and an appropriate mortar mix was employed, and the new
masonry shapes ostensibly fell out of use. The Groutlock and Port Costa Key bricks were
a short-lived experiment in construction technology following the Long Beach earthquake.
Research did not indicate that they were ever widely used or influential to later
developments in construction technology. As such, it does not appear that the use of
these brick shapes was an important building technique.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under
Criterion 4.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(5). It is a significant or a representative example of the work or
product of a notable builder, designer or architect.
Research into the construction history of 631 Colorado Avenue did not reveal the name
of the architect or the builder for the Main Building. The architect for the Auxiliary Building
was identified on the 1941 building permit as Frederic Barienbrock. Frederick Barienbrock
was a local architect that worked in Santa Monica for 50 years. Barienbrock was
responsible for the designs of 1725 Main Street, 827 6th Street, 829 6th Street, and the
1951 addition to the Santa Monica Courthouse and County Building wing of the Santa
Monica Civic Center. While Barienbrock appears to have been a successful local
architect, his work is not particularly noteworthy and he is not an important architectural
figure in the history of the city or the region. Additionally, the utilitarian canopy would not
be a notable example of his work, and it no longer conveys its original design intent due
to modifications on all elevations.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be significant under
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1442 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 15 -
Criterion 5.
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is located in a portion of Santa Monica’s
original township that is now referred to as the Downtown neighborhood. The property is
surrounded by residential, commercial, and industrial properties ranging from one to four
stories in height. The subject property is an unremarkable infill site that, although part of
the original township, does not appear to be an established and familiar visual feature of
the neighborhood or City.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be significant under
Criterion 6.
Evaluation for Structure of Merit Designation
The City’s historic preservation consultant, GPA, recommends and staff agrees that the
Commission deny the property as a designated Structure of Merit:
9.56.080(A): The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue was individually identified in the 2018 Historic
Resources Inventory (HRI) Update and assigned a status code of 5S3, indicating that the
property appeared to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey
evaluation for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown
neighborhood of Santa Monica and being one of one of relatively few extant industrial
buildings in this area from the pre‐World War II period. However, based on further
analysis, the property does not appear to merit designation.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1443 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 16 -
9.56.080(B): The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the
following criteria:
The subject property is a minimum of 50 years of age as it was constructed in 1914.
Therefore, the structure is eligible for further consideration under the following criteria:
(B)(1). The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design,
detail or historical type.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is over fifty years of age, but it is not a unique
or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type. As discussed
above, the buildings are industrial vernacular buildings with utilitarian purposes
that are ubiquitous throughout Santa Monica’s industrial areas, such as the Pico
neighborhood, and Southern California as a whole.
(B)(2). The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer
prevalent.
The subject property represents the industrial vernacular style which is still
represented in the City in large numbers. While the resource is one of the few
remaining industrial buildings in the southeastern portion of the Downtown, it is not
rare when considered with the larger inventory of buildings in the industrial areas
of Santa Monica. Industrial development in this area was not as historically
prevalent in Downtown as other areas in the city, such as the Pico neighborhood.
Further north on Colorado Avenue there are numerous extant examples of similarly
scaled industrial development.
(B)(3). The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property is not located within any previously identified potential historic
district, and a historic district is unlikely to exist in the area surrounding 631
Colorado Avenue. The subject property is surrounded by commercial, industrial,
and multi-family buildings of various styles, sizes, and construction dates. They
are not visually or historically unified and do not form a significant or cohesive
grouping.
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1444 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- 17 -
Summary
The property and buildings at 631 Colorado Avenue represent unremarkable, vernacular
buildings that did not appear to influence development patterns or techniques, is not
associated with cultural history or persons of significance to the history of the city and
otherwise does not appear to meet any of the Landmark criteria. As such the Landmarks
Commission should deny designation of the property as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission determine that the property located at 631
Colorado Avenue does not meet the criteria to be designated a City Landmark or
Structure of Merit an deny the designation based on the draft findings contained herein.
Pursuant to SMMC 9.36.180, the Landmarks Commission’s determination regarding this
application may be appealed to the City Council if the appeal is filed with the City Planning
Division within ten (10) consecutive days commencing from the date that the decision is
made by the Landmarks Commission.
Attachments:
A. Public Notice
B. Landmark Nomination Application, May 2021
C. Landmark Assessment Report, GPA Consulting, January 2022
6.B.b
Packet Pg. 1445 Attachment: 631 Colorado Designation staff report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue – Revised Findings
The consultant evaluations by ESA and GPA of the Landmark Designation Application for 631
Colorado Avenue have brought many interesting new facts to light. This discussion takes new
perspectives into account and is followed by revised suggested findings for the Landmark
Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue. The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is listed as 5S3, a
potentially individual resource, in the 2018 HRI. ESA quotes the HRIs reasoning on page 3:
631 Broadway [sic] appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The
property is significant for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown
neighborhood of Santa Monica. Constructed in 1937, it is one of relatively few extant
industrial buildings in the area from the pre-World War II period.
Notwithstanding alterations to the structures outlined in the Landmark Designation Application
and in both consultant’s reports, the Santa Monica Conservancy found upon further research
that this “windshield” evaluation of the subject property succinctly captured the property’s
significance as an extremely rare building type in the city that demonstrates the use of
particular materials and building techniques unique to its time of its construction, and was
occupied by a series of uses that tell the story of the industrial history of the city.
Etta Vena Moxley
The original application provided a robust history of the life of Etta Vena Moxley. Both ESA and
GPA acknowledge Etta Moxley as a person of historic significance. The Conservancy did not
nominate this site, which is now devoid of any physical evidence of Moxley’s life, on the
strength that association. But because the subject property otherwise meets Criteria 1 and
Criteria 4 for designation, we believe that this important story should nonetheless be included
in the record. The history of African American communities has not been understood, recorded,
or preserved in Santa Monica until recent attention has begun to dig up the stories. In fact,
Moxley’s story was found inadvertently during research into 631 Colorado Avenue as a
resource reflecting the city’s industrial past. Without artifacts to represent them, Santa
Monica’s Historic Preservation program has difficulty recognizing many important histories. But
when designation criteria are met based on physical improvements that remain extant, the
Landmarks Commission has the discretion to add recognition into the findings of erased
histories that took place on a particular parcel. In this case, we recommend that a reference to
Etta Moxley be included in the findings.
GPA incorrectly places the city’s first African American homes in the present-day Civic Center
(and Samohi campus), which are in the vicinity of Philips Chapel in Ocean Park. In fact, the first
African American homes in Santa Monica at the end of the 19th century and in the first decade
of the 20th century were in the immediate vicinity of the subject parcel, and not a one still
exists today. GPA acknowledges that the erased history of African American communities is not
easily acknowledged by our current program and recommends other kinds of recognition for
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1446 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
the events. The Conservancy hopes the Landmarks Commission will pay close attention to
ensure our official program is not biased towards the history of rich, white men who built things
that are “worth” saving, and that it recognizes all aspects of our history by referencing earlier
stories that took place on redeveloped parcels that bear other significance as well.
These maps show the locations of African American households (in blue) listed in the United States Census for
Santa Monica in 1900 and in 1910. Note: The Pacific Ocean is along the bottoms of the maps and the white streak
in the middle represents the Santa Monica Freeway.
Architectural Significance
From 1904 – 1972, Santa Monica hosted five different clay extraction and brick manufacturing
sites covering much of the eastern reaches of the city from Virginia Avenue to Broadway and
from 22nd Street to Franklin Street. By the time of the 1918 Sanborn maps, brick buildings in
Ocean Park proliferated on Main Street, Pier Avenue, Marine Street and on the Ocean Front
Promenade. Of those, only the brick commercial buildings on Main Street are still extant. In
downtown, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Streets, and Santa Monica Boulevard as far as 7th Street were
other concentrations of brick buildings. To these groups Wilshire Boulevard in downtown and
Wilshire Boulevard between Euclid and 16th Streets were added to the inventory of brick
building clusters through the 1920s. All these clusters were retail districts. There were other
brick buildings scattered across other districts for schools and homes, but they are few and far
between. The peak period of major brickmaking activity in the city and the nation came to a
sudden end in 1929, when the stock market crash disabled new building starts. The industry
was further impeded by the perception of bricks as unsafe after the 1933 Long Beach
Earthquake caused so many structures made of them to collapse. It was in this context that the
Simons Brick Company began an aggressive campaign to promote Groutlock bricks and revive
the market for clay products. Right before the crash Simons’ plants were producing almost a
million bricks per day. Production was restored to 150,000 Groutlock bricks per day as a result
of the campaign.
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1447 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
In this light, 631 Colorado Avenue represents a snapshot of a historical moment of crisis in the
brick industry where buildings were made of Groutlock and Porta Costa bricks as manufacturers
scrambled to rebuild confidence in the material. Of the 47 brick buildings from our HRI listed in
the ESA report, only five are from the 1930s, and only one other, a retail building at 1327 5th
Street, also exhibits decorative detailing in the manner of the subject property. ESA notes that a
structure at 1631 10th Street exhibits similar construction techniques to the subject property,
though that structure was built a decade later and the permits only describe it as brick
masonry. GPA dismisses the use of specialized reinforced brick construction from the 1930s
because it was a passing phase replaced by more sustained techniques. In fact, the subject
property is an extremely rare example that shows how the brick construction industry
recovered after two historical blows (the financial crisis and the earthquake) and would soon
take over again to provide a ubiquitous material for commercial industrial buildings in Santa
Monica through the 1950s and 1960s. The use of this new brick type, plus the use of reinforced
concrete posts and beams, marks an advance in building technology that exemplifies this
moment in our history.
The subject property exhibits characteristics of the Art Deco style that is rare in commercial
industrial buildings in the city. The subject property is dismissed by GPA as an example of the
Art Deco style because it is not an exemplary example of that style, disregarding the fact that
any style or ornamentation on this type of structure is unusual and likely to be applied with a
light touch. Exhibiting the classic features of that style: grooved piers, horizontal speed lines,
and step-back forms in the capitals, the subject property is a successful manifestation of how
the subtle application of a style can result in an industrial building with notable street appeal.
That is just what makes this a very rare example. The discussion about Groutlock bricks and
Porta Costa bricks by GPA shows that while the use of Porta Costa brick is visible on the south
elevation, the design of Groutlock bricks would make it difficult to ascertain if they were used
or not by a non-invasive visual inspection because the angled surfaces are hidden inside. The
notched Porta Costa bricks are visible in the areas that had been stuccoed so their notched
grooves would have been covered, but the Groutlock bricks called for in the original building
permit were likely used in the areas where the bricks were left exposed. The use of these
specialized bricks that transitioned the brick industry through hard times is exactly what is
meant by Santa Monica’s Criteria 4 for Landmark Designation: 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.
Cultural Significance
The GPA report quotes the city’s context statement on page 6:
…Though most resources from this period [1920-1941] are no longer extant, Santa
Monica’s industrial development during this period provided the foundation for rampant
expansion during and after World War II.
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1448 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
The history of the tenancy of 631 Colorado Avenue literally “exemplifies, symbolizes, or
manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City”
in a manner consistent with Santa Monica’s Criteria 1 for Landmark Designation. ESA
acknowledges the big picture of how the uses of the subject property relate to Santa Monica
History on page 52:
The occupancy and ownership history of the subject property illustrates the overall
pattern of economic development along Colorado Avenue from the pre-World War II to
post-World War II periods, to the mid- to late-twentieth century, and through the first
two decades of the twenty-first century. Both buildings on the subject property, Buildings
A and B, appear to have been owned and occupied by the same owners/tenants
throughout their history. From post-Prohibition initial construction as a wholesale liquor
distribution office and warehouse, use of the property then briefly supported post-war
classified missile development and atomic research. With the post-war resurgence of
automobile production, the site reflected the dominance of American car culture in its
use as an auto body paint and repair shop along a busy thoroughfare. With the changing
economic focus and explosive growth of media and communications in the twenty-first
century, the property has been home to a series of highly successful film production
companies.
The post-prohibition era began while the Great Depression still weighed heavily on people’s
lives. In Santa Monica, it was characterized by what ESA terms on page 63 as the “mutually
supportive endeavors” of tourism and alcohol. Santa Monica’s Context Statement supports this
assertion, listing gambling ships, illegal slot machine rings, hotel room bookies, and more as
popular distractions. So, in a city where most industrial warehouses were still built with wood, a
costly brick beer distribution center with attractive art deco styling reflected the elevated
stature of that type of business in that era. As the post-prohibition excitement over access to
alcohol normalized, and WWII brought an abrupt end to the Great Depression, the aviation and
aerospace industries took hold in the city, occupying space everywhere it could be found,
including at the subject property. It also led to a proliferation of new one-story, brick,
commercial industrial buildings in various parts of the city including downtown for a variety of
new, mostly aerospace related industries springing from the resulting “ripple effect.” The site’s
next use as an autobody repair shop, while not significant in itself represents another industry
that exemplifies Santa Monica and California culture. That was followed in the 1990s by the
present film industry use, which has an obvious connection to the history and culture of the
United States, California, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica. And Bay Films in particular, would
very likely qualify the site for designation in future decades when the active business life of its
principles is over and can be viewed as a whole.
GPA dismisses the property’s ability to exemplify the commercial industrial typology, and the
beer distribution use in particular because a particular storage structure is no longer extant and
there is no loading dock on site anymore. The storage structure, as was noted in the Application
for Landmark Designation, was actually a wooden residential structure that was left behind
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1449 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
from the site’s residential phase. So, it is not clear how its survival relates to the newer
buildings. A demolished canopy on the north property line was similarly insignificant to
understanding the use of the main structures. Regarding the lack of a loading dock, one can
only wonder how adaptive reuse can be permitted and even encouraged after a resource is
deemed of value and is designated as a landmark, but is seen as a loss of integrity if it occurs
before designation. As for the auxiliary brick structure on the site, as in all designations, its
value to an understanding of the property is debatable. The Santa Monica Conservancy
concedes that the secondary (west) structure on the site may not be critical to this designation.
What is important is that it is extremely unlikely that any one-story, brick commercial industrial
buildings will be left in downtown in a few more years. We hope the commission will protect
this one, unique example. We recently lost the last remaining examples from the first phase of
development downtown of Victorian and Queen Anne homes. Let’s not let that happen with
phase 2 development in Santa Monica’s downtown.
Revised Findings for Santa Monica Landmark Designation Criteria 1 & 4
Landmark Criteria:
1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political or architectural history of the City.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion. When the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building was constructed in 1937, it was the first light industrial commercial building in the
south-east portion of Santa Monica’s downtown, which had been a working-class neighborhood
occupied by people of color since the founding of the Town of Santa Monica in 1875. The two
contributing structures book-ending the property were built during the economic recovery
from the Great Depression and the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne period. The primary structure
on the parcel reflects classic architectural characteristics of that style. The A.B.C. Distributing
Company building was a pioneer of the industrial commercial phase of development in
downtown, and the only built in downtown with characteristics of the Art Deco/Streamline
Moderne style. Furthermore, since the 1990s the neighborhood has been almost completely
redeveloped with a third phase of development, leaving the subject property as a rare and
significant example of the industrial commercial phase it pioneered.
The succession of uses of the A.B.C. Distributing Company property conveys a significant
pattern of economic development in Santa Monica, representative of the City’s evolution from
the 1930s to the present day. It was built as a beer outlet in the city after the repeal of
prohibition. The post-prohibition era in Santa Monica was characterized by the tourism
industry, which relied heavily of alcohol sales for its appeal. Gambling ships were moored off
the coast of the city, and illegal slot machine rings and hotel room bookies added to the new
economy. The brick A.B.C. Distributing Company warehouse with attractive art deco styling
reflected the elevated stature of the liquor business in that era. With the success of Douglas
Aircraft and the coming of WWII, the aviation and aerospace industry took hold in Santa
Monica next, soon occupying space everywhere it could be found, including at the subject
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1450 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
property. Aerospace industry demands led to a proliferation of new one-story, brick,
commercial industrial buildings in various parts of the city including downtown to house a
variety of related industries. The site’s next use as an autobody repair shop beginning in the
late 1950s when post-war car culture was peaking, represents another industry that exemplifies
Santa Monica and California culture. That use was followed in the 1990s by film industry use,
which also has a strong connection to the history and culture of the United States, California,
Los Angeles, and Santa Monica.
The subject parcel is also significant for its association with Etta Vena Moxley (1870-1950), a
dedicated life-long leader in the African American Women’s Club movement in the State of
California, Los Angeles and in Santa Monica. She lived at 631 Colorado Avenue from 1898 –
1927 and continued to own it until 1937. Etta Moxley was a member of a leading group of Los
Angeles and Santa Monica African American activists striving for social justice and equal rights
for people of all races. Etta Moxley was associated with a number of significant groups often in
leadership roles.
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 qualifies under this criterion because the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building is the only known example of post-Long Beach Earthquake transitional engineering
techniques for ensuring that brick and mortar structures had seismic integrity.
By 1929, brick buildings in Santa Monica were primarily clustered in the city’s retail districts.
Brick structures serving as schools, churches or homes were thinly scattered across other areas.
Brickmaking in the city’s five brickyards, the first established in 1904, was dramatically curtailed
in 1929, when the stock market crash disabled new building starts. The industry was further
impeded by the perception of brick as unsafe after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake. It was in
this context that the Simons Brick Company began an aggressive campaign to promote
Groutlock bricks to rebuild the market for clay products. Right before the crash Simons’ plants
had been producing almost a million bricks per day and were considered the top producer in
the world. The promotions restored production to 150,000 Groutlock bricks per day. During
that period, brick was primarily used for small scale industrial buildings such as the subject
property. The subject property is an excellent example of the use of Groutlock brick within
reinforced concrete structural frames as seismically safe construction methods developed in
the mid-1930s as a response to the Long Beach Earthquake. No other Groutlock brick structures
are known in Santa Monica, making the A.B.C. Distributing Company buildings a unique and
rare example of a post-Long Beach Earthquake reinforced brick construction technique.
The subject property exhibits characteristics of the Art Deco style that is rare in commercial
industrial buildings in the city. The attractive street presence of the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building evidences the successful manifestation of a subtle application of classic elements of
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1451 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
the Art Deco style resulting in an industrial building with recognizable street appeal. Its primary
façade facing Colorado is divided into three bays separated by protruding piers embossed with
four vertical grooved lines, and with stepped tapered caps that rise above the roofline. The area
above the windows is stuccoed and embossed with two horizontal sets of grooved lines, three
in each set, appearing continuous behind the piers. The stepped caps over the piers reflect the
step-backs found in Art Deco architecture. The utilitarian secondary elevation facing east abuts
the sidewalk on Seventh Street. It is divided into six bays by a reinforced cement support
structure of vertical and horizontal beams that are flush with the surface of the brick. The bay
closest to Colorado Avenue is punctuated by a large window opening. Each of the remaining
bays has a small window opening in the center, flush with the ceiling height as marked by a
horizontal reinforced concrete beam.
Nina Fresco
January 2022
6.B.c
Packet Pg. 1452 Attachment: ColoradoAve631-Application amendment (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Planning Division (310) 458-8341
Planning and Community Development Department www.smgov.net
09/18
CITY OF SANTA MONICA – CITY PLANNING DIVISION
DESIGNATION APPLICATION
Landmark Structure of Merit
Applications must be submitted by appointment at the City Planning public counter, Room 111 at City Hall, located at 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica,
CA 90401. To schedule an appointment or if you have any questions completing this application please call City Planning at (310) 458-8341.GENERAL INFORMATION PROJECT ADDRESS:
Land Use Element District: Zoning District:
Assessor Parcel: - - Lot Size:
APPLICANT
Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Email:
CONTACT PERSON (if different) (Note: All correspondence will be sent to the applicant)
Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Email:
Relation to Applicant:
PROPERTY OWNER
Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Subject improvement is generally known as:
Existing use(s) of site:
Rent control status:
Status: Occupied Unoccupied
Recognized in the Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory: Yes No
Condition: Excellent Good Fair Deteriorated Ruins Unexposed
Threats: None Private Development Vandalism
Public Works Project Zoning Other:
This part to be completed by City staff
Received By: Amount Paid: $
Date Submitted: Check No.:
NOTES TO
APPLICANT
Please complete all
applicable sections of this application and submit all required materials. Incomplete
applications will not be accepted for filing.
Landmarks
Commission meets on the second Monday of each month.
The applicant, representative, or legal owner familiar with the project must be present at the
Landmarks Commission meeting.
A decision on
designation is rendered at the hearing. All decisions by the Landmarks
Commission are subject to a 10-day appeal period. An official appeal form and fee schedule is
available at the City Planning Division Public Counter. Appealed projects will be scheduled for
a hearing before the City Council.
Scott Albright 851.9005/20/2021
21ENT-0125
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1453 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ~ Please Note ~
The following property and historical information identified below
must be provided in order for your application to be determined
complete by the City Planning Division.
You may provide information on additional sheets of paper.
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Description of site or structure, note any major alterations & dates of alterations:
Statement of architectural significance:
Statement of historic importance:
NOTES TO
APPLICANT
For more information on designation procedures, refer to
SMMC Section 9.56.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1454 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Page 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Person(s) of historic importance:
Local State National
Statement of other significance:
Documents and publications that relate directly to proposed improvement (bibliography):
FOR STRUCTURES ONLY:
Date of construction: Factual Estimated
Source:
Architect/Designer/Engineer:
Contractor/ Other builder:
Architectural Style:
Historic Use of Structure(s):
Present Use of Structure(s):
Is/Are structure(s) on original site: Yes No Unknown
Is/Are structure(s) threatened with destruction: Yes No Unknown
If yes, state reason:
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1455 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Page 4 APPLICATOIN REQUIREMENTS APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS – all items must be provided
Completed Application.
Payment of Fee, if applicable.
Payment of Fee is WAIVED for Non-Profit Organizations. Documentation demonstrating Tax-Exempt Status must be included with this application and at the time of filing to be eligible for a Landmark/Structure of Merit Designation Application fee waiver.
Staff will confirm non-profit organization status prior to deeming this application complete.
Eight (8) sets of labeled Color Photographs of the building elevations or improvement on 8½" x 11"
paper (Color photocopies are acceptable).
Any information you feel would be of assistance in reviewing the application, such as original plans,
old photos, or other historical information.
For structures only: if applicant is requesting approval of modifications, please submit all materials requested for a Certificate of Appropriateness Application.
I hereby certify that the information contained in this application is correct to the best of my knowledge.
____________________________________________________
Applicant’s Name (PRINT)
_________________________________________________________
Applicant’s Signature Date
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1456 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
631 Colorado Avenue – A.B.C. Distributing Company
Property Description
Description
The subject property includes two parcels, lots K and L in block 193 of the Town of Santa
Monica Tract, on the northwest corner of Colorado Avenue and Seventh Street. It is developed
with two brick, Art Deco/Streamline Moderne style light industrial buildings built in 1937 and
1941, that sit like bookends on the east and west edges of the parcel as viewed from Colorado
Avenue. The east structure, built in 1937, covers the entire east 50 feet of the double lot
adjoining three property lines. It was built with groutlock brick, a product intended to be
resilient in the event of an earthquake, made by the Simons Brick Company. Its primary façade
facing Colorado is divided into three bays separated by protruding piers embossed with four
vertical grooved lines, and with stepped tapered caps that rise above the roofline. The area
above the windows is stuccoed, decorated with two horizontal sets of grooved lines, three in
each set, appearing continuous behind the piers. Steel-framed divided light windows with a grid
pattern of 12 x 4 panes span the full width of each bay between the piers, inclusive of six sets of
hopper windows. Below the windows the bricks that comprise the structure are exposed, and
the groutlock ridges of some bricks are visible. The secondary elevation facing east abuts the
sidewalk on Seventh Street. It is divided into six bays by a reinforced cement support structure
of vertical and horizontal beams that are flush with the surface of the brick. The bay closest to
Colorado Avenue is punctuated by a 6 x 4 multi-light steel framed window, also with hoppers
inclusive. Each of the next four bays heading north has a small steel framed hopper window in
the center, flush with the ceiling height as marked by a horizontal reinforced concrete beam.
The west elevation of the subject property faces the interior of the parcel and is not completely
visible from the public right of way. It appears to be divided into six bays like the east elevation,
with similar small steel hopper windows. The third bay in from Colorado Avenue contains the
building entrance with a contemporary doorway. A second story addition was added above the
northern most bay at the rear of the structure in 1998, and a single story el has been added to
the interior side of the same bay.
The west structure measuring 25 X 42 feet, sits on the south and west property lines of the
parcel, fronting Colorado Avenue and adjacent to an alley. The brick façade facing Colorado
Avenue is obscured by a hedge, but appears to be intact. It shares the beamed support
structure of the main building on the site. All four corners of the west structure are finished
with piers with tapered caps similar to those on the east building but appear to be either
replaced or altered. They are finished with plain, smooth concrete. The west, north and east
elevations are clad in smooth-finish concrete or stucco and have no openings. The building
entrance is on the east elevation facing the interior of the site, which is not visible from the
street.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1457 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Permits and Alterations
The original building permit for the east structure was issued to A.B.C. Distributing Company on
May 8, 1937, indicating a 50 X 100-foot structure, 20 feet in height to be built of groutlock brick
at a cost of $7000. No architect is listed. According to a permit dated December 11, 1941, the
west structure was added as a loading canopy that cost $500. It had a composition roof but sat
at ground level with no raised floor. The west side of the structure was unenclosed. In 1947, a
loading platform and doors were added for $800.
In June 1955, both brick buildings were sandblasted. The Aerophysics Development Corporation
filed for electrical and plumbing permits in August, September and November 1955, but did not
make any structural changes to the property. In 1957, Keystone Body Works replaced four
interior columns with two in the west structure, and built a 21-foot addition to it along the alley
elevation to serve as an enclosed paint spray booth. It appears in aerial images that a remaining
residential structure on the site was removed at that time. The following year, in 1958,
Keystone added an unenclosed canopy structure for polishing cars behind the spray booth,
which filled in the remaining alley elevation to five feet from the north property line. Keystone
also added an 18 square foot metal projecting sign to the property. The central area of the
parcel remained undeveloped. In 1959, a permit for an 8-foot-tall cinder block wall along the
alley was issued. No more substantive work was done on the property until a 1994 Safety
Assessment after the Northridge Earthquake noted that bricks had fallen from an unidentified
“rear wall.” Regardless, the building was green tagged because the “building doesn’t look like it
took any damage.” It is likely that the brick wall referred to fell from the west structure abutting
the alley, or on its north elevation where it is presently stuccoed.
In 1996, a new owner filed a permit for tenant improvements, which appear to be the addition
of partition walls inside the east structure. The west structure is labeled “storage” on the plans.
The two automotive-related additions to the west structure were removed, but the block wall
along the alley was retained. The space between the structures was marked for 17 parking
spaces. In 1997 the bricks on both buildings were sandblasted a second time, inside and out.
A 730 square foot second-story addition was added in 1998 along the rear (north) elevation of
the primary structure over the last bay. It is subtly differentiated by flashing along the Seventh
Street elevation where it ties in at the top of the exposed structural ceiling beam. The east and
south elevations of the addition are clad in brick to match the original structure. The addition is
differentiated with a scored stucco finish on the north side, with the original bricks remaining
exposed on the original ground floor wall below. The addition is punctuated by two steel
windows on the east elevation facing Seventh Street that are larger than the ground floor
windows and set midway between the floor and ceiling. The addition is not visible from the
front of the property at Colorado Avenue. On the west elevation a first-floor-only addition
appears to create a shallow el by modestly extending the sixth bay. The addition has a scored
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1458 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
plaster finish on the interior-facing elevations, and full width windows facing west that
proportionally reflect the windows facing Colorado Avenue. That same year, a fence was added
to close off the Colorado frontage between the two structures, and the curb cut was removed.
The fence is comprised of a low concrete wall topped by contemporary curved wrought iron
pickets rising to ten or more feet and punctuated by square columns that reflect the design of
the original fluted pilasters on the east structure, but are differentiated as new by the smooth
cement and black metal tapered caps. The fencing picks up again along the alley frontage
behind the west structure, where only iron pickets are used to create an automatic gate for
vehicular access. In 2002, the present owner filed a permit for an interior remodel of the two
buildings, and the addition of landscaping to the site, primarily along the west elevation of the
east structure where it meets the addition.
Comparables
From the 1950s through the 1990s, the eastern portion of Downtown was dominated by low
brick commercial industrial buildings. Today, only two one-story brick commercial industrial
buildings in addition to the subject property remain standing in Downtown Santa Monica at 501
Broadway Avenue (built in 1955) and at 1557 7th Street (built in 1958). They are both
featureless brick buildings with simple boxy massing. Both properties currently have
replacement projects that are working their way through the city entitlement process. The
subject project is both the first and the last of its type in downtown, and the only one known to
have used historically significant engineering methods or to be reflective of an architectural
style.
Simons Brick & the Groutlock System
Brickmaking took place in Santa Monica in the first months after its founding when the bricks
that built the Rapp Saloon (extant) on Second Street were fired on site by brick contractors
Spenser and Pugh, who had collected the clay on the east side of town. By 1903, the prospects
for brickmaking concerns in the Los Angeles area were so great that Robert Jones (the founder’s
nephew) and William Gillis (older brother to R.C. Gillis), began a brick plant of their own, Sunset
Brick and Tile, near Twenty-third Street and Colorado Avenue. They were major shareholders in
the successor company that bought out the remaining holdings from the retiring founders. The
new brick concern help establish the city’s industrial district just beyond the edge of the original
townsite between Colorado Avenue and the edge of the Rancho San Vicente y Santa Monica at
Pico Boulevard. They sold Sunset Brick and Tile to the Los Angeles Pressed Brick Company
(established 1887) a year later. Two months after that, in November 1904, the Simons Brick
Company (established 1886) also began setting up shop in Santa Monica. With deep reserves of
excellent clay, Simons planned that Santa Monica would become their new main plant since the
reserves in their original Pasadena clay pits were running low, and their Boyle Heights plant was
small. But in 1906, they added a vast new site in Montebello to their portfolio, which enabling
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1459 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
their business to expand beyond expectations, became their main plant. While some brick firing
did take place in Santa Monica, a lot of the uniquely deep-red, high-quality clay that came out
of the Santa Monica pits were moved by railroad to the Montebello plant for processing.
Simons Brick became the largest brick manufactory in the world at its peak in 1924. The
company founded by Reuben Simons was built up under the leadership of eldest son “Big Joe”
Simons. In 1914, a coup that resulted in a family feud, shifted leadership to Joe’s youngest
brother Walter Simons who saw the company through its heyday, final demise, and dissolution
in 1952. Simons Brick is both celebrated for its brick and ignominious for the company town
they built in Montebello which was the largest, racially segregated industrial town ever built in
the United States.
With demand for building supplies slowing after the Great Depression began in 1929, it was the
beginning of the end for Simons Brick. Things turned abruptly for the worse on March 10, 1933,
when the Long Beach Earthquake wreaked havoc on the Southland, causing severe damage to
most masonry buildings standing at the time, and schools in particular. Shoddy brickmaking,
bricklaying, grout quality, and building engineering were blamed for the failure of masonry
structures during the earthquake more than the material itself.1 But brick fell out of favor
anyway, used mostly for small scale industrial buildings such as the subject property through
the end of the 1930s. The Riley Act, which among other things required all California cities to
have building departments with teams of inspectors to enforce a new uniform building code,
was adopted soon after the quake. The Field Act established rigorous new seismic safety
standards for school buildings in particular. Groutlock brick had been developed by Simons
Brick a year before the earthquake. The groutlocks featured corrugated ridges on the grout
faces of the brick, and gaps for inserting metal reinforcing rods. Both features locked the bricks
together even during a seismic event that introduced lateral forces. Walter Simons began
promoting his groutlock product aggressively soon after the Long Beach Earthquake, using it to
build back trust in brick for safety and permanence.2 Simons was back in production at a rate of
150,000 groutlock bricks per day within a few months of the quake, only ten percent of their
peak production, but a big boost to the foundering company.3 New structural reinforcement
techniques, such as use of reinforced concrete beams that isolated sections of a structure so in
the event of damage it was less likely that a whole building would collapse, along with the use
of the groutlock brick allowed brick construction to tentatively begin again. All these
engineering innovations are demonstrated in the subject property. Construction slow-downs
during WWII struck the final blow to Simons Brick, which shut down all its plants by 1950. No
other groutlock brick structures are known in Santa Monica.
1 Quake Building Law May Be Softened to Permit Some Bricks, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, May 21,
1933, Brick Chatter, Pasadena Post, Pasadena, California, March 22, 1934
2 Home Features Reveal Genius, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, May 1, 1932
3 Factories Throughout City Increasing Production, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, May 21, 1933
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1460 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Early Context
The map for the Town of Santa Monica was recorded with the county clerk on July 10, 1875. It
included the area between today’s Colorado Avenue and Montana Avenue and extended east
from the Pacific Ocean to Twenty-sixth Street. But parcels in most of that area were not placed
on the market for many years, remaining largely agricultural. When the first land auction took
place on July 15, 1875, sales were focused on the blocks closest to the coast and railroad that
came through the city just south of Railroad (Colorado) Avenue. By the time the City of Santa
Monica was incorporated in 1886, development was concentrated along Ocean Avenue,
Second, Third and Fourths Streets. Commercial activity was centered on Second and Third
Streets between Utah (Broadway) Avenue and Oregon (Santa Monica) Avenue. South of Utah to
the railroad tracks was developed with stables, boarding houses, and small dwellings. North of
the commercial center were large homes, many on double lots, and churches representing
three different denominations.4 By the 1891 Sanborn map, the north side with larger homes
had extended north as far as Washington Avenue, and enjoyed the addition of a tennis club and
the opulent home of city co-founder John Percival Jones. The dwellings south of Oregon
Avenue, and particularly south of Utah Avenue now extended east to Sixth Street and were
notably smaller than those on the north side. Tucked between the town and the railroad, they
shared their small district with three Chinese laundries.5 By 1895, development south of Utah
Avenue extended east as far as Ninth Street and included the subject parcel, which was shown
with a small, narrow cottage and several accessory structures behind it on the Sanborn map
that year. The area was dotted with numerous similar dwellings, and several others hardly
bigger than sheds.
According to historian Dr. Alison Rose Jefferson, Santa Monica enjoys the oldest African
American community on the Southern California coast.6 At the time of the 1880 census, fifteen
African Americans out of a total Santa Monica population of 417 lived in the city.7 According to
census records, between 1880 and 1900, the African American population in Santa Monica
crept up to 60 persons, an increase that lagged slightly behind the overall population of the city,
which jumped from 417 persons to 3057.
Most African Americans in Santa Monica at the end of the nineteenth century made their
homes in today’s downtown between Broadway and Colorado Avenues, at the edge of town by
the railroad tracks. A few scattered households were on Main Street in Ocean Park, and a few
more African American households were scattered around in unincorporated areas in the east
part of the city. Only those who worked as live-in domestics were residing on the north side of
4 Santa Monica, California, Sanborn Map, 1887
5 Santa Monica, California, Sanborn Map, 1891
6 A Short History: Continuity and Change in the Twentieth Century Santa Monica African American Community,
Draft 2, by Alison Rose Jefferson, Belmar History + Art Project for the City of Santa Monica, 2018
7 United States Census, Santa Monica, California, 1880, www.ancestry.com
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1461 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
town.8 Between 1900 and 1910, the African American population in Santa Monica grew to 191,
keeping pace with the population growth for Caucasians by remaining at 2% of those that called
Santa Monica home.9 By 1910 many African American families were also living in the Bandini
Tract as well, an area that included the Belmar Triangle and the western half of the present day
Santa Monica High School campus inclusive of Firth Street.
The community of African Americans in Santa Monica established numerous religious and social
organizations in the early 1900s. They first held religious services in Santa Monica in Hull’s Hall
on Third Street near Utah Avenue (Broadway).10 Hull’s Hall, a public meeting space available for
rent above a furniture store, was in the center of the earliest grouping of African American
homes. But the dream was to have a church of their own. In 1908, the Washington School at
the corner of Ashland and Fourth Streets in Ocean Park was damaged by fire and slated for
demolition, to be replaced with a fireproof structure. The tragedy had fortuitous timing for
African Americans who, with the help of the larger church organization in Texas, purchased the
building from the school district, and a site at the corner of Bay and Fourth Streets on which to
place it.11 The Santa Monica A.M.E. Church was named Phillips Chapel. New social and political
organizations were formed regularly following the establishment of Phillips Chapel, including
the Afro-American Council of Santa Monica that provided support to African Americans for
rent, real estate matters, and other practical needs, a literary group called The Forum, and a
chapter of the Masonic Lodge dedicated to African Americans.12 A Santa Monica Chapter of the
NAACP was established by a strong community of activists which had Phillips Chapel at its
center.
Etta Vena Moxley: “Lifting As We Climb”
On January 5, 1897, Etta Vena married John Walter Moxley in Los Angeles. Soon after they
moved to Santa Monica and made a home on the subject property where they lived for over
thirty years.
Etta Vena was born on March 27, 1870 in Toledo, Ohio to William Walter Vena of Kentucky, and
Georgiana Newton of Virginia. The year before her own wedding, Etta Vena’s brother Clarence
Vena married her fiancé’s sister (whose name was also Etta, so her married name was Etta
Moxley Vena). John Walter Moxley was born on April 6, 1862 in Dresden, Ontario, to a Black
8 United States Census, Santa Monica, California, 1880-1920, www.ancestry.com
9 Will Help Solve the Question, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, June 6, 1903
10 Colored People Want a Church, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, March 2, 1908
11 Phillips Chapel Christian (formerly Colored) Methodist Episcopal Church, by Alison Rose Jefferson, Term Paper,
Spring 2005, University of Southern California, submitted to the City of Santa Monica as documentation for the
Landmarks Designation of Phillips Chapel, 401 Bay Street, October 10, 2005
12 Afro-American Council Holds Interesting Meet, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, November 11,
1910, Forum Organized at Phillips Chapel, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, February 18, 1911,
Masonic Lodge for the Colored People, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, February 27, 1911
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1462 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Canadian mother, Melvina Richey of the same place and John Walter Moxley Sr. a drayman
(truck driver) born in Georgetown, Kentucky. The Moxley’s moved to Toledo, Ohio in 1878,
soon after Melvina died from complications of childbirth. The two families lived on the same
block in Toledo in the 1880s. John Walter Moxley’s other known siblings were Alice, Emma and
James. Etta Vena Moxley had at least one other brother named Edward. She also had a cousin,
James Vena, who was the editor of a newspaper for the African American community in Los
Angeles. It appears that both the Moxley and Vena families lived as free Blacks as early as 1840
in their respective homes in Kentucky and Ontario. J.W. Moxley Jr. moved to California in 1888.
Etta Vena and several other family members among the Moxley’s and the Vena’s also moved to
California around that time.13
Newlyweds John and Etta Moxley settled in Santa Monica at 103 Seventh Street. Based on an
examination of Sanborn Maps and old street numbering patterns, it appears that this was the
address of a pre-1895 cottage at the corner of Seventh Street and Colorado Avenue, the subject
parcel. By 1899, John had established himself as a barber at 214 Third Street, a midblock shop
between Utah and Oregon Avenues (Broadway and Santa Monica Boulevards).14 By 1901, the
barbershop was well-known enough to be invited to enter a float in the Fourth of July Parade in
Santa Monica.15
In September 1902, the deed for the subject parcel at Seventh Street and Railroad Avenue
(Colorado Avenue), where they had already been living, was recorded by John P. and Georgina
Jones to J.W. and Etta V. Moxley.16 Soon, Moxley added three new chairs to his barbershop,
and the couple added a $400 frame cottage with five rooms to their parcel behind the original
cottage. Etta gave up a job working for a caterer in Los Angeles to start her own business
catering weddings, luncheons, banquets, and receptions for white society ladies. She worked
from home at Seventh and Colorado.17 The hard-working Moxley’s were well on their way in
their quest to achieve the American Dream.
13 Moxley and Vena, Los Angeles County, California Marriage Licenses, January 5, 1897, www.findmypast.com, John
Walter Moxley, State of California Department of Public Health, Vital Statistics, Standard Certificate of Death,
October 15, 1938, www.findmypast.com
14 J.W. Moxley, Santa Monica Directory, 1899, Santa Monica Public Library
15 A Grand Parade, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, June 2, 1901
16 Jones to Moxley, Los Angeles County Deed Records Book 1621, page 181, September 2, 1902,
www.familysearch.com, [Note: this deed only transferred lot L in block 193 of the Town of Santa Monica Tract.
Evidence was found that the Moxley’s did own both properties, but a somewhat exhaustive search did not come
up with a deed for lot K. Also, the deed may reflect the satisfaction of a mortgage, taken on the property a few
years earlier, which might explain how they came to live there prior to the deed recording date. Still the cottage
pre-dated the Moxley’s arrival in Santa Monica. It may have been built buy a previous buyer who was not able to
satisfy their mortgage resulting in the ownership of house and lot reverting back to Jones.]
17 (untitled), Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, March 19, 1903, A New Cottage on Colorado, Santa
Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, December 8, 1903, (untitled), Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica,
California, September 30, 1904
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1463 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Meanwhile, Etta Moxley’s commitment to public service and community organizing was
becoming publicly apparent. With no equivalent yet in Santa Monica, Etta remained associated
with the African Methodist Episcopal Church in Los Angeles. The A.M.E. Church at the turn-of-
the-century did not open leadership positions to women. Instead, to exercise their influence
church women formed groups, societies and coalitions to bring people together, socialize, raise
money, and provide community services. In 1898, Etta V. Moxley was elected president of the
Women’s Mite Missionary Society, one such women’s organization associated with the
church.18 In 1904, Etta Moxley gave a speech at the Afro-American Congress in Los Angeles
entitled Club Life Among Colored People. She told her audience that for the people of her race
to achieve their goals under the pressures of racism, they had to be super-achievers, to be the
very best at what they set out to do. Drawing on the up-close observations of the white
women’s club luncheons she catered, Etta explained what that meant for African American club
women.
We are the greatest imitators in the world and what our white sisters can do we can do.
We have many women’s clubs, and we are anxious to imitate our white sisters in that
respect, but we seem to have missed a point; our club soon degenerates into a social
club or a literary society. Such a club disgraces the name of women’s club and can never
gain the recognition for which we strive. There are likely white women’s clubs that do
the same, but we are only entitled to credit when we imitate them in the best things. . . .
We must do things if we wish to be recognized. When we have provided education for
our young men and women and homes for our old folks, we will have done something
worthy of recognition, for we will have made ourselves benefactors to all the people.19
“Lifting as we Climb,” was the official motto of the National Federation of Colored Women’s
Clubs, and appears to have been Etta Moxley’s personal motto as well. In 1905, Etta was
appointed president of the Sojourner Truth Industrial Club, a new group within the church that
had been founded the previous year by Mrs. J.M. Scott. Under Etta Moxley’s leadership, a large
committee of the Sojourner Truth Club was preparing to build a group residence for unmarried,
self-supporting, African American women, a group that would be very vulnerable without
community support in a large city like Los Angeles. The Sojourner Truth Home was entirely
funded and managed by African American women. It was the first establishment of its kind in
the state, and the only one for several decades.20 During this highly productive period in Etta’s
life references to the delicious meals she catered to the white club women of Santa Monica
appeared regularly in the society pages of the Santa Monica Outlook. She appeared to have
18 Women on a Mission: African Methodist Episcopal Missionary Women, Gender and Race Relations, 1900-1940,
Claire Cooke, Doctoral Thesis, School of Humanities, University of Western Australia, 2014, How To Get Up, Los
Angeles Evening Post, Los Angeles, California, August 20, 1898
19 Colored Women Take Laurels, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, August 31, 1904
20 (untitled), Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, November 15, 1904, Will Assist Negro Girls, Los
Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, April 13, 1906, The Criminalization of Black Angeleno Women:
Institutionalized Racism and Sexism in Los Angeles, by Kaitlin Therese Boyd, Master’s Thesis, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, 2012
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1464 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
been highly regarded as a caterer among her club-member employers who ranked at the top of
Santa Monica society and spent significant time and money on lavish luncheons. In 1907, the
Sojourner Truth Home was up and running, and Etta was elected president of the group for the
third time. She travelled to Oakland that year to represent her club at the State Federation of
Colored Women’s Clubs.21
While his wife worked to make the world a better place, Mr. Moxley became treasurer of a new
Santa Monica Union League in 1908, which held card parties and other social gatherings for
men. Not particularly active in community organizing, J.W. Moxley attracted a different kind of
attention in the news when he was arrested for firing his gun within the city limits while
hunting ducks. It is worth noting that he was south of Pico Boulevard during the infraction,
which was undeveloped land. Not all the circumstances were reported.22 He did serve as a poll
officer for a local election.23
On August 16, 1908 the Moxley’s only child, a daughter they named Honoré, was born.
In 1910, Etta Moxley and Mrs. S.A. Wright organized a Santa Monica Chapter of the National
Association of Colored Women. The national president of the association, the largest African
American women’s group in the country at the time, was Mrs. Booker T. Washington. The
activist organization promoted African American women’s suffrage, which was not represented
in the mainstream suffrage movement. They also pushed back against Jim Crow laws, and
worked to improve schools and educational opportunities for African Americans. Etta began as
secretary on the founding board of the local chapter of the N.A.C.W.,24 and she delivered
periodic speeches at events at Philips Chapel reflecting her important work. She was soon
elected vice-president of the State Federation of Colored Women’s Clubs as well, which
published a cookbook in 1910 featuring two of Etta Moxley’s recipes.
Marshmallow Salad
1 fourth Ib. marshmallows cut up
1 half Ib. pecan nuts broken in bits
1 cup white cherries
1 cup pineapple cut up
Dressing, 1 half cup whipped cream
1 third cup mayonnaise
21 Gone to Attend State Federation, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 5, 1907
22 Hunts in Middle of City, Los Angeles Herald, Los Angeles, California November 27, 1909
23 Colored People Have Organized, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, February 12, 1908, Precincts,
Polling Places and Officers of Road Bond Election, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, July 22, 1908
24 Colored Women Are to be Organized Here, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, March 18, 1910,
National Association of Colored Women, Allison Lange, Ph.D., National Women’s History Museum,
http://www.crusadeforthevote.org/nacw, Fall 2015
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1465 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Chill the fruits and before serving mix with dressing and place on lettuce leaf. MRS. ETTA
V. MOXLEY, First Vice President of State Federation, Santa Monica.
Jellied Potato Salad
One quart cold boiled potatoes cut in dice. Coat small moulds with gelatine decorate
with sliced pimolas. Put the potatoes with a very little onion, celery and cucumber into
the mould. Season the rest of the gelatine which is the remainder of the half box used,
with parsley and onion and pour over the ingredients in the mold, chill and turn out on a
lettuce leaf. Serve with mayonnaise in which a cup of shrimps has been chopped. MRS.
ETTA V. Moxley, Santa Monica Cateress.25
In 1912, Etta V. Moxley, was elected president of the State Federation of Colored Women’s
Clubs. As leader of the club of clubs, Etta toured the state, visiting all fifty-two member
organizations in California. She returned from the tour and was re-elected to serve as president
for another year, and also as delegate to an upcoming National Federation meeting in
Wilberford, Ohio.26 Her husband John continued his participation in more leisure oriented
clubs, hosting The Rising Son’s League of Santa Monica at his barber shop, which had moved to
219 Utah Avenue (Broadway) in the Keller Block. John served as treasurer to the group as well
as host.27 By contrast, Etta became a blur of purposeful activity presiding over numerous
groups, fundraisers, and rallies for political causes, and giving speeches continually over the
next decades. In 1914 as president of the Colored Women’s Vincent Morgan Club, she presided
at a rally on the brand-new tennis courts of the La Bonita on Belmar Place. (Etta often worked
closely with respected Los Angeles matron Mrs. G.M. Warner, who was the aunt of Helen
Warren, owner of La Bonita.)28 Etta Moxley publicly endorsed local candidates, started new
civics organizations, and gave more speeches. Her daughter Honoré was often at her side,
sometimes playing piano as part of the entertainment at events. With other members of
Phillips Chapel she organized get-out-the-vote campaigns for the African American community,
continuing to take a special interest in women’s suffrage. The church also formed a women’s
auxiliary dedicated to Red Cross work in 1917, with Etta Moxley an active participant.29
A family tragedy occurred in 1917, when the police were called due to a disturbance in the
Moxley home. Etta was found bloodied and unconscious on the floor. She had been badly
beaten by her husband. Etta pressed charges which resulted in her husband spending six
months in jail. It appears that she lived apart from her husband for more than a year, before
25 The Federation Cookbook, A Collection of Tested Recipes Contributed by the Colored Women of the State of
California, by Mrs. Bertha L. Turner, State Superintendent Domestic Science, Pasadena California, 1910, Library of
Congress
26 To Inspect Colored Clubs of State, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, July 29, 1913, Honor for Local
Woman, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 7, 1913
27 Rising Son’s Meet, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, October 31, 1913
28 (untitled), Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 21, 1914
29 Members of Colored Church Work for Red Cross, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, December 15,
1917
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1466 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
they reconciled.30 Etta maintained her day-job as a caterer, and until 1920 also served as a
janitor at one of the branch libraries in Santa Monica possibly to make up for her husband’s lost
income.31
A group called the Monday Morning Club opened new headquarters on San Juan Avenue in
Venice in 1926, after holding its first meetings in a Baptist Church nearby. Mrs. Moxley was not
only a board member, and later president of the club, but was part-owner of the underlying
property. Well-known and respected in the African American women’s club world, Etta spoke at
the inaugural event for the Monday Morning Club house.32 When W.E.B. Du Bois came to speak
in the area in 1927, Mrs. Moxley made a presentation on behalf of all club women at that event
as well.33
In 1929, Honoré Moxley graduated from the University of Southern California, receiving a
Bachelor’s Degree in Education.34 Around the same time, her parents moved from her
childhood home at 631 Colorado Avenue to 1458 Euclid Street on the outskirts of the Pico
Neighborhood, which was concentrated between 14th Street and Cloverfield Avenue, and
between Santa Monica and Pico Boulevards.35 They held on to the Colorado Avenue parcels,
which were developed with several rental cottages. Following in her mother’s footsteps,
Honoré delivered a keynote address at the First A.M.E. Church in Venice as part of a weekly
evening program for which Etta Moxley herself delivered a keynote address the following
week.36
The Moxley’s move to Euclid Street was consistent with the overall migration of African
Americans, and all people of color in Santa Monica during the 1920s and 1930s. Downtown
Santa Monica, concentrated on Second, Third and Fourth Streets, was becoming a commercial
success, and racist practices among realtors that became openly accepted in the 1920s made it
difficult for boom-time African American new-comers to the city to settle new sections of
downtown. The block of Seventh Street where the Moxley’s lived was almost entirely populated
by African Americans and Latinx but with no room to expand their community, the new-comers
and their cultural activities, clubs, and churches, became established in the Pico Neighborhood.
A new Masonic Lodge Hall on Eighteenth Street and Broadway hosted a well-attended
candidates forum sponsored by the Federated Clubs and presided over by Etta Moxley in 1930.
Her political endorsements delivered in open letters carried weight in her community eager to
ensure they voted for representatives who were unprejudiced and would treat people of all
30 Husband Beat Wife Most Cruelly, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, September 12, 1917, Wife
Beater Jailed, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles California, September 14, 1917
31 Story Hour at Public Library Pleases ‘Kiddies’, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, November 3, 1920
32 New Quarters of Club Dedicated at Sunday Services, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, December
3, 1926
33 DuBois Addresses Large Gathering, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, February 23, 1927
34 Santa Monicans to Receive Diplomas, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, June 13, 1929
35 [Note: the Moxley moved sometime between 1927 and 1930.]
36 First (Venice), Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, April 26, 1930, May 10, 1930
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1467 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
races fairly.37 Etta Moxley was active in the Womens’ Political Study Club during this period,
which became known for advocating for equal access to public places for African Americans by
engaging the courts.38
As Etta Moxley entered her 60s, she still worked as a club-luncheon caterer in Santa Monica
and continued to take the speaker’s podium at churches, organizational meetings, fund raisers
for social service causes, and political events. Her husband John Walter Moxley retired from
barbering and passed away at home on Euclid Street in 1938. He had sold the site of their first
Santa Monica home (subject property) the previous year to beer distributor Glen A. Moyer. Etta
Vena Moxley died on January 28, 1950. Her obituary credited her with a host of additional
affiliations not mentioned in the survey above including being one of the organizers of the
order of Eastern Star in California, and Matrix of the O.E.S., Past Matron of Orpha Chapter,
O.E.S. and Heroines of Jericho, and Past Historian of Delta Mothers and Sponsors Club.39 Other
sources add that she had been a “trail blazer” in the Fanny J. Wall Home and Day Nursery, and
the Eastside Settlement House.40
Honoré Moxley was married three times and divorced twice. Her first marriage in 1931 was to
Harry Chandler Wallace. In 1937, Honoré married Edgar Carey, and in 1949 she married
Kenneth Irving Levy.41 She served as president of her chapter of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority
for three terms (the first African American Sorority in the United States established in 1912),
worked as a teacher and guidance counselor in Los Angeles public schools, and continued her
own education at USC and Los Angeles State College, eventually earning a Ph.D. She was
politically progressive, at one point attracting the attention of the Committee on Un-American
Activities, which claimed to ferret out suspected communists. In 1954 four years after her
mother’s death, Honoré emceed the golden anniversary celebration of the Sojourner Truth
Home her mother helped found. In 1956 at Jefferson High School, she became the first African
American woman to head the counselling department in a secondary school in Los Angeles.
Honoré Moxley Levy died in 1979.
Tenants on the Moxley Property
The structures on the subject property during the Moxley years were listed under a variety of
addresses, including 619, 621, 625, 631, 641 Colorado Avenue, and on Seventh Street they were
37 Candidates Speak at Club Gathering, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, July 2, 1930, Negroes
Endorse Lyon, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 18, 1930
38 Santa Monica, California Eagle, Los Angeles, California, October 12, 1934
39 Pioneer Mrs. Etta Vena Moxley Passes After Short Illness, California Eagle, Los Angeles, California, February 2,
1950
40 Negro Who’s Who in California, Negro Who’s Who in California Publishing Company, 1948
41 Wallace to Moxley, Marriage License, Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California, June 19, 1931,
www.findmypast.com, Carey to Moxley, Marriage License, Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California, November
21, 1937, www.findmypast.com, Levy to Moxley, Marriage License, Orange County, California, June 19, 1931,
www.findmypast.com
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1468 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
numbered 1554, 1558, and 1562. There were four cottages and a small commercial building.
The latter was squeezed onto the corner of the parcel where Seventh Street and Colorado
Avenue intersect around 1925, though no permit was found for it. It appears that the Moxley’s
lived in the “front” house on 7th Street until they built the cottage known as 621 Colorado
behind it in 1905 for which a permit was found. They lived there until 1928, when they moved
to Euclid Street. The cottage known as 619 Colorado, on the west side of the Moxley’s, and the
cottage just north of that known as 1554 Seventh Street were added between 1907 and 1912.
No permits were found for either of those cottages. Santa Monica directories through 1928
show the cottages occupied by a range of laborers, fishermen, housekeepers, laundresses,
plasterers, janitors, and others. The small commercial building added in 1925 was occupied by
neighborhood-serving uses including John Moxley’s barbershop, a grocery, and a second-hand
furniture shop. Directories from 1931-1936 show a number of vacancies on the property
leading up to its sale in 1937.
A.B.C. Distributing Company & the Growth of Downtown
In 1937, Glen A. Moyer applied for a building permit for a one-story brick office and warehouse
building at 631 Colorado Avenue to house the A.B.C. Distributing Company, which distributed
beer for the Aztec Brewing Company based in San Diego. Moyer was born an Iowa farm boy in
August 1891. By 1920, he had left his father’s farm and was living on his own doing odd jobs.42
In 1929, Moyer married Zora McCourry in San Diego, California. She worked in a steam laundry,
and he was a machinist in a steel mill. In 1933, with prohibition about to be sent packing, Aztec
Brewing Company made a big push to find entrepreneurs to disseminate throughout the region
to distribute their beer to very thirsty Americans. Like many beer companies across the United
States, the Aztec Brewing Company had made several major preemptive moves in order to be
ready on day one, when laws relaxed and then repealed prohibition. Moyer was in the right
place at the right time to leverage the opportunity to his own advantage by accepting a beer
distribution franchise.
In 1931, when repeal of prohibition was coming down the pike, enforcement in Los Angeles
County was lax.43 But it wasn’t until after the November 1932 election of Franklin D. Roosevelt
that there was real movement towards legalizing drink. On March 22, 1933, Roosevelt signed
the Cullen-Harrison Act that made sales of low-alcohol beer and wine permissible while the
complete end of prohibition cranked its way through the machinery of United States politics,
which was expected to take years. The act became effective two weeks later on April 7, which
some beer enthusiasts still celebrate as National Beer Day. The complete repeal of national
prohibition occurred sooner than anticipated on December 5, 1933, with the passage of the
Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution.
42 Glen A. Moyer, United States Census, Guthrie County, Iowa, 1900, www.ancestry.com, Glen A. Moyer, United
States Census, Crook County, Wyoming, 1910 & 1920, www.ancestry.com
43 Prohibition’s Thing of Past, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, November 7, 1931
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1469 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
The Aztec Brewing Company was established in Mexicali, Mexico in 1921, during prohibition in
the United States by American businessmen Edward P. Baker, Herbert Jaffe and William H.
Strouse. Their products became very popular among Americans who travelled to Baja to drink.
Their best seller was an award-winning pale lager dubbed “Famous A.B.C. Beer,” recognized in
Mexican and Spanish beer competitions. In April 7, 1933, the day the Cullen-Harrison Act
became law, Baker announced that the Aztec Brewing Company had already moved to San
Diego where the new plant was prepped and ready to start beer production, strategically
poised to get in on the ground floor of the long-suppressed beer industry in the United States.44
The army of franchise holders was immediately deployed, fanning out over the western United
States. Over the next several months, liquor license applications for A.B.C. Distribution
Company outlets from counties all over California, as well as Arizona, Nevada, and Utah were
filed by the group organized by the brewery before the laws had changed.45
Glen A. Moyer, of the first wave of A.B.C. Distributors during that heady beer-only-permitted
period in 1933, set up his first location at 1711 Washington Boulevard (Abbot Kinney
Boulevard) in Venice. An ad for Moyer’s business appeared in the Santa Monica Outlook in
August. An advertisement in the Los Angeles Times the next day listed no less than six A.B.C.
Distributing Company outlets in Los Angeles County, including Moyer’s. But so far, none were in
the more conservative Santa Monica, where the end of prohibition was not welcomed the way
it was in fun-loving Venice. Since the new alcohol rules were administered at the county level, it
was legal to drink low-alcohol beer in Santa Monica, but city ordinances prevented its sale to
end users by the drink where there was dancing or even standing. Santa Monica imbibers had
to be firmly planted on a chair or stool with a plate a food in front of them in order to be
served.46 As Santa Monica adjusted to the new reality of legal drink, Glen Moyer moved his
outlet for A.B.C. Distributing Company a little further north to 2611 Main Street, at the corner
of Ocean Park Boulevard by 1936. The exact date of the move was not found, but a flurry of
advertisements for A.B.C. Beer at the Main Street location appeared in the Santa Monica
Outlook in March and April of that year, a strategy Moyer may have used to ensure his regular
customers would be able to find him in a new location. There was one other beer distributor in
the city directory at that time, M&B Distributing at 1551 12th Street. No information was found
about M&B Distributing, who owned it, or exactly what they sold.47
Moyer’s A.B.C. Distributing Company needed more space than either of the tiny properties on
Abbot Kinney Boulevard and Main Street it had been occupying afforded. Glen A. Moyer
purchased lots K & L in block 193 of the Santa Monica Tract from John and Etta Moxley so he
44 Brewery Sold, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, April 7, 1933
45 Applications for Beer Sale Granted Eight, Santa Ana Register, Santa Ana, California, July 12, 1933, A.B.C. Beer
Advertisement, The Bakersfield Californian, Los Angeles, California, September 1, 1933
46 Police Ordered to Close Al Pseudo Saloons Within the City, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California,
December 7, 1933
47 Brewer’s Agents, Santa Monica City Directory, 1936, www.ancestry.com
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1470 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
could expand his business. On May 8, 1937, Moyer applied for a building permit for a one-story
office and warehouse building. The 50- by 100-foot structure sat along three lot lines at the east
end of the double lot and cost $7000. It was made with groutlock brick, an innovation of Simons
Brick Company heavily promoted after the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake. One cottage and a
garage from the Moxley period of ownership remained on the north-west edge of the parcel.
The other cottages were demolished.48
In the mid to late 1930s, evidence of efforts to emerge from the Great Depression began to
yield results in reports of development activity in downtown Santa Monica. Montgomery Ward,
Sears, and J.C. Penney were all building or improving stores, as were Coast Outfitting, Thrifty
Drug, and Henshey’s Department Store. Remodeling on a smaller scale was going on in
numerous other locally-based establishments. Parking meters, which were patented in 1927
and first installed in Oklahoma City in 1935, came to downtown Santa Monica in August 1936
on a trial basis (they succeeded), and alleys in downtown up to 5th Street were made one way
to relieve traffic confusion.49 Second, Third, and Fourth Streets in downtown had made a
dramatic transition to commercial uses during the population and development booms of the
1920s. The success of Santa Monica’s commercial district in the post-Depression era was
assured. Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Streets in downtown were still almost entirely residential in
spite of the aspirational C-Zone (commercial) designation all of downtown up to Lincoln
Boulevard in the 1922 zoning ordinance. The homes that remained in downtown represented
the first section of middle- and working-class homes in the city. Most of the cottages dated
from the 1880s through the turn of the century and were now showing their age. Fifth, Sixth,
and Seventh Streets between Colorado and Santa Monica Boulevards in particular was a
neighborhood of people of color at the former edge of town since the earliest days when the
downtown section comprised the entire developed area of the city.
The A.B.C. Distributing Company was the first major commercial structure in Santa Monica’s
downtown east of the core original commercial district on Second, Third, and Fourth Streets. By
the time of an aerial photograph taken on March 5, 1940, the subject property built three years
earlier was still the only new development in the long-standing residential neighborhood in
Santa Monica populated with African Americans, Lantinx, and the white working class.50 The
1950 Sanborn map indicates little additional change. The transition to low-rise commercial
buildings in that part of downtown took hold during the 1950s, and was nearly complete in
1960. The subject property is the only example of a low-rise industrial commercial building in
downtown built during the art deco/streamline moderne period. Today most of that area of
48 Application for Building Permit, 625 Colorado Avenue, applicant A.B.C. Distributing Company, City of Santa
Monica Planning Document Archives, May 8, 1938, Warehouse Constructed, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica,
California, May 22, 1937
49 Business Zone Shows Change, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 15, 1936, Businessmen on
4th St, Undertake Extensive Improvements, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, October 24, 1936,
Auto Parking Meters Urged, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, August 18, 1936, One-Way Traffic
Rule Will Apply to Alleys, Santa Monica Outlook, Santa Monica, California, December 12, 1936
50
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1471 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
downtown has been transformed again with the largest apartment buildings permitted in the
city, leaving only three low-rise examples including the subject property, from the second phase
of downtown development.
A 1947 building permit for 631 Colorado Avenue indicates Moyer, still owned the property but
had delegated management of the A.B.C. Distributing Company in Santa Monica to Sam D.
Hecht. Hecht had been employed by the Calvert Distillers Corporation from 1934-1945, so it’s
possible he took the job with Moyer a year or two sooner. A 1949 article reporting that Aztec
Brewery was no more, and the plant had been bought out by Altes Brewery of Detroit,
Michigan, referred to Sam D. Hecht as owner and operator of the Santa Monica outlet.51 Glen
Moyer died in 1951, the same year Hecht was on trial for tax fraud for shenanigans on his 1945
tax return.52 To hide income from business activities that were in violation of a noncompete
agreement Hecht had with his then employer Calvert distillers, he had attributed income, and
sometimes ownership of holdings to various family members in a cover-up scheme. The family
members also happened to be in lower tax brackets than Hecht was, lowering the tax liability
on the holdings. Hecht was found guilty, and his case set a precedent for the illegality of that
type of transfer as tax fraud.53 The Altes (formerly Aztec) Brewing Company in San Diego shut
its doors and sold off its assets in 1953, obviating the need for an A.B.C. Distributing Company.
The Aztec Brewing Company Building, a recognized historic resource in the city of San Diego,
was leased to an aircraft corporation. The A.B.C. Distributing Company building had a similar
fate.54 The 1954 Santa Monica Directory indicates that the subject property was vacant that
year.
Aerophysics Development Corporation
In 1955 and 1956, the subject property was occupied by the Aerophysics Development
Corporation, founded in 1951 by Dr. William Bollay. In 1950, Bollay served as Technical Director
of the North American Aviation Aerophysics Laboratory. Guided missile development was
becoming the main thrust of the aircraft industry at that time, and the field of aerospace where
Bolloy was an expert and innovator, took hold.55 He left North American Aviation to establish
Aerophysics Development Corporation in 1951, working from the basement of his Pacific
Palisades home. The founding project of the new company was a commission from the United
States Army for a guided anti-tank missile referred to as the Dart. The aerospace industry was
already finding a home in Santa Monica due to the presence of Douglas Aircraft. Douglas was by
51 Eastern Beer Now Being Made in West, Venice Vanguard, Venice, California, September 28, 1949
52 Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer, Mirror News, Los Angeles California, January 17, 1951
53 Reports of the Tax Courts of the United States, January 1951 to June 1951, Volume 16, Paul H. Walker, Acting
Reporter, United States government Printing Office, Washington DC, 1951
54 Brewery to Close, Mirror News, Los Angeles, March 19, 1953, Brewery Auction, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles,
California, July 19, 1953, Rohr Aircraft Corp. Leases Altes Brewing Co. Building, The Chula Vista Star, Chula Vista,
California, June 18, 1953
55 Guided Missile Study Boom to Industry, The Colton Courier, Colton, California, January 5, 1950
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1472 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
far the largest company in town, but four smaller companies of note focused efforts on
research related to military defense in the city: Propulsion Research, RAND, Research
Corporation, and Aerophysics Development Corporation.56
By 1953, Bollay established administrative offices for the company at 15304 Sunset Boulevard
in Pacific Palisades. Space for fabrication and research was rented from Waldo Waterman at
1554 Fifth Street at Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica (demolished), a former Buick car
dealership, where Waterman had invented the first functional flying car called the Arrowbile, in
1937.57 Classified advertisements by the hundreds appeared in local papers seeking engineers,
draftsmen, designers, model-builders, and researchers to work for the new company. By 1955,
Aerophysics had added four more offices in Santa Monica to accommodate its 175 employees:
1452 Fourth Street (demolished), 309 Santa Monica Boulevard (Junipher Building, a designated
Landmark), 506 Santa Monica Boulevard (extant), and 631 Colorado Avenue (subject property).
Testing for the Dart guided anti-tank missile began in 1954, but technical challenges called for
redoubled efforts in research and development. Aerophysics Development Corporation was
bought out by the Studebaker-Packard Corporation in 1956. Studebaker-Packard solved the
company’s space problem with a move to Goleta, California where they provided a new 103-
acre campus that accommodated 300 employees to continue efforts on the Dart. In 1958, after
the Army had spent $44 million on the Dart, which still had not met specifications, the project
was cancelled. The Aerophysics Development Corporation’s Goleta campus attracted several
other aerospace companies to Goleta establishing it as a new hub for that industry.58
Keystone Autobody Shop
In 1957, Keystone Autobody took over at 631 Colorado Avenue. According to permit records,
Keystone was owned by Jack Hammer. Three Jack Hammers were identified. Two were well-
known singer-songwriters who adopted it as a stage name, one remembered for co-writing the
song Great Balls of Fire, the other for Black Widow Spider Woman. Neither of them owned a
body shop in Santa Monica. The third Jack Hammer was local, a Danish immigrant born Svend
Hammer, who changed his name to Jack upon his naturalization. He lived in Sunset Park and
worked in a dry cleaner for many years. During the years when Keystone Autobody was
established, he was listed as a gardener at Santa Monica College in city directories, so it wasn’t
him either. The only historical reference found to Keystone Autobody was in a biography of
surf-rockers Jan and Dean, who purportedly had their car fixed there. Keystone Autobody
remained at the subject property until 1994, moving to 1762 Fourteenth Street. Under the
business name Bair’s Keystone Autobody, the company operated there until the present year,
56 Goodrum and Vincent Building, City Landmark Assessment Report, PCR Services Corporation, Santa Monica,
California, April 2012
57 Aerophysics Development Corp., Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California, November 2, 1953
58 City of Goleta Citywide Historic Context Statement, Historic Resources Group, Pasadena, California, September
27, 2017
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1473 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
shutting down during the Covid-19 pandemic. Since 1996, the subject property has been
occupied with film production uses.
Statement of Significance
When the A.B.C. Distributing Company building was built in 1937, it was the first industrial
commercial building in the south-east portion of Santa Monica’s downtown, which had been a
working-class neighborhood primarily occupied by people of color since the founding of the
Town of Santa Monica in 1875. The two contributing structures book-ending the property were
built during the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne period and reflect characteristics of that style.
The composition uses modern abstract geometric forms in vertical/horizontal interplay,
decorated with groups of scored lines. The line bundles of three or four are known as “speed
lines” in Streamline Moderne architecture, as they suggest movement and allude to the
modern machines of transportation – railroads, ocean liners, aircraft. The stepped caps over
the piers reflect the step-backs found in Art Deco architecture. Because it was a decade or more
before the area continued to be redeveloped with similar single-story brick commercial
buildings, it was the first in the area and the only built in downtown in the Art Deco/Streamline
Moderne style. Furthermore, since the 1990s the neighborhood has been almost completely
redeveloped with a third phase of multi-story apartment buildings, leaving the subject property
as a rare and significant example of the type of development it pioneered, which is almost
extinct from the vicinity.
The A.B.C. Distributing Company building is significant as an example of post-Long Beach
Earthquake engineering techniques for ensuring that brick and mortar structures had seismic
integrity. Reinforced beams provide a structural frame for brick and mortar panels that would
have previously relied on gravity alone for stability. The bricks themselves were groutlock
bricks, a historically significant product of the Simons Brick Company that was actively and
aggressively promoted as the answer to seismic deficiencies in masonry buildings. The
groutlock bricks had grooved mortar surfaces, and spaces for reinforcing steel rods that literally
locked them in place so they could resist the lateral forces of seismic activity. The building
structure and materials are significant as an example of state-of-the art masonry technology
following the Long Beach earthquake of 1933.
The A.B.C. Distributing Company itself is significant as one of the first, if not the first, beer
outlet in the city after Prohibition. While it had two other rented locations prior to construction
of the subject buildings for its own use, this building best exemplifies the sustained success the
company experienced as a result of a strategically prepared and timed infiltration of the
Southern California Beverage Market set to begin the moment beer sales were permitted again
after Prohibition ended. It exemplifies economic development following the end of prohibition.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1474 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Finally, the subject property is a significant site apart from the improvements there today for its
association with Etta Vena Moxley, a dedicated life-long leader in the African American
Women’s Club movement in the State of California, Los Angeles and in Santa Monica; a
member of a leading group of Santa Monica African American activists striving for social justice
and developing the community engagement needed to get there; a suffragette; and an
organizer of significant community support institutions and social services such as the
Sojourner Truth Home.
Application of Santa Monica Criteria
Landmark Criteria:
1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political or architectural history of the City.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion. When the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building was built in 1937, it was the first light industrial/commercial building in the south-east
portion of Santa Monica’s downtown, which had been a working-class neighborhood primarily
occupied by people of color since the founding of the Town of Santa Monica in 1875. The two
contributing structures book-ending the property were built during the Art Deco/Streamline
Moderne period and reflect architectural characteristics of that style. Because it was a decade
or more before the area continued to be redeveloped with similar single-story brick commercial
buildings, it was the first commercial industrial building in the vicinity, and the only built in
downtown in the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne style. Furthermore, since the 1990s the
neighborhood has been almost completely redeveloped with a third phase of development
consisting of multi-story apartment buildings, leaving the subject property as a rare and
significant example of the type of development it pioneered, which is nearly extinct in the area.
The A.B.C. Distributing Company is significant as one of the first, if not the first, beer outlets in
the city. The City of Santa Monica took a more conservative stance on alcohol consumption at
the end of prohibition than neighboring communities in Los Angeles County. A.B.C. Distributing
Company was established just over the border in Venice as soon as federal law allowed, and
moved into Santa Monica a few years later. While the company had two other rented locations
prior to construction of the subject buildings for its own use, these buildings are the only ones it
built for itself, and thus best exemplify the sustained success the company experienced as a
result of a strategically prepared and timed infiltration of the Southern California Beverage
Market set to begin the moment beer sales were permitted again after prohibition was over,
and the re-establishment of alcoholic beverage sales in the City of Santa Monica. Therefore, the
A.B.C. Distributing Company buildings reflect the economic development of Santa Monica.
2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1475 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
The subject property does not qualify under this criterion. While there are decorative elements
on this structure, they do not rise to the level of significance necessary to meet this criterion.
3. It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or
national history.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion for its association with Etta Vena Moxley
(1870-1950), a dedicated life-long leader in the African American Women’s Club movement in
the State of California, Los Angeles and in Santa Monica. Etta Moxley was a member of a
leading group of Los Angeles and Santa Monica African American activists striving for social
justice and equal rights for people of all races. Through social groups and clubs, often
associated with churches, they developed the community engagement necessary to be
effective. Etta Moxley was associated with a number of significant groups often in leadership
roles including the Women’s Mite Missionary Society (president), Afro-American Congress of
1904 (speaker), Sojourner Truth Industrial Club (three-time president and organizer of the
Sojourner Truth Home), State Federation of Colored Women’s Clubs (delegate to the
Convention in of 1907, vice president, president), Santa Monica Chapter of the National
Association of Colored Women (founding organizer, secretary of founding board), Colored
Women’s Vincent Morgan Club (president), Red Cross Women’s Auxiliary of Phillips Chapel
(member), Monday Morning Club (founder, president), Women’s Political Study Club (member),
California Order of the Eastern Star (organizer, Matrix, and past Matron of two different
chapters of the Eastern Star), and Delta Mothers and Sponsors Club (historian). In her work with
these groups, Etta Moxley was a suffragette, resistor of Jim Crow, promoter of good schools
and good access to them for African Americans, endorser of candidates sympathetic to civil
rights issues, organizer of GOTV campaigns among African Americans, and an organizer of
significant community support institutions and social services such as the Sojourner Truth
Home, the first, and for many years the only, residence for single working African American
women in Los Angeles established, funded and operated completely by African American
women. Well known because of her years of leadership and community service, Etta Moxley
was a keynote speaker at church and club events across many decades, including at a 1927
Santa Monica engagement featuring W.E.B. Du Bois.
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 qualifies under this criterion because the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building is the only known example of post-Long Beach Earthquake engineering techniques for
ensuring that brick and mortar structures had seismic integrity. Visible reinforced beams
provide a structural frame for brick and mortar panels that would have previously relied on
gravity alone for stability, and the beams isolated sections of the structure so in the event of
damage it was less likely that the whole building would collapse. The bricks themselves were
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1476 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
groutlock bricks, a product of the Simons Brick Company that was actively and aggressively
promoted as the answer to seismic deficiencies in masonry buildings. The groutlock bricks had
grooved mortar surfaces that literally locked them in place, and connecting gaps that were
filled with metal rods secured in place by adhesive grout so they could resist the lateral forces
of seismic activity. With demand for building supplies slowing after the Great Depression began
in 1929, it was the beginning of the end for Simons Brick, established in 1886. Things turned
abruptly for the worse on March 10, 1933, when the Long Beach Earthquake wreaked havoc on
the Southland, causing severe damage to most masonry buildings standing at the time, and
schools in particular. Shoddy brickmaking, bricklaying, grout quality, and building engineering
were blamed for the failure of masonry structures during the earthquake more than the
material itself. But brick fell out of favor anyway, used mostly for small scale industrial buildings
such as the subject property through the end of the 1930s. Walter Simons began promoting his
groutlock product aggressively soon after the Long Beach Earthquake, in an effort to build back
trust in brick for safety and permanence. Simons was back in production at a rate of 150,000
groutlock bricks per day within a few months of the quake, only ten percent of their peak
production, but a big boost to the foundering company. Groutlock brick allowed brick
construction to tentatively begin again. The subject property is an excellent example of the use
of groutlock brick and the associated seismic construction methods developed in the mid-1930s
as a response to the Long Beach Earthquake. No other groutlock brick structures are known in
Santa Monica, making the A.B.C. Distributing Company buildings a unique and rare example of a
post-Long Beach Earthquake construction technique.
The A.B.C. Distributing Company buildings are significant under this criterion as exemplifying
the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne style. The pair of industrial commercial buildings sit like
bookends on the east and west edges of the parcel as viewed from Colorado Avenue. The east
structure, built in 1937, exposes its structural system of concrete beams interfaced with
groutlock brick on its east wall. Its primary façade facing Colorado is divided into three bays
separated by protruding piers embossed with four vertical grooved lines, and with stepped
tapered caps that rise above the roofline. The area above the windows is stuccoed, decorated
with two horizontal sets of grooved lines, three in each set, appearing continuous behind the
piers. The composition uses modern abstract geometric forms in vertical/horizontal interplay,
decorated with groups of scored lines. The line bundles of three or four are known as “speed
lines” in Streamline Moderne architecture, as they suggest movement and allude to the
modern machines of transportation – railroads, ocean liners, aircraft. The stepped caps over
the piers reflect the step-backs found in Art Deco architecture. Steel-framed divided light
windows with a grid pattern of 12 x 4 panes span the full width of each bay between the piers,
inclusive of six sets of hopper windows. Below the windows the bricks that comprise the
structure are exposed, and the groutlock ridges of some bricks are visible. The secondary
elevation facing east abuts the sidewalk on Seventh Street. It is divided into six bays by a
reinforced cement support structure of vertical and horizontal beams that are flush with the
surface of the brick. The bay closest to Colorado Avenue is punctuated by a fourth 6 x 4 multi-
light steel framed window, also with hoppers inclusive. Each of the remaining bays have a small
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1477 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
steel framed hopper window in the center, flush with the ceiling height as marked by a
horizontal reinforced concrete beam. The west structure sits on the south and west property
lines of the parcel, fronting Colorado Avenue and adjacent to an alley. The brick façade facing
Colorado Avenue shares the beamed support structure of the east building.
5. It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable
builder, designer or architect.
The subject property does not qualify for this criterion because it is not associated with any
particular architect or builder, notable or otherwise.
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.
The subject property does not qualify for this criterion because in spite of its 80 years at a
corner location it does not stand out for a particular feature of interest that would qualify it to
meet this criterion.
Structure of Merit Criteria:
A. The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion because it is listed in the 2018 Historic
Resources Inventory with a status code of 5S3.
B. The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the following criteria:
1. The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or
historical type.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion because it is the only known example
of groutlock brick in the city and is an excellent example of post-Long Beach Earthquake
seismic reinforcement techniques. (see criterion 4 above)
2. The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion because it is the only Art
Deco/Streamline Moderne commercial industrial building in Downtown, and one of
three remaining commercial industrial buildings of any style in Downtown due to wide-
spread redevelopment in recent years. (see criterion 4 above)
3. The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property is not a contributor to a potential historic district.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1478 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Santa Monica Directory Search
Year Address Name Occupation Notes
1905 – J.W. Moxley barber, 214 3rd St home not listed
– J.E. Moxley barber, 214 3rd St home not listed (brother?)
– Walter Moxley barber, 214 3rd St home not listed (father?)
1907 7th & Colorado Mrs. J.W. Moxley caterer business listing
1912 1558 7th St Guard Robbins plasterer –
1554 7th St Richard Mallet emp So Cal Edison –
619 Colorado Carlos Judson driver Pendleton & Sons married to Mallet’s daughter
621 Colorado John W. Moxley barber, w 225 Utah Ave Keller Block
1913 1554 7th St George Van Pelt gardener [fisherman] record sized fish SM Pier - boats
1554 7th St Orrin Van Pelt laborer –
1554 7th St Wm Van Pelt fisherman became SM Police Officer
1558 7th St vacant – –
619 Colorado Carlos Judson cement worker –
621 Colorado John W. Moxley barber 219 Utah Keller Block
1914 1554 7th St Henry P. Jones – 1920 obit: coffee & tea business
1558 7th St David J. Wilson engineer Sunset Inn –
619 Colorado vacant – –
621 Colorado John W. Moxley barber 219 Utah Keller Block
1915 1554 7th St Henry P. Jones – –
1558 7th St Mark Allen elevator operator maybe Af Am boxer, law troubles
619 Colorado Mrs. Roselia Cooper widow C.P., laundress –
621 Colorado John W. Moxley barber 219 Utah –
1917 1554 7th St vacant – –
1558 7th St John T. (Dollie) Manriquez cement worker –
619 Colorado Mrs. Jennie Mack widow J.A., domestic –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 219 Utah –
1918 1554 7th St (not listed) – –
1558 7th St John P. (Ella L.) Manriquez cement worker –
619 Colorado Mrs. Jennie Mack widow J.A. –
621 Colorado Mrs. Etta Vena Moxley – –
– John W. Moxley barber, 219 Utah no home listed, Keller Block
1919 1554 7th St John Crawford laborer Street Dept maybe veteran
1558 7th St Alphonso (Ethel) Brice janitor Rouse & Livengood –
619 Colorado Mrs. Jennie Mack widow J.A. –
619 Colorado Hebe Mack – –
621 Colorado Mrs. Etta V. Moxley janitor OP Library –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 219 Utah –
1921 1554 7th St Raymond (Mary) Ponce – –
1558 7th St Guadalupe (Rosa) Moreno laborer shot at all night card game
619 Colorado Mrs. Jennie L. Mack widow J.A. –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 219 Utah –
1923 1554 7th St Angel (Snyda) Rangel plasterer [Kneen Paving] wife died medical malpractice
1558 7th St Guadalupe (Rosa) Moreno laborer –
619 Colorado Mrs. Jennie L. Mack housekeeper –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 219 Utah –
1925 1554 7th St M. (Teho) Takahasi gardener –
1558 7th St Guadalupe (Rosa) Moreno laborer –
619 Colorado (not listed) – –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 641 Colorado new bldg. confirmed 1927 aerial
1927 1554 7th St M. (Teho) Takahasi gardener –
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1479 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Year Address Name Occupation Notes
1558 7th St Guadalupe (Rosa) Moreno laborer –
619 Colorado (not listed) – –
621 Colorado John W. (Etta V.) Moxley barber 641 Colorado new bldg. 1928 aerial
621 Colorado Honore E. Moxley – –
641 Colorado J.W. Moxley barber –
1928 1554 7th St Oriental [sic] – –
1558 7th St Guadalupe (Rosa) Moreno laborer –
619 Colorado Anthony (Margie) Perry fisherman –
621 Colorado (not listed) – Walter Moxley 1538 Euclid
641 Colorado R.G. Adams barber –
1931 1554 7th St Jos (Lupe) Munje laborer daughter Luz Isabell born
1558 7th St Neaavis [sic] Sanchez – –
1562 7th St Thomas A. (Janet) Moody grocer same as 641 Colorado, lives 6th St
619 Colorado (not listed) – –
621 Colorado (not listed) – J, E, H Moxley 1538 Euclid
641 Colorado (not listed) – –
1933 1554 7th St Jos (Lupe) Munje laborer arrested for drunk driving
1558 7th St vacant – –
1562 7th St vacant – –
619 Colorado (not listed) – –
621 Colorado (not listed) – –
641 Colorado (not listed) – –
1936 1554 7th St Jas Joyce laborer –
1558 7th St Henry Cluff laborer –
1558 7th St Louis Olsen – –
1562 7th St Mrs. Eleanor Baines 2nd hand furniture –
619 Colorado (not listed) – –
621 Colorado (not listed) – –
641 Colorado (not listed) – –
Brick Building Constructed 1937
1938 623 Colorado ABC Distributing Co. GA Moyer mgr, wines and
liquors
1940 631 Colorado ABC Distributing Co. liquors
1947 631 Colorado ABC Distributing Co. Sam D. Hecht mgr,
wholesale liquors
bldg. permit lists Moyer, owner
Hecht, manager
1952 631 Colorado ABC Distributing Co. liquors
1954 631 Colorado vacant –
1960 631 Colorado Keystone Body Shop Inc. – bldg. permit lists Jack Hammer,
owner
Research conducted by Nina Fresco
May 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1480 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1895 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, subject parcel in red. The south half of the subject parcel was already developed with a
small dwelling before the Moxley’s arrived in Santa Monica.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1481 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1902 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, subject parcel in red. The Moxley’s had been living at 103 Seventh Street as early as
the time of the 1900 census. Because the house opposite and slightly north of the subject parcel is numbered 108, it can be inferred
that the earliest address for the subject parcel was 103 Seventh Street.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1482 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1909 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, subject parcel in red. In 1903, soon after their deed was recorded, the Moxley’s built
621 Colorado Avenue behind the original cottage on their property. It became the family home until 1928. No other permits or deeds
were found with the Moxley’s name after construction of their home, but by 1909 they had clearly added a third cottage to the
parcel. The Rest-A-While rooming house and apartments that served African American tourists is marked in blue.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1483 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1918 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, subject parcel in red. By 1918, the Moxley’s owned both of the subject parcels and
had added a fourth cottage at the rear of the northern section. The Seventh Day Adventist Church, a precursor to the Calvary Baptist
Church in the Pico Neighborhood is marked in blue on Sixth Street. The Rest-A-While is on Fifth Street (in blue); the map labels it
“tenements.”
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1484 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
African Americans in downtown per U.S. census 1900 - 1940, subject parcel in red. The citywide version of this map shows that this
is where nearly all African Americans lived in Santa Monica in 1900. By 1910, some black families were also living in Belmar, on the
future Samohi site, and in Ocean Park. By 1920, population was booming. African Americans lived east of 14th Street for the first
time, and in significant numbers. No African Americans ever lived north of SM Blvd or south of Pico Blvd during this period.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1485 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1950 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, subject parcel in red. Marked in green: By 1950, in addition to the Moxley property,
only four other commercial developments had been added to the commercially-zoned residential district. Referencing previous
maps, most of those parcels had been vacant, leaving the residential community intact. Marked in blue: The church had moved on by
this time, but the Rest-A-While carried on with additional cottages squeezed into every available space on the parcel.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1486 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
1950 Sanborn Map, Santa Monica, California, detail. The A.B.C. Distribution Company buildings are built of reinforced brick with
reinforced concrete pilasters and beams, all of which remain visible today. The east brick structure (labeled here as 621 Colorado)
was the loading canopy in the 1941 permit. It was completely open on the west elevation.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1487 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
August 1, 1927 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. Second, Third, and Fourths Streets were
becoming increasingly commercial through the 1920s, but Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Streets retained their residential character.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1488 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
February 20, 1937 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Colorado Avenue at left. A few months before the building permit was
pulled for the beer distribution company, it appears that the cottages known as 619 and 621 Colorado had already been demolished.
The house and garage retained after the east building was constructed are in the lower portion of the red ovals.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1489 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 1, 1938 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. A year after A.B.C. Distributing Company was
constructed, the house and garage at the west end of the parcel remain and an unidentified structure sits between the old house
and the brick building along the north property line. It appears that the rest of the parcel is paved. Commercial development in
downtown is spreading south to Colorado, but the first phase of residential development remains in the east half of downtown.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1490 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
March 5, 1940 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. The A.B.C. Distributing Company property
appears to have been built out almost as depicted in the 1950 Sanborn map by 1940. The west structure will be added in one year
from the date of this image. The surrounding area remains residential, unchanged since the 1938 aerial above.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1491 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
January 1, 1947 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. Very little has changed in Downtown since
the 1940 aerial. The most significant changes are south of Colorado Avenue were the Sears Building and the trailer parks that began
to dominate the landscape.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1492 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
July 1, 1956 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. The layout of the subject property appears
unchanged since the previous aerial. Several parcels in the east half of Downtown have now been cleared and are used for surface
parking. A significant shift towards commercial use is occurring in the long-time residential area surrounding the subject property.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1493 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
May 1, 1960 aerial, UCSB Collection. Lincoln Blvd. at top, Santa Monica Blvd. at left. Keystone Bodyworks’ paint booth and car
wash canopy referenced in permit records have superseded the old cottage that was still extant in the previous aerial. The area
surrounding the subject parcel has been almost completely rebuilt with low-rise commercial buildings since an aerial taken just four
years earlier. Note that the Rest-A-While is one of the few extant properties from the first phase of development.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1494 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Cottages at 1531 Seventh Street, 1949. Signs read: “For Sale, To Be Moved,” marking the beginning of redevelopment of the east
half of Downtown.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1495 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Building Permit, May 8, 1937, construction of east building.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1496 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Building Permit, December 11, 1941, construction of west building.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1497 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Building Permit, March 5, 1947, addition of loading platform and doors to west building
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1498 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Simons Brick advertising campaign for Groutlock Masonry: Los Angeles Times, August 6, 1933, January 10, 1937, October 15, 1933
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1499 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Santa Monica Outlook, October 5, 1937
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1500 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Santa Monica Outlook, September 30, 1938 (above)
Collectible Aztec Brewing Company beer cans (below)
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1501 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Aztec Brewing Company, San Diego California. Exterior (above), Tap room (below).
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1502 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
December 31, 2001
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1503 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1504 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1505 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1506 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1507 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1508 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1509 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. South facade of main building. The notches on the tops of grout lock bricks are visible in some places.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1510 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. East facade, main building.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1511 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. East facade of second story addition to east building. Metal flashing on top of reinforced beam signals that the
addition is not original.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1512 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. North end of east elevation.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1513 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Reinforced support beams on east elevation. Bracing was added at beam intersections as additional seismic
reinforcement after the Northridge Earthquake.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1514 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Pedestrian gate on south elevation. Old and new pilasters juxtaposed. New pilasters have tapered black metal caps.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1515 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Fencing along south edge of parcel connecting the two historic structures.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1516 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. View of property from south-west corner.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1517 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Wide view of entire west edge of parcel.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1518 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. View of interior courtyard through vehicular gate on the north side of the west edge of the parcel off the alley.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1519 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Views into courtyard from vehicular gate in alley.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1520 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Vehicular gate.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1521 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 23, 2021. Vehicular gate and north elevation of west building.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1522 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 2021. Google views inside courtyard, facing west.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1523 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
April 2021. Google views inside courtyard, north (top) and east (bottom).
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1524 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application June 2021
Comparables. In a district that once proliferated with single story brick commercial industrial buildings, only three remain standing
today, the subject property, 1557 7th Street (above), and 501 Broadway Avenue (below). Both structures pictured above have
already been approved for demolition and replacement projects are in the process of obtaining entitlements.
6.B.d
Packet Pg. 1525 Attachment: Designation Application 631 Colorado (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Landmark Assessment Report
Date: January 3, 2021
For: Stephanie Reich, Design and Historic Preservation Planner
Subject: 631 Colorado Avenue
From: Emma Haggerty, Associate Architectural Historian
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Executive Summary
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is occupied by an industrial vernacular warehouse and an
auxiliary building that were built in 1937 and 1941, respectively. Prior historical resource inventories
and surveys of Santa Monica did not identify the property as appearing individually eligible for
Santa Monica Landmark listing, a Structure of Merit, or contributing to a potential historic district.
However, the property was identified in the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) Update and
assigned a status code of 5S3, indicating that the property appeared to be individually eligible for
local listing or designation through survey evaluation for conveying patterns of industrial
development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica.
The current property owner filed a Demolition Application with the City of Santa Monica (City) in
February 2021 and a Landmark Application was subsequently submitted in May 2021. As part of
the interim demolition permit review process for properties over 40 years of age, GPA Consulting
(GPA) has been retained by the City of Santa Monica (City) to prepare this Landmark Assessment
Report to determine if the property appears to be eligible for designation, and if so, under which
criteria.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1526 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 2
GPA evaluated the two buildings on the property under the six Santa Monica Landmark criteria
as well as the Structure of Merit criteria. As a result of this analysis, GPA concludes that the property
does not appear to be significant under any local criteria, and therefore does not appear to be
eligible for designation as a Santa Monica Landmark. The subject property also does not appear
to merit recognition as a Structure of Merit. Although the property was identified in the 2018 HRI,
further analysis has revealed that the property does not retain integrity or rise to the level of
significance to be eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark or Structure of Merit.
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue as a Santa
Monica Landmark as part of the interim demolition permit review process. The property is located
on a corner lot at Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the City of Santa Monica (see Figure 2). This
area is part of the Downtown neighborhood that includes the southern portion of the original
township which was subdivided in 1875.1 The property comprises one legal parcel (Los Angeles
County Assessor’s Parcel No. 4291-023-009).
Prior historical resource inventories and surveys of Santa Monica have not identified the property
as individually eligible for Santa Monica Landmark listing, a Structure of Merit, or contributing to a
potential historic district; however, the property was identified in the 2018 Historic Resources
Inventory (HRI) as appearing eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark for conveying patterns
of industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica and being one of one
of relatively few extant industrial buildings in this area from the pre‐World War II period.
Emma Haggerty was responsible for the preparation of this report. She fulfills the qualifications of
a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61.
Her résumé is included as Attachment A.
1 Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Citywide Historic
Resources Inventory Update Survey Report (Santa Monica: City of Santa Monica Planning and Community
Development, August 9, 2019), 40.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1527 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 3
Figure 2: 631 Colorado Avenue indicated with black outline. Base image courtesy of LA County GIS.
Methodology
In preparing this report, GPA performed the following tasks:
1. Reviewed existing information, including the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update and
the Demolition Application.
2. Conducted a field inspection of the property on December 2, 2021. Digital photographs
of the exterior of the buildings were taken during this field inspection.
3. Conducted research into the history of the property. Sources referenced included building
permit records, city directories, newspaper archives, genealogical databases, and historic
maps.
4. Reviewed and analyzed ordinances, statutes, regulations, bulletins, and technical
materials relating to federal, state, and local historic preservation designations, and
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1528 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 4
assessment processes and programs to evaluate the property for significance as a Santa
Monica Landmark.
5. Evaluated the property under the Santa Monica Landmark and Structure of Merit criteria.
Historic Context2
African American Community (c. 1900-1977)
Black settlement in Santa Monica generally followed Los Angeles County-wide
trends, including the early establishment of community institutions, residential
segregation based on discriminatory practices, and the impacts of the civil rights
movement. In the past, African Americans have represented the largest of the
ethnic minorities residing in Santa Monica, and the community has a rich history
and deeply entrenched roots within the city. The construction of the Santa Monica
Freeway (Interstate 10) and the development of the Civic Center all but
decimated the postwar African American community, and therefore many
resources relating to this theme are no longer extant. The majority of the extant
resources related to this theme are found in the Pico or Ocean Park neighborhoods
of the city.
… The first African Americans arrived in Santa Monica in the late 19th century,
“seduced by the escapism of the sand-and-surf resort town…” They settled
between 2nd and 6th Streets (present day Civic Center), in proximity to Phillips
Chapel, home to the Colored Methodist Episcopal Church (today the Christian
Methodist Episcopal Church). The local congregation was founded in 1908 and
presided over by Pastor J.A. Stout. It operated out of an old schoolhouse ultimately
named Phillips Chapel, after Bishop Charles H. Phillips of the Colored Methodist
Episcopal church’s Fifth Episcopal District. Following the establishment of the
chapel, it was relocated to 2001 4th Street (City of Santa Monica Landmark #68),
near the Ocean Park neighborhood of Santa Monica… Between 1910 and 1920,
Santa Monica’s [Black] population increased from 191 to 282. In addition to the
Phillip’s Chapel community, African Americans began settling in the working-class
Pico neighborhood.
Though members of the [Black] community succeeded early on in creating a sense
of place within Santa Monica, they never fully escaped [anti-Black] prejudice and
racial intolerance, which only increased during the 1920s. African Americans faced
residential discrimination and exclusion from most social and commercial
enterprises, though blatant segregation and even racially-triggered violence was
perhaps most experienced in the region’s public recreational spaces. During the
1920s, black residents in the City of Los Angeles were prohibited from using public
swimming pools, except on the day before the pools were cleaned, and most
2 The following, unless otherwise noted, is excerpted from Architectural Resources Group and Historic
Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update Survey Report (Santa
Monica: City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development, August 9, 2019).
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1529 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 5
beaches in Los Angeles County were considered off-limits to African Americans,
whether by formal ordinance, informal signage, or an unspoken understanding.
… African Americans, like other ethnic minorities in Santa Monica, experienced
ongoing prejudice into the 1930s as segregation became implicit, and increased
competition for jobs spurred by the Great Depression made white citizens even less
hospitable to minorities. However, a critical need for labor during World War II,
exacerbated by existing discriminatory hiring practices, prompted the issuance of
President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1941 Executive Order 8802, which “forbade
discrimination in wartime defense industries and created the Fair Employment
Practice Committee (FEPC) to investigate charges of racial discrimination.” The
removal of such practices allowed [African Americans] to work in certain industries
like aviation, from which they had previously been excluded. By 1942, the Douglas
Aircraft plant in Santa Monica began hiring African American workers and by war’s
end, over 2,000 worked at the plant.631 This turn of events drew more [Black
residents] to Southern California, and Los Angeles gained an estimated 10,000 to
12,000 new arrivals each month by the summer of 1943; in Santa Monica, the
[Black] population rose from approximately 500 before the war to more than 4,000
by 1960. Though African Americans were still discriminated against within the
workforce, their contributions to war production facilitated better wages and a
sense of liberation that lasted into the postwar period.
Prior to the construction of 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property contained four residential
cottages and two outbuildings.3 The City of Santa Monica Landmark Designation Application for
the subject property notes that Etta Moxley lived in one of the four cottages.4 Moxley was a
prominent African American Santa Monica resident who was heavily involved in various
organizations, clubs, and philanthropic endeavors for the betterment of the African American
community throughout her lifetime.5
The displacement and removal of African American communities is not unique to Santa Monica
and was a pervasive practice throughout the United States with long-lasting and devastating
consequences. However, since the existing buildings were constructed after the demolition of the
residential cottages, Moxley does not have any association with the subject property at this time.
Because the built environment only reflects certain aspects of the importance a community,
space, or neighborhood may have, place-based historic designation programs do not fully or
accurately capture history that may be intangible or lost. Historic preservation planning is just one
of many tools for recognizing social, cultural, and historical value. Other strategies to employ may
3 Sanborn Map Company, Santa Monica, California, Sheet 38, 1918, accessed December 2021,
www.proquest.com.
4 Nina Fresco, "City of Santa Monica Landmark Designation Application - 631 Colorado Avenue," May 20,
2021, 1-73.
5 Ibid.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1530 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 6
include historical markers, mapping programs, oral history projects, public art, events, walking
tours, and close collaboration with advocacy groups.
Pre-World War II Industrial Development (1920-1941) (Overview)
In the 1920s, Santa Monica’s population jumped from 15,000 to 37,000, the largest
increase in the city’s history.
The aviation industry played a significant role in the growth and development of
Santa Monica in the early 20th century. Santa Monica had been a distinctly non-
industrial city until the 1930s. A 1924 map of the Los Angeles area showed no
industries in Santa Monica with more than twenty-five employees. However,
beginning in the 1920s, aircraft companies established or relocated operations to
Southern California, which offered expanses of open, undeveloped land,
favorable climatic conditions, and adequate infrastructure, including water,
power, and transportation systems to support development of factories, testing
facilities, and new housing for a rapidly expanding workforce. Growth of aviation
and aerospace industries in Los Angeles County can be attributed to civic
boosterism, which promoted the region’s natural advantages, including weather
conducive to year-round flying and outdoor construction of airplanes. …Though
most resources from this period are no longer extant, Santa Monica’s industrial
development during this period provided the foundation for rampant expansion
during and after World War II.
In addition to industrial buildings associated with the aviation industry, other light
industrial uses from the period can be found in the industrially zoned portions of the
city. These buildings are typically vernacular in style, and early factory buildings
may include daylight or controlled-condition factory buildings, warehouse
buildings, and other types that support light industrial uses.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1531 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 7
Industrial Vernacular
The term “Industrial Vernacular” is used to describe simple industrial buildings with
little or no distinguishing decorative features. These buildings are characterized by
their utilitarian design, prosaic materials, and lack of any characteristics of
recognizable styles. There are two sub-types of industrial vernacular factory
buildings: daylight factories and controlled condition factories. Daylight factories
were common prior to the widespread use of electric lighting, when controlling
and capitalizing on daylight was a necessary component in the design of
manufacturing buildings. Daylight was brought into the building using a variety of
methods, including expansive industrial sash windows, orientation of intensive hand
work next to the exterior walls of the building, skylights, and specialized roof forms
to bring light into the interior.
With the development of better illumination from fluorescent bulbs, manufacturers
changed their focus in design from capitalizing on available light to controlling
lighting and ventilation through closed systems. Controlled conditions factories are
distinguished by their minimal use of windows for light and ventilation. While some
windows may be located on the front-facing façade or on an attached office, the
building relies on internal systems for circulation and climate control.
Character-defining features include:
• Square or rectangular plan and simple massing
• One- or two-story height
• Flat, truss, or sawtooth roof, usually with parapet; roof monitors, skylights or
clerestory windows
• Brick masonry construction, expressed or veneered in cement plaster
• Divided-light, steel-sash awning, hopper, or double-hung windows
• Loading docks and doors
• Oversized bays of continuous industrial steel sash on two or more façades
(daylight factory)
• Lack of fenestration or sky-lighting (controlled conditions factory)
• Architecturally notable entrance or overall design (controlled conditions
factory)
Art Deco
Art Deco originated in France in the 1910s as an experimental movement in
architecture and the decorative arts. It developed into a major style when it was
first exhibited in Paris at the 1925 Arts Decoratifs et Industriels Modernes, from which
it takes its name. The Exposition’s organizers had insisted on the creation of a new,
modern aesthetic. The architecture of the Art Deco movement rejected the rigid
organizational methods and classical ornamentation of the Beaux Arts style. It
emphasized a soaring verticality through the use of stepped towers, spires, and
fluted or reeded piers, and embraced highly stylized geometric, floral and
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1532 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 8
figurative motifs as decorative elements on both the exterior and interior. Ornate
metalwork, especially aluminum, glazed terra cotta tiles, and bright colors were
hallmarks of the style.
Art Deco was the first popular style in the United States that consciously rejected
historical precedents. It was instead a product of the Machine Age and took its
inspiration from industry and transportation. It was only briefly popular in Santa
Monica, from the late 1920s until the late 1930s, and was employed primarily in
commercial and institutional buildings, and occasionally in multi-family residential
buildings. It was rarely used for single-family residences. By the mid-1930s, in the
depths of the Great Depression, the highly decorated style was already viewed as
garish and overwrought, and it was soon abandoned in favor of the cleaner,
simpler Streamline Moderne style.
Character-defining features include:
• Vertical emphasis
• Smooth wall surfaces, usually of plaster
• Flat roofs with decorative parapets or towers
• Stylized decorative floral and figurative elements in cast stone, glazed terra
cotta tiles, or aluminum
• Geometric decorative motifs such as zigzags and chevrons
• Stepped towers, piers, and other vertical elements
• Metal windows, usually fixed or casement
Streamline Moderne/PWA Moderne
The constraints of the Great Depression cut short the development of Art Deco
architecture, but replaced it with a purer expression of modernity, the Streamline
Moderne. Characterized by smooth surfaces, curved corners, and sweeping
horizontal lines, Streamline Moderne is considered to be the first thoroughly Modern
architectural style to achieve wide acceptance among the American public.
Inspired by the industrial designs of the period, the style was popular throughout
the United States in the late 1930s. Unlike the equally modern but highly
ornamental Art Deco style of the late 1920s, Streamline Moderne was perceived as
expressing an austerity more appropriate for Depression-era architecture. The
prime movers behind the Streamline Moderne style such as Raymond Loewy,
Walter Dorwin Teague, Gilbert Rohde, and Norman Bel Geddes all disliked Art
Deco, seeing it as falsely modern.
The origins of the Streamline Moderne are rooted in transportation design, which
took the curved form of the teardrop, because it was the most efficient shape in
lowering the wind resistance of an object. Product designers and architects who
wanted to express efficiency borrowed the streamlined shape of cars, planes,
trains, and ocean liners. Streamline Moderne architecture looked efficient in its
clean lines. It was in fact relatively inexpensive to build because there was little
labor-intensive ornament like terra cotta; exteriors tended to be concrete or
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1533 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 9
plaster. The Streamline Moderne’s finest hour was the New York World’s Fair of 1939-
40. Here, the “World of Tomorrow” showcased the cars and cities of the future, a
robot, a microwave oven, and a television, all in streamlined pavilions. While the
style was popular throughout Southern California during the 1930s, there are
relatively few examples simply because there was so little construction activity
during the Depression.
Art Deco and Streamline Moderne were not necessarily opposites. A Streamline
Moderne building incorporating some Art Deco elements was not uncommon,
particularly in the Federally-funded projects of the Works Progress Administration.
The buildings executed under those programs are often referred to as PWA
Moderne. They incorporate the clean lines of Streamline Moderne with simplified
decorative elements of Art Deco to create an appropriately monumental but
restrained architectural language for post offices, courthouses, schools, libraries,
city halls, bridges, and other institutional and infrastructure projects across the
country.
Character-defining features include:
• Horizontal emphasis
• Asymmetrical façade
• Flat roof with coping
• Smooth plaster wall surfaces
• Curved end walls and corners
• Glass block and porthole windows
• Flat canopy over entrances
• Fluted or reeded moldings or stringcourses
• Pipe railings along exterior staircases and balconies
• Steel sash windows
Reinforced Brick Masonry
Reinforced brick masonry (RBM) refers to brick masonry construction reinforced with steel to
improve the brick’s tensile strength. Different RBM techniques have been utilized for hundreds of
years, but some of the most significant advancements in the United States occurred after the Long
Beach Earthquake in 1933. Safer and more resilient construction techniques were researched,
developed, and later codified in response to the dangers of unreinforced masonry buildings.6
6 National Research Council, Modern Masonry: Natural Stone and Clay Products (Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press, 1956), 32-45, accessed December 2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.17226/9551; The
Brick Industry Association, “Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry,” October 1996, accessed
December 2, 2021, https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-
documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-masonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1534 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 10
As a part of this research and experimentation, masonry units with new, specialized shapes were
developed and used for construction. Two of those shapes included Groutlock and Port Costa
Key bricks. Groutlock bricks were irregularly shaped with beveled edges on one side which, when
stacked, would allow space for both horizontal and vertical reinforcements (see Figure 3). Port
Costa Key bricks featured two centralized notches along the stretcher (see Figure 4). Both types
of brick were advertised and used throughout Southern California for institutional and commercial
construction following the 1933 earthquake.7
Figure 3: Illustration of Groutlock brick, circled.
National Research Council, 35.
Figure 4: Illustration of Porta Costa Key brick,
circled. National Research Council, 35.
7 National Research Council, 32.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1535 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 11
Figure 5: Detail view of brick on south elevation.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Figure 6: Detail view of brick on west elevation.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Research indicates that the use of these brick shapes fell out of favor in the 1950s when research
demonstrated that a structurally sound building depended not only the brick, but the type of
mortar used, and proper workmanship and construction techniques. That is, there was no need
for these special shaped bricks so long as a skilled bricklayer completed the construction.8
While the 1937 building permit identifies the Main Building as being built with Groutlock bricks, no
visible Groutlock bricks were observed during a physical assessment of the property; however, a
few examples of what appear to be notched Port Costa Key bricks were observed (see Figure 5
and Figure 6).
Property History
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is currently occupied by the main, industrial
warehouse (Main Building, for the purposes of this report) on the eastern portion of the parcel and
an auxiliary building (Auxiliary Building, for the purposes of this report) to the west which were built
in 1937 and 1941, respectively. The property originally featured a Wine Storage Building, a wood
framed platform, and a wooden addition to the Main Building’s west elevation, forming a U-
shaped configuration with open space along Colorado Avenue (see Figure 7).
8 Ibid., 36.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1536 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 12
Figure 7: 1950 Sanborn Map, 631 Colorado Avenue.
The building permit for the Main Building was issued to the “A.B.C Distribution Co.” (Aztec Brewing
Company) in 1937 for the construction of a 50 by 100-foot brick building with composition roofing.
Research did not reveal an architect, engineer, or builder. In 1941, the building permit for what is
now the Auxiliary Building, located on the corner of Colorado Avenue and a rear alleyway, was
issued for the construction of a 25 by 42-foot loading canopy with composition roofing. The exterior
materials were not noted on the building permit application but the architect, Frederic
Barienbrock, was listed. However, Sanborn Maps from 1950 indicate the canopy was also made
of brick with a composite roof supported by steel beams. The maps also indicate that a small
wooden platform with composite roofing was present on the fifth bay of the west elevation of the
Main Building. In 1947, the canopy that is now the Auxiliary Building was altered to include an
interior loading platform and exterior doors.
From 1955-1956, the Aerophysics Development Corporation owned the property and during their
ownership, they sandblasted both buildings and made minor interior tenant improvements that
did not alter the exterior of either building or the parcel. The following owner, Keystone Body Works,
owned the property from 1957-1994. During their ownership, the company added a rear one-story
addition to the Main Building along the alleyway in 1957, a free-standing canopy and signage in
1958, a new privacy wall made of concrete block along the west elevation of the property against
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1537 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 13
the alleyway in 1959 and removed the small wooden platform from the fifth bay of the Main
Building sometime between 1950-1963. After 1963, a one-story, scored-stucco clad addition with
fenestration consisting of large divided lite windows was added to the rear of the west elevation
of the Auxiliary Building.
The addition and canopy on the Main Building were removed in 1996 during a tenant
improvement project by new owners, Bandit Films. In 1997, both buildings were sandblasted and
in 1998, a 730-square foot, second-story addition was completed along the entire north elevation
of the Main Building as well as a contemporary privacy fence along Colorado Avenue and the
rear alleyway. In 2002, the current owner of the property, Bay Films, added landscaping to the
north of the main entrance on the Main Building’s west elevation and along both sides of the
fence along Colorado Avenue.
Property Description
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is located on a corner parcel bound by Colorado Avenue
to the south, 7th Street to the east, a separate parcel to the north, and an alleyway to the west.
The parcel contains two buildings, the Main Building located on the eastern side of the parcel and
the Auxiliary Building located in the western corner. The property features limited landscaped
areas with mature trees and hedges planted directly along the Colorado Avenue property line
and around the main entrance of the Main Building and Auxiliary Building for added privacy. The
remainder of the parcel is covered in asphalt paving that has been divided into parking spaces
which are not visible from the public-right-of way due the mature landscaping and modern fence
with Art Deco-inspired piers and wrought iron posts that runs along Colorado Avenue.
Main Building
The Main Building was built in 1937 on the corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street as an industrial
vernacular warehouse with Art Deco and Streamline Moderne influences. It is rectangular in plan
with its shorter elevation facing Colorado Avenue. The building is one story in height with a two-
story addition and barrel truss roof partially obscured by a raised parapet. The top of the barrel
truss extends above the parapet, revealing eight evenly spaced skylights and three HVAC systems
surrounded by corrugated screening.
The southern-facing façade along Colorado Street is of masonry construction and separated into
three bays by reinforced concrete piers with four vertical score lines and a three-tiered square
cap that extends above the parapet. The three bays feature 12-over-4 divided lite steel windows
with operable sashes. The concrete cladding above the windows is embossed with horizontal
speed lines and displays the signage for the current tenants.
The east elevation facing 7th Street lies directly on the property line and features an exposed brick
façade separated into six distinct bays divided by vertical reinforced concrete columns that are
flush with the wall and intersect a horizontal beam that runs along the entire elevation. Within the
first bay, on the corner of the 7th Street, is a large 6-over-4 divided lite steel window followed by a
rectangular 2-over-2 divided lite steel window to the north, both with operable sashes. The
remaining five bays feature a continuation of the masonry, a flat parapet, and a centralized 4-
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1538 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 14
over-2 divided lite steel windows with operable sashes. The last bay features a second story
addition that includes two 3-over-3 divided lite steel windows with operable sashes and brick
cladding with a simple parapet, similar to the original construction. At the northeast corner, there
is a concrete column.
The north elevation lies directly on the adjacent property line and is clad in a continuation of brick.
The second-story addition runs the entire length of the north elevation and is clad in smooth
concrete with four evenly separated horizontal score lines. The north elevation abuts the
neighboring property and is not fully visible. The west elevation of the Main Building facing the
interior of the property is divided into six separate bays like the east elevation, with the two bays
closest to Colorado Avenue featuring a centralized 4-over-2 and 3-over-3 divided lite steel window
with operable sashes. The middle bay features an inset contemporary entryway with a solid
singular door surrounded by sidelights and a transom with fourteen divided lights and opaque
glazing. The fourth bay matches bays one and two, while the fifth bay features a large divided lite
window. The sixth bay features a projecting one-story addition that was completed c. 1980. The
addition consists of full height divided light windows between concrete columns. The top of the
addition is a flat roof deck surrounded by a metal railing. The second-story addition opens onto
the roof deck. The sixth bay also gives visibility to the second story addition which runs flush with
the original building footprint and is clad in brick. Overall, the building appears to be in good
condition.
Auxiliary Building
The Auxiliary Building was originally constructed in 1941 as a loading canopy for the Aztec Brewing
Company’s operations. It is a one-story building that is rectangular in plan with a flat, composition
roof. The south elevation facing Colorado Avenue features a brick façade with a horizontal,
reinforced concrete beam flush with the wall surface flanked by two vertical smooth concrete
columns with three-tiered caps. The concrete columns are likely replacements or later additions
as they are not identified on Sanborn Maps, and do not match the design of the columns on the
Main Building. The south elevation does not feature any exterior doors, windows, or additional
decorative elements.
The east elevation facing the interior of the property features a smooth concrete façade with five
bays. The three bays closest to Colorado Avenue feature large, square divided lite steel sash
windows and the fourth bay features a deeply inset contemporary entrance door. The last bay
on the east elevation features another square window.
The north elevation is limited in its exterior details but features a smooth concrete wall with a
singular horizontal score line running across the upper portion of the wall, indicating the lower
portion of the wall may have been infilled at one point. At the east edge of the roofline there is a
metal ladder. The corners of the north elevation are also flanked by concrete columns matching
those found on the south elevation.
The rear, west elevation facing the alley matches the north elevation in design, materials, and
horizontal score line which runs the entire length of the elevation. Overall, this modified Auxiliary
Building appears to also be in good condition.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1539 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 15
Evaluation for Local Landmark Designation
Per §9.56.100(A) of the Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance (adopted in 1976
and later amended in 1987, 1991, and most recently 2015), a property merits consideration as a
Landmark if it satisfies one or more of six statutory criteria. The following discussion considers the
significance of 631 Colorado Avenue under each criterion.
Criterion 1: It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political or architectural history.
The property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political, or architectural history or development of Santa Monica.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American residential
neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings.9 As such, the residential
and outbuildings related to the cultural and social history of this area are no longer extant, and
the existing buildings do not share the same association.
The subject property is one of the first industrial buildings built in this specific southeast area of
downtown but does not appear to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of industrial
development in Downtown or Santa Monica as a whole. Industrial buildings were being built
throughout the City in the pre-war era, particularly in the nearby Pico neighborhood, in large
groupings around and adjacent to transportation outlets.10 Furthermore, the property’s original
use as a distributor for the Aztec Brewing Company does not exemplify the economic
development patterns Santa Monica was experiencing at this time. As mentioned above, Santa
Monica’s aviation industry was the primary source of industrial development prior to World War II.
The City of Santa Monica was not known for its alcohol distribution nor is this building the
headquarters or a notable location for the Aztec Brewing Company’s operations, which included
various distribution warehouses throughout the Southwest. Additionally, the two existing buildings
on the parcel were built as part of a collection of three buildings with a wood-framed platform
that all served a specific purpose in the distribution of alcoholic beverages. As a result of the loss
of the third building and rear platform, as well as the infill of the Auxiliary Building that was originally
a loading canopy and addition of fencing along Colorado Avenue, the site no longer reads as
an alcohol distribution center.
Constructed in the industrial vernacular style, the Main Building lacks the primary character
defining features that would qualify it as a light industrial building, such as loading docks and
doors, and oversized bays of continuous industrial steel sash on two or more façades. Neither
building on the site is a notable example of the Art Deco or Streamline Moderne styles, and there
is no evidence to suggest this building was influential to the architectural development of the city.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 1.
9 Sanborn Map Company, Santa Monica, California, Sheet 38, 1918, accessed December 2021,
www.proquest.com.
10 Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Citywide Historic
Resources Inventory Update Survey Report, 52.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1540 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 16
Criterion 2: It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue were constructed for industrial, utilitarian
purposes. Thousands of industrial buildings were constructed throughout Southern California
during pre- and post-World War II building booms. As such, the buildings do not possess special
aesthetic or artistic interest or value, and do not appear to be significant under Criterion 2.
Criterion 3: It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or
national history.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American neighborhood,
replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa Monica Landmark
Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley, a prominent figure in the
African American community, lived in one of the four residential cottages.11 Since the residential
and outbuildings related to this cultural and social history are no longer extant, the existing
buildings on the property do not share the same association.
The Aztec Brewing Company obtained the permits for both buildings currently on site. Following
the end of Prohibition, the Aztec Brewing Company had various distribution warehouses
throughout the Southwest. Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the Aztec
Brewing Company was owned or operated by any historic personages.
Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the remaining businesses associated with
the site were owned or operated by historically significant individuals. Research also did not reveal
any evidence of association with an important historic event.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 3.
Criterion 4: It embodies the distinguishing 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.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue are examples of industrial vernacular construction
in the years prior and during World War II. Industrial buildings constructed during this time featured
limited exterior details as they were not intended to attract pedestrians for commercial use and
were utilitarian by nature. While the modest use of Art Deco and Streamline Moderne elements is
visible on both buildings, the few features alone do not make these buildings notable examples
of the Art Deco or Streamline Moderne styles. They lack the more distinguishing characteristics of
Art Deco, such as smooth cladding, stylized or geometric decorative elements, ornate metalwork,
material such as colorful glazed terra cotta, or an emphasis on verticality. Similarly, the buildings
do not possess the distinguishing characteristics of the Streamline Moderne style, which would
include features such as curved surfaces, glass block and porthole windows, asymmetrical
arrangement of features, and accents such as pipe railings and flat canopies. The construction
and features of both structures are not notable in any way, and have been modified over time.
11 Fresco, 1-73.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1541 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 17
Lastly, as indicated on 1950 Sanborn Maps around Santa Monica’s industrial cores, such as along
rail lines or present-day freeways, brick industrial buildings were not a rarity for the City.
On the original permit for the Main Building, the construction material is indicated as Groutlock
brick, a building material produced by the Simons Brick Company. However, a physical
assessment of the site indicates that the brick is not an example of Groutlock, but rather another
type of grouted masonry, described as Port Costa Key (see Figure 3 through Figure 6). A few
scattered examples of what appear to be the Port Costa Key bricks are visible and have stepped
notching at the top of the brick. Although this building material is visible, it was not used for the
entire building, or if it was, only a few examples of this type of brick are visible from the exterior. As
discussed above, many solutions for increasing the earthquake resistance of masonry buildings
were explored in the aftermath of the Long Beach Earthquake, including experimentation with
new masonry shapes. These shapes included the Groutlock brick, which had a diagonal or
beveled edge, and the Port Costa Key brick, which had interlocking “notches.” However,
subsequent engineering studies in the decades after World War II revealed that a special masonry
shape was not necessary when good workmanship and an appropriate mortar mix was
employed, and the new masonry shapes ostensibly fell out of use. The Groutlock and Port Costa
Key bricks were a short-lived experiment in construction technology following the Long Beach
earthquake. Research did not indicate that they were ever widely used or influential to later
developments in construction technology. As such, it does not appear that the use of these brick
shapes was an important building technique.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 4.
Criterion 5: It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable
builder, designer, or architect.
Research into the construction history of 631 Colorado Avenue did not reveal the name of the
architect or the builder for the Main Building. The architect for the Auxiliary Building was identified
on the 1941 building permit as Frederic Barienbrock. Frederick Barienbrock was a local architect
that worked in Santa Monica for 50 years.12 Barienbrock was responsible for the designs of 1725
Main Street, 827 6th Street, 829 6th Street, and the 1951 addition to the Santa Monica Courthouse
and County Building wing of the Santa Monica Civic Center.13 While Barienbrock appears to have
been a successful local architect, the utilitarian canopy would not be a notable example of his
work, and it no longer conveys its original design intent due to modifications on all elevations.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 5.
12 Edan Hughes, "Artists in California, 1786-1940" California Arts and Architecture list, 1932; City Directory; Death
record.
13 Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Citywide Historic
Resources Inventory Update Survey Report, Appendix B: Individual Resources, 33-56; Wuellner, Margarita J.
Tech. Character Defining Features Analysis Santa Monica City Hall Landscape and Grounds - 1685 Main
Street Santa Monica, California, 2011.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1542 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 18
Criterion 6: It has a unique location, a singular visual characteristic, or is an established and
familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City.
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is located in a portion of Santa Monica’s original
township that is now referred to as the Downtown neighborhood. The property is surrounded by
residential, commercial, and industrial properties ranging from one to four stories in height. The
subject property is an unremarkable infill site that, although part of the original township, does not
appear to be an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood or City.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 6.
Summary
Neither building located at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be eligible for listing under any of
the Santa Monica Landmark Criteria. The buildings are further evaluated for listing as a Structure
of Merit below.
Evaluation for Structure of Merit Designation
Per §9.56.080 of the Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance, an improvement
may be designated a Structure of Merit if the Landmarks Commission determines that it merits
official recognition for possessing at least one of two characteristics. The following discussion
considers whether the property at 631 Colorado Avenue possesses these characteristics.
A: The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue was individually identified in the 2018 Historic Resources
Inventory (HRI) Update and assigned a status code of 5S3, indicating that the property appeared
to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation for conveying
patterns of industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica and being
one of one of relatively few extant industrial buildings in this area from the pre‐World War II period.
However, based on further analysis, the property does not appear to merit designation.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1543 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 19
B: The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the following criteria:
B1. The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical
type.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is over fifty years of age, but it is not a unique or rare
example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type. As discussed above, the
buildings are industrial vernacular buildings with utilitarian purposes that are ubiquitous
throughout Santa Monica’s industrial areas, such as the Pico neighborhood, and Southern
California as a whole.
B2. The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.
The subject property represents the industrial vernacular style which is still represented in
the City in large numbers. While the resource is one of the few remaining industrial buildings
in the southeastern portion of the Downtown, it is not rare when considered with the larger
inventory of buildings in the industrial areas of Santa Monica. Industrial development in this
area was not as historically prevalent in Downtown as other areas in the city, such as the
Pico neighborhood. Further north on Colorado Avenue there are numerous extant
examples of similarly scaled industrial development (see Appendix F).
B3. The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property is not located within any previously identified potential historic district,
and a historic district is unlikely to exist in the area surrounding 631 Colorado Avenue. The
subject property is surrounded by commercial, industrial, and multi-family buildings of
various styles, sizes, and construction dates. They are not visually or historically unified and
do not form a significant or cohesive grouping.
Summary
Neither building located at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be eligible for listing as a Structure
of Merit.
Integrity Analysis
It is standard practice to assess a property’s integrity as part of a historic evaluation. Integrity is a
property’s ability to convey its historic significance through its physical features. National Register
Bulletin #15 defines seven aspects of integrity: Location, design, setting, materials, workmanship,
feeling, and association. In order to convey significance, a property must retain some
combination of these aspects of integrity from its period of significance. The aspects of integrity
that are essential vary depending on the significance of the resource.
Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the
historic event occurred.
The property retains integrity of location as the existing buildings have not been moved.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1544 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 20
Design: The combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style
of the property.
The property does not retain integrity of design. The Main Building’s integrity of design has been
lost as a result of modifications over time, including a second story addition, construction of a
modified, contemporary styled recessed entryway, and a new one-story addition on the west
elevation. The Main Building no longer reflects an industrial alcohol distribution center and
currently conveys the feeling of an office space. The Auxiliary Building also does not retain integrity
of design, as it has been essentially reconstructed over time and is now a fully enclosed building
that no longer reflects its original function as an industrial loading canopy. The property as a whole
no longer retains integrity of design as the rear wine storage building and raised wooden platform
noted on the 1950 Sanborn Map related to the site’s use as an alcohol distribution center have
been removed, access to the site from Colorado Avenue has been fenced off, and the remainder
of the parcel has been paved and divided into parking spaces with added landscaping.
Therefore, 631 Colorado Boulevard no longer retains integrity of design.
Setting: The physical environment of a historic property.
The integrity of the property’s immediate setting has been diminished, as original buildings on the
parcel, such as the rear raised platform and wine storage noted on the 1950 Sanborn Map, have
been removed, and the site surrounding the buildings has been converted into surface parking
with contemporary landscaping. Additionally, the original access point from Colorado Avenue
has been enclosed with a contemporary fence and the curb cut has been removed, forcing
access to the site to the rear alleyway. The surrounding setting neighborhood has also changed
through the continued development of the surrounding area throughout the twentieth century,
including infill construction and redevelopment with a combination of new and old residential,
commercial, and industrial buildings as well as the recently constructed Expo Line. Therefore, 631
Colorado Avenue no longer retains integrity of setting.
Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period
of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.
The property does not retain integrity of materials. The Main Building retains key elements such as
reinforced concrete, steel windows, and masonry walls, but the integrity of materials has been
diminished by the introduction of new features, including a contemporary entryway. The Auxiliary
Building does not retain integrity of materials as its original materials were removed when three
out of its four elevations were infilled. Therefore, 631 Colorado Avenue no longer retains integrity
of materials.
Workmanship: The physical evidence or the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given
period in history or prehistory.
The property does not retain integrity of workmanship. The integrity of workmanship for the Main
Building has been diminished by modifications to the exterior over time, including sandblasting of
all façades. The Auxiliary Building does not retain integrity of workmanship as it has been largely
reconstructed over time. Therefore, the property as a whole no longer retains integrity of
workmanship.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1545 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 21
Feeling: A property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of
time.
The property no longer retains integrity of feeling. As a result of the modifications to the property,
it no longer evokes the sense of a prewar industrial warehouse and distribution center.
Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic
property.
The integrity of association does not apply to either building, as there are no historic associations
for the physical integrity to convey.
Summary
While the Main Building retains some aspects of physical integrity, its overall integrity has been
diminished through exterior modifications, including two additions, sandblasting, and the
introduction of contemporary new elements. The Auxiliary Building does not retain integrity as it
has been largely reconstructed, and the integrity of the site overall has been lost through the
demolition of buildings and structures associated with the alcohol distribution operation,
reconfiguration of its street access, enclosure with a privacy fence, and contemporary paving
and landscaping for the surface parking lot. As a result, the property no longer retains sufficient
physical integrity to reflect its original use.
Conclusions
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be eligible under any of the Santa
Monica Landmark Criteria, nor does it appear to merit recognition as a Structure of Merit. The
property was identified as individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey
evaluation for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of
Santa Monica.
However, during the additional analysis conducted for this report, it was revealed that the
grouping of industrial buildings at 631 Colorado Avenue has been modified and does not have
an important association with a significant aspect of Santa Monica’s industrial history. In the event
the property had retained its original design and configuration, the property as a whole would still
be an example of a ubiquitous, industrial property type in Santa Monica and Southern California
that does not possess the distinctive characteristics of a specific style or property type. Research
did not reveal any other potential significant associations with important persons or events, or the
cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history of Santa Monica, and the property
does not appear likely to contribute to a potential historic district.
Therefore, GPA concludes that neither building on the property appears to warrant designation
as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1546 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 22
Sources
Ancestry.com. Various digital collections.
Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group. City of Santa Monica Citywide
Historic Resources Inventory Update Survey Report. Santa Monica: City of Santa Monica
Planning and Community Development, August 9, 2019.
The Brick Industry Association. “Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry.” October 1996.
Accessed December 2, 2021, https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-
research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-masonry---
introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0.
Fresco, Nina. "City of Santa Monica Landmark Designation Application - 631 Colorado Avenue."
May 20, 2021, 1-73.
Hughes, Edan. Artists in California, 1786-1940. California Arts and Architecture list, 1932; City
Directory; Death record.
National Research Council. Modern Masonry: Natural Stone and Clay Product. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press, 1956. Accessed December 2, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.17226/9551.
Sanborn Map Company. Santa Monica, Los Angeles, California, 1918. Accessed December
2021. www.proquest.com.
Wuellner, Margarita J. Tech. Character Defining Features Analysis Santa Monica City Hall
Landscape and Grounds - 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, California, 2011.
Attachments
Attachment A: Résumé
Attachment B: Photographs
Attachment C: City Directory Listings
Attachment D: Sanborn Maps
Attachment E: Building Permits
Attachment F: Low-Rise Industrial Development
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1547 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment A
Attachment A: Résumé
Emma Haggerty is an Associate Architectural Historian at GPA and has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2016. Emma graduated from the University of Vermont with a
Master of Science in Historic Preservation. She has since worked
in the public sector in both New Jersey and California on a variety of projects. Emma joined GPA in 2021 and her
experience has included review of environmental compliance
documents in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA); design review for consistency with the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS); and municipal code
compliance. Additionally, Emma has experience reviewing
Mills Act Applications, preparing Mills Act Contracts, and performing site inspections for properties under and interested
in the Mills Act.
Educational Background:
▪ M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Vermont, 2018
▪ B.A., Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers
University, 2016
Professional Experience: ▪ GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural
Historian, 2021-Present
▪ City of San Diego, Historical Resources Senior Planner & Mills Act Coordinator, 2018-2021
▪ New Jersey Historic Preservation Office,
Program Associate, 2018 ▪ National Trust for Historic Preservation –
Lyndhurst Mansion, Historic Preservation
Intern, 2017
Qualifications: ▪ Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards for
architectural history pursuant to the
Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
Selected Projects:
▪ Mills Act Application Review, Mills Act Coordinator, City of San Diego,
February 2020-November 2021
▪ Mills Act Research and Contract Preparation,
Mills Act Coordinator, City of San Diego, February 2020-November
2021
▪ Mills Act Inspection and Contract Recordation, Mills Act Coordinator, City of San Diego, February 2020-November
2021
▪ Quieter Homes Program – Section 106 Compliance Review, Planner, City of San
Diego,
January 2019-January 2020
▪ Preliminary Design Assistance for Historic District Design Guideline Compliance,
Senior Planner, City of San Diego, December
2020- November 2021
▪ CEQA Significance Report Evaluation, Planner, City of San Diego,
July 2018- November 2021
▪ Prepared and presented formal presentations
for over 50 different properties at Historical Resources Board Meetings and
City Council, City of San Diego,
July 2018- November 2021
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1548 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Attachment B: Photographs
Photo 1: South elevation of Main Building, view looking north.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 2: West elevation of Main Building, view looking east.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1549 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 3: West elevation of Main Building and projecting addition, view looking northeast.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 4: East elevation of Main Building, view looking west.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1550 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 5: North and east elevation of Main Building, including second-story addition, view looking southwest.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 6: West elevation of Main Building, entrance detail, view looking east.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1551 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 7: Main Building, typical window.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 8: Main Building, north elevation, typical brick.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1552 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 9: Main Building, west elevation, “key shape” brick detail.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 10: Main Building, south elevation, “key shape” brick detail.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1553 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 11: Main Building, south elevation, speed line detail.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 12: Auxiliary Building, west and south elevations, view looking NE.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1554 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 13: Auxiliary Building, west and north elevations, view looking SE.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 14: Auxiliary Building, east elevation, view looking west.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1555 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment B
Photo 15: Auxiliary Building, east elevation, typical windows.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
Photo 16: Auxiliary Building, east elevation, entrance detail.
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1556 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment C
Attachment C: City Directory Listings
1938 (Ancestry.com): ABC Distributing Company - Glen Moyer, General Manager
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1557 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment C
1940 (Ancestry.com): ABC Distributing Company - Glen Moyer, General Manager
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1558 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment C
1952 (Ancestry.com): ABC Distributing Company – Sam Hecht, General Manager
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1559 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment C
1958 (Ancestry.com): Keystone Body Shop – Jack Hammer, Owner
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1560 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment D
Attachment D: Sanborn Maps
Sanborn Map, 1950
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1561 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment D
Sanborn Map, 1950 – Close up of 631 Colorado Avenue
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1562 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment D
Sanborn Map, 1963
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1563 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment D
Sanborn Map, 1963 – Close up of 631 Colorado Avenue
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1564 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment E
Attachment E: Building Permits
1937 Building Permit – Main Building
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1565 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment E
1941 Building Permit – Auxiliary Building
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1566 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Landmark Assessment Report – 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA Attachment F
Attachment F: Low-Rise Industrial Development
GPA Consulting, December 2, 2021.
1501 and 1517 Colorado Avenue 1531 Colorado Avenue
1547 and 1551 16th Street, 1601 Colorado Avenue 1547 14th Street
1805 Colorado Avenue 1831 Colorado Avenue
6.B.e
Packet Pg. 1567 Attachment: GPA Landmark Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
www.coxcastle.com Los Angeles | Orange County | San Francisco
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067-3284
P: 310.284.2200 F: 310.284.2100
Alexander M. DeGood
310.284.2205
ADeGood@coxcastle.com
December 29, 2021
VIA E-MAIL TO STEPHANIE.REICH@SANTAMONICA.GOV
Landmarks Commission
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street, Suite 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
c/o Ms. Stephanie Reich
Design and Historic Preservation Planner
Re: Landmark Designation Application for 631 Colorado Avenue (Application
No. 21ENT-0125)
Honorable Chair Genser and Members of the Landmarks Commission:
This office represents 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc., the owner (“Owner”) of the property
located at 621-631 Colorado Avenue (the “Property”) in the City of Santa Monica (the “City”).
The Property is currently improved with two buildings separated by a surface parking lot—with
the eastern building (“Building A”)1 constructed in 1937 and expanded between 1998 and 2002
and the western building (“Building B”) constructed in 1941 and expanded in 1958. Building A
and Building B are collectively referred to herein as the “Improvements.”
On May 20, 2021, the City received a Landmark Designation Application (the
“Application”) from the Santa Monica Conservancy (the “Applicant”) requesting the City’s
Landmarks Commission (the “Commission”) designate the Improvements as a City Landmark.
Environmental Science Associates’ (“ESA”) Cultural Resources Director Margarita
Jerabek, PhD, prepared a comprehensive City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report for
the Property (the “Landmark Report”), which is attached hereto for your review as Exhibit A. The
Landmark Report concludes that the Property does not meet the City’s criteria for designation, is
not of a level of particular historical significance, and lacks integrity to be eligible for listing as a
City Landmark. This letter details the Landmark Report’s conclusions to facilitate the
Commission’s review of the Landmark Report.
1 The defined terms “Building A” and “Building B” mirror those used in the Landmark Report (as defined further
herein).
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1568 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021
Page 2
A. The Landmark Report Concludes that the Improvements Do Not Meet Any
of the Factors Required for Landmark Designation as Set Forth in SMMC §
9.56.100.A
The factors for a City Landmark designation are set forth in Santa Monica Municipal
Code (“SMMC”) § 9.56.100.A and are as follows:
1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political or architectural history of the City.
2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
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.
The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements meet none of the six SMMC
enumerated factors, as summarized below.
1. The Improvements do not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the
cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements do not exemplify, symbolize, or
manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
See Landmark Report, pp. 81-82. The Landmark Report establishes the Improvements are not
nearly the first of a commercial or industrial nature within the area of the Property (contrary to
the Application’s assertions) and in turn are not representative of pioneering a significant pattern
of development in the City’s history. Id. Furthermore, the Landmark Report establishes the
Improvements when built were not industrial in nature, as the Improvements were used as a
distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages and not for an industrial use—such as the
manufacturing or bottling of alcoholic beverages. See Landmark Report, p. 3.
Rather, the Improvements operated as a distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages for
a non-local corporation (which distribution lasted for less than one-fourth of the Improvements’
existence2), did not materially contribute to the history of the City as the Improvements
2 The Improvements operated as a distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages for approximately 18 years, as a
defense research office for approximately four years, as an auto body shop for approximately 36 years, and as film
production office(s) for approximately 24 years. See Landmark Report, pp. 51-53.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1569 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021
Page 3
supported alcohol distribution to the larger Los Angeles region, and did not in any material way
contribute to the reemergence of alcohol in the City following the end of prohibition3. See
Landmark Report, pp. 81-82.
In sum, the Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application)
concludes that the Improvements do not meet this factor, as the Improvements’ use as an alcohol
distribution warehouse are not unique or notable.
2. The Improvements do not have aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other
noteworthy interest or value.
The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements do not
have aesthetic or artistic interest or value or other noteworthy interest or value. See Landmark
Report, p. 82; Application, pp. 23-24. The Landmark Report states “the [Improvements] are
considered modest in comparison to other buildings in the [Commercial/Industrial Vernacular
architecture] style [as t]hey have limited decorative features [and have] been substantially altered
from [their] original appearance.” See Landmark Report, p. 82. As such, the Improvements do
not meet this factor.
3. The Improvements are not identified with historic personages or with
important events in local, state, or national history.
The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements are not identified with historic
personages or with important events in local, state, or national history. See Landmark Report, p
82. The Application focuses on Ms. Etta Moxley’s4 ownership of the Property. However, the
Landmark Report establishes the Improvements were constructed after Ms. Moxley (or her
husband) sold the Property5 for use as an alcohol distribution warehouse. “There is no remaining
historic significance for the former structures that were once occupied and owned by [] Etta
Moxley, as all previous improvements associated with [Ms. Moxley’s] life and [the Property]
were demolished prior to the construction of the [Improvements].” See Landmark Report, p. 87
(emphasis added).
3 The Application admits that not only were the Improvements not the first distribution warehouse of alcoholic
beverages in the City (see Application, p. 18 [documenting M&B Distributing’s existence in the City prior to the
development of the Improvements]) but, the Improvements were also not the A.B.C. Distributing Company’s first
buildings in and/or near the City (see Application, pp. 18, 22 [documenting other A.B.C. Distributing Company
locations in and/or near the City prior to re-location to the Improvements].)
4 While Ms. Moxley, based on the information provided in the Application, lived an admirable life, there is no
evidence to support consideration of her as a historic personage.
5 According to the Application, it was Ms. Moxley’s husband John Walter Moxley who sold the Property in 1937.
See Application, p. 16.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1570 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021
Page 4
In sum, the Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application)
concludes that the Improvements do not meet this factor, as the Application’s assertions relate to
structures long demolished and to a person who is not of historical significance.
4. The Improvements do not embody distinguishing architectural
characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction,
or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are not a unique or
rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to
such a study.
The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements do not embody distinguishing
architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the
use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are not a unique or rare example of an
architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. See Landmark Report, pp.
82-84. The Landmark Report sets forth that both expansions and modifications of Building A
and Building B have materially altered their original construction, design, workmanship, and
materials. Id. Further, the improvements are not rare, but rather modest and altered examples of
the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture style. Id.; see also p. 80 and Table 4 of the
Landmark Report (documenting several better examples of the architecture style within the City
and identifying a potential Main Street Commercial District for this style).
As for construction methods, the Landmark Report establishes that groutlock brick (a
type of reinforced brick masonry) neither became a highly utilized, important construction
method6 in the City or elsewhere as a result of its application on the Property (as it was already a
ubiquitous construction method in southern California and the United States), nor was it a novel
construction method, as the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for
over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its history. See
Landmark Report, pp. 82-84.
In addition, other examples of reinforced brick masonry exist throughout the City and the
Improvements’ original brick masonry has been sandblasted at least twice (according to City
building permits), which has destroyed the original finishing and mortar pointing. Id. In sum, the
Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application) concludes that the
Improvements do not meet this factor.
6 The Landmark Report provides “[t]he [construction of Building A] was not published in any architectural or
engineering journals, nor was its construction method mentioned in any local or regional newspapers.” See
Landmark Report, pp. 83-84.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1571 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021
Page 5
5. The Improvements are not a significant or a representative example of the
work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.
The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements are
not a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder,
designer, or architect. See Landmark Report, p. 84; Application, p. 26. The Landmark Report
provides that while established architect Fredric C. Barienbrock is listed as the architect for
Building B (which as originally constructed was a commercial loading canopy), this commercial
building is neither significant nor representative of Mr. Barienbrock’s larger, notable body of
work of residential and large-scale civic and institutional buildings (e.g., the Modern style Santa
Monica Courthouse) and has been significantly modified and expanded over time to further
establish a lack of integrity necessary to meet this factor. See Landmark Report, p. 84. As such,
the Improvements do not meet this factor.
6. The Improvements do not have a unique location, a singular physical
characteristic, or an established and familiar visual feature of a
neighborhood, community or the City.
The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements do not
have a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or an established and familiar visual
feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City. See Landmark Report, p. 84; Application, p.
26. As such, the Improvements do not meet this factor.
* * *
In short, as detailed above, the Landmark Report establishes that the Property and
Improvements do not meet any of the factors for designation as defined in SMMC § 9.56.100.A.
Should you have questions regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact
me. In the meantime, we look forward to the Commission’s review and thank you for your time
and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Alexander M. DeGood
AMD:ejc
cc: Amanda Duane, GPA Consulting
Heidi von Tongeln, Deputy City Attorney
086482\14234771v5
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1572 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
EXHIBIT A
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1573 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Final
631 COLORADO AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
Prepared for December 2021
Mr. Michael Bay
500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1574 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1575 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Final
631 COLORADO AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
Prepared for December 2021
Mr. Michael Bay
500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA
233 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 150
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310.451.4488
esassoc.com
Bend
Camarillo
Delray Beach
Destin
Irvine
Los Angeles
Oakland
Orlando
Pasadena
Petaluma
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
Santa Monica
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1576 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of
public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and
emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered
assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader,
and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate
member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on
Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision
and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our
operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1577 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue i ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
631 Colorado Avenue Santa Monica, California
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation
Report
Page
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1
Environmental Setting .......................................................................................................... 3
Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................ 3
Architectural Description ..................................................................................................... 6
Site 6
Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue .................................................................................. 6
Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue ................................................................................ 18
Research Results ................................................................................................................ 25
Settlement and Development of Santa Monica ............................................................ 25
Subject Tract and Neighborhood Development ........................................................... 27
Subject Parcel Development ........................................................................................ 34
Construction History ..................................................................................................... 38
Ownership/Occupancy History ..................................................................................... 52
Historic Contexts ................................................................................................................ 60
Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977) ................................................ 60
Theme: Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-1944) ............................... 60
Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950) ............................................. 66
Evaluation of Significance ................................................................................................. 81
Landmark Criteria ........................................................................................................ 82
Structure of Merit ......................................................................................................... 86
Historic Integrity ........................................................................................................... 86
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 88
References ........................................................................................................................... 89
Attachments
A. Professional Qualifications
B. Building Permits
C. Sanborn Maps
D. Table 5. Summary of Research on Reinforced Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
E. DPR Forms
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1578 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue ii ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
List of Figures
Figure 1 Regional and Property Vicinity .............................................................................. 4
Figure 2 Aerial Photograph and Project Site ....................................................................... 5
Figure 3 Building A east facade along Colorado Avenue, view to west .............................. 9
Figure 4 Building A south facade, view north ...................................................................... 9
Figure 5 Building A south facade with scored parapet and pylons .................................... 10
Figure 6 Building A south facade with detail of brick bulkhead (altered) and scored
pylons and parapet, and new industrial type windows in the former
storefront opening, view west ............................................................................. 10
Figure 7 Building A east elevation along 7th Street, view west .......................................... 11
Figure 8 Building A east elevation, with non-original window in original opening,
view north ........................................................................................................... 11
Figure 9 Building A east elevation with second-story addition, view north ........................ 12
Figure 10 Building A north elevation with second-story addition, view south ...................... 12
Figure 11 Building A west corner with original brick wall (sandblasted) and concrete
pylon, and non-original metal gate, view north ................................................... 13
Figure 12 Building A west elevation with contemporary building entrance at center
and ground-floor projecting wing addition at left, view east ................................ 13
Figure 13 Detail of Building A contemporary recessed entrance, within altered
former garage door opening, view east. Evidence of parapet repairs is
visible above the concrete horizontal beam, where the brick changes
color from above the fifth course to the top of the parapet. Seismic tie
bars are also evident on the concrete horizontal beams and on the east
and west parapets. ............................................................................................. 14
Figure 14 Detail of ground-floor addition at Building A north corner of west
elevation, at left, with contemporary non-original window assembly at
right in location of former garage door (lower portion of door under
window has been bricked in), view east .............................................................. 14
Figure 15 Interior view with open arched ceiling, and exposed wood trusses and
rafters at Building A, view to west. Altered garage bays have been
altered and reused for main entrance (left) and large window (right). ................. 15
Figure 16 Detail of original brickwork (sandblasted) and concrete beams (altered for
seismic improvements) with contemporary infill window assemblies in
original storefront openings at Building A, south corner facing east. .................. 15
Figure 17 Detail of water damage and efflorescence to brick at Building A interior
wall ..................................................................................................................... 16
Figure 18 Incompatible and irregular mortar patching at infill area at Building A
interior wall ......................................................................................................... 16
Figure 19 Building A interior with contemporary second story staircase ............................. 17
Figure 20 Second-floor addition at Building A facing rooftop patio over ground floor
wing addition ....................................................................................................... 17
Figure 21 Detail of contemporary partition walls at juncture with historic brick and
concrete column and beam ................................................................................ 18
Figure 22 Building B south facade along Colorado Avenue, view north ............................. 20
Figure 23 Detail of brick parapet and pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals at
Building B south facade ...................................................................................... 20
Figure 24 Building B west elevation along 6th Court alleyway, view east. Evidence
of graffiti removal on wall. ................................................................................... 21
Figure 25 Building B, perspective view of west and north elevations with corner
pylon, smooth stucco cladding, and mechanized gate, view south ..................... 21
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1579 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue iii ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Figure 26 Building B north elevation with smooth stucco cladding and flanking
corner pylons, and contemporary signage, view west ........................................ 22
Figure 27 Building B contemporary recessed entrance along eastern elevation,
facing west .......................................................................................................... 22
Figure 28 Building B eastern elevation (altered) which has been infilled since
original construction and clad in stucco siding with new windows, view
north ................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 29 Detail of Building B contemporary steel 4:3 lite windows with non-original
smooth stucco siding, view west ......................................................................... 23
Figure 30 Interior view of original brickwork (sandblasted) at southern outer wall .............. 24
Figure 31 View of Building B interior brickwork of original wall that was formerly at
the exterior northern extent of the building, prior to new north addition,
view to east ......................................................................................................... 24
Figure 32 Detail of Town of Santa Monica Tract with subject property outlined in
red, 1875 ............................................................................................................ 29
Figure 33 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1895 ................................... 30
Figure 34 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1902 ................................... 30
Figure 35 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1909 ................................... 31
Figure 36 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1918 ................................... 31
Figure 37 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood
with subject property outlined in red, 1950 ......................................................... 32
Figure 38 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A (green arrow) and B (Blue arrow) and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1965 ............... 32
Figure 39 Aerial photograph depicting subject property and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1994 ................................... 33
Figure 40 Aerial photograph depicting subject property and surrounding
neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 2021 ................................... 33
Figure 41 Detail of aerial photograph depicting future site of Buildings A and B with
property outlined in red, 1928 ............................................................................. 35
Figure 42 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Building A with subject property
outlined in red, 1938 ........................................................................................... 35
Figure 43 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined
in red, 1950 ......................................................................................................... 36
Figure 44 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1952 ............................................................................. 36
Figure 45 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1964 ............................................................................. 37
Figure 46 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined
in red, 1965 ......................................................................................................... 37
Figure 47 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 2002 ............................................................................. 38
Figure 48 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 2005 ............................................................................. 38
Figure 49 Building A with original storefront configuration along Colorado Avenue,
1945 .................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 50 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood
with subject property outlined in red, 1986 ......................................................... 43
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1580 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue iv ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Figure 51 Site plan for property including Buildings A, B, and parking lot as included
on building permit, 1995 ..................................................................................... 44
Figure 52 Building B when used as a loading canopy for truck storage, 1945 .................... 46
Figure 53 Sketch plan as included with building permit to modify Building B with
doors, 1947 ......................................................................................................... 47
Figure 54 Sketch plan as included with building to construct addition to Building B,
1958 .................................................................................................................... 47
Figure 55 Advertisement promoting the “earthquake proof” reinforced groutlock brick
masonry as used on a residence ........................................................................ 51
Figure 56 Newspaper article discussing new groutlock method of construction, 1933.......... 51
Figure 57 Aztec Brewing Company in San Diego, c. 1933 showing the state-of-the-
art production capability of the newly renovated brewery in the early post-
Prohibition period. ............................................................................................... 56
Figure 58 Aztec Brewing Company, c. 1933, advertised its Famous A. B. C. Beer as
“Class in a Glass.” .............................................................................................. 57
Figure 59 Aztec Brewing Company, 1933, listing A. B. C. Distributing Co. franchises
in the Los Angeles area. The Santa Monica location was not listed, as it
was not yet constructed by this time. .................................................................. 57
Figure 60 Corner brick commercial building in Winters, California, built circa 1906 ............ 67
Figure 61 1631 10th Street, a light manufacturing building constructed in 1947 ................. 80
Figure 62 2920 Nebraska Avenue, a utilitarian industrial building constructed in
1946 .................................................................................................................... 80
List of Tables
Table 1 631 Colorado Avenue, Building A City of Santa Monica Building Permits .......... 41
Table 2 621 Colorado Avenue, Building B City of Santa Monica Building Permits .......... 46
Table 3 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue Ownership and Occupancy ............................... 53
Table 4 Other Commercial Vernacular buildings identified in Santa Monica ................... 68
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1581 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
631 Colorado Avenue 1 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 COLORADO AVENUE
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation
Report
Executive Summary
Environmental Science Associates (ESA) was retained by Michael Bay (Client) to prepare this
Santa Monica Landmark Assessment Report (Report) to identify and evaluate the two buildings
located at 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue (subject property). The properties are located in the
downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica (City), California, on one assessor parcel (APN) 4291-
023-009. This Report was prepared to assess the property for potential eligibility as a Santa
Monica Landmark or as a Structure of Merit. This Report includes a discussion of the survey
methods used, a brief historic context of the Project site and surrounding area, and the
identification and evaluation of the existing improvements on the subject property.
The subject property is developed with a one-story brick building with a rear second story
addition at the east extent constructed in 1937 (Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue), and a one-
story stucco-clad brick building at the western extent constructed in 1941 (Building B, 621
Colorado Avenue). Both buildings were designed in the Commercial Vernacular style.
ESA conducted research on the construction and occupancy history of each of the buildings
within the Project site and reviewed the history of the project site within the development of the
Town of Santa Monica Tract. For the current evaluation, each building at the Project site was
evaluated by ESA under the following architectural and historical contexts and sub-themes: Santa
Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977); Pre-World War II Commercial Development
(1920-1944), Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s-1960s); and Early 20th
Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950). As discussed in greater detail below, the subject
property was assessed during the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update in 2018, at which
time classified as an “Industrial Vernacular” in style building and it was given a National Register
Status Code of 5S3 that identified the subject property as “appears to be individually eligible for
local listing or designation through survey evaluation.” 1
The subject property is a small, commercial improvement that is not representative of a
significant pattern of commercial or industrial development in the City. The subject property, an
1 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory Update- Individual Resources, 2018,
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Programs/Historic-
Preservation/Appendix%20B_Individual%20Resources%20090418_rt.pdf, accessed 10/14/2021.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1582 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 2 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
altered, adaptively reused Commercial/Industrial Vernacular building, does not retain integrity to
manifest the cultural and economic history of Santa Monica, nor is it exemplary of a type, style or
method of construction in the architectural history of the City.
The subject property appears to have been substantially altered since its original construction and
ESA found that it does not retain sufficient integrity to convey significance as a representative
example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building in the architectural history of the
City. Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture is modest and utilitarian in character in
comparison to other building types. Substantial alterations of the warehouse door openings,
reconfiguration and replacement of the original storefronts, reconfiguration of the site plan, and
sandblasting of the brick all materially detract from the integrity of the property as an example of
commercial/industrial vernacular architecture or as an example of a pattern of commercial
development. Consequently, the subject property lacks sufficient aesthetic or architectural value
and historic integrity necessary for designation under any of the applicable Landmark or Structure
of Merit criteria. Research findings do not indicate that the existing improvements are identified
with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. Both
Buildings A and B are substantially altered examples of buildings originally designed in the
Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style, and therefore, the subject buildings are not eligible as a
rare, extant example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular historical property type. Buildings A
and B also do not appear to be eligible as examples of a method of construction. Building A was
constructed with groutlock brick, a form of reinforced brick masonry, as indicated on the original
building permit. However, the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally
for nearly two centuries and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its
history, and as such groutlock brick was just one reinforced brick masonry system of many that
have been implemented over time. While ESA did not identify other examples of the same exact
type of groutlock brick found in Building A elsewhere in Santa Monica, we discovered that there
are other examples of reinforced brick masonry as this was a ubiquitous construction method in
southern California during the early 20th century period due to the prevalence of earthquakes in
the region. Furthermore, our research data indicates that the specific form of groutlock brick
utilized in Building A never became a common method of construction and that other methods of
reinforced brick masonry construction were more widely utilized in the City. Even if we would
assume it was a rare significant construction method, the building has been extensively
sandblasted throughout the exterior and interior and no longer has integrity to convey significance
as a representative example of a method of construction. ESA found no evidence that the subject
property is a significant or representative example of the work or product of a notable builder,
designer or architect, as discussed in detail in this report. Finally, the subject property does not
appear to have a unique location, singular physical characteristic, nor is an established visual
feature of a neighborhood or of the City. Therefore, the subject property appears ineligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Landmark.
While the subject property has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, and the
building is more than 50 years of age, the property is not a unique, rare, or representative example
of an architectural design, detail or historic type. Additionally, the subject property does not
contribute to a potential Historic District. Therefore, the subject property appears ineligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1583 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 3 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
In conclusion, ESA finds the existing improvements on the subject property to lack integrity to be
eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark or as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.
Environmental Setting
The subject property, located at 621-631 Colorado Avenue (APN 4291-023-009), is situated on
the north corner of Colorado Avenue, between 7th Street to the north, Broadway to the east, 6th
Street on the south, and Colorado Avenue to the west (Figures 1 and 2). Located at the edge of
the Santa Monica Downtown Neighborhood, lots K and L of Block 193 includes two brick
vernacular multi-purpose commercial/industrial buildings, identified for the purposes of this
study as Buildings A and B. This evaluation will assess the converted wholesale liquor and beer
warehouse “A. B. C. Distributing Co.” and store “Wine Beer Liquors” (Building A), constructed in
1937, and converted truck storage garage (Building B), constructed in 1941 for historical
significance under the City of Santa Monica Landmark Designation Criteria (SMMC 9.56.100) and
Structure of Merit Designation Criteria (SMMC 9.56.080). The subject property is bordered by
mixed development: multi-family housing to the north and east, and both large- and small-scale
commercial developments and some multi-family housing to the south, and west. A low-rise
brick commercial building is located on the lot immediately to the east of the subject property on
the east corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street. To the west of the subject property, across the
alley, is a block of low-rise commercial buildings on Colorado Avenue that extends to the corner
of Colorado Avenue and 6th Street.
Regulatory Setting
The subject property has been identified and assessed under the City of Santa Monica’s ongoing
survey process. The subject property was assessed during the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory
Update in 2018.2 It was given a National Register Status Code of 5S3 that identified the subject
property as “appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey
evaluation.” The property was classified as “Industrial Vernacular” in style with a construction
date of 1937. The statement of potential significance for the property included in the inventory
was as follows: “631 Broadway appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The
property is significant for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown
neighborhood of Santa Monica. Constructed in 1937, it is one of relatively few extant industrial
buildings in the area from the pre‐World War II period.”3
However, as demonstrated in this report, the subject property was not used for manufacturing and
did not have an industrial use. It was built as a multi-purpose commercial/industrial wholesale
warehouse for the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages, and originally had two commercial
storefronts facing south toward Colorado Avenue, one for a liquor store “Wine Beer Liquors”,
and the other for a wholesale warehouse distributing office “A. B. C. Distributing Co.”
2 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory Update- Individual Resources, 2018,
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Programs/Historic-
Preservation/Appendix%20B_Individual%20Resources%20090418_rt.pdf, accessed 10/14/2021. 3 Ibid., p. 46.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1584 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
TopangaState Park
ØProject Site
San Fernando
Valley
§¨¦405
UV1 UV91
§¨¦710
§¨¦110
Long Beach
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Upper VanNorman Lake
Middle
Lake
Chatsworth
Reservoir
Devils
Gate Res.
FloodControlBasin
Encino
Reservoir
Hollywood
Reservoir
Upper Stone
Canyon Res.
Silver
Lake Res.
Manhattan
Beach Gardena
Downey
Inglewood
Bell
Pico
Rivera
Monterey
Park
West
Hollywood Alhambra
Beverly Hills
San Gabriel
Pasadena
Glendale
Los Angeles
Burbank
Santa Monica
Simi
Valley
§¨¦710
§¨¦210
§¨¦110
§¨¦105
§¨¦5
§¨¦10
§¨¦405
£¤101
UV1
UV42
UV110
UV60
UV170
UV118
UV134
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\2021xxx\D202100734_00_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment\03_MXDs_Projects\D202100734_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment.aprx, CKeen 10/12/2021SOURCE: Los Angeles County, 2021; ESA, 2021
Figure 1
Regional and Property Vicinity
631 Colorado Ave Landmark Assessment
N 0 4
Miles
KERN
SAN BERNARDINO
SAN DIEGO
RIVERSIDE
LOS ANGELES
VENTURA
SANTABARBARA
ORANGEArea of
Interest
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1585 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6t
h
S
t
7th
S
t
6th
S
t
7th
St
ColoradoAveColoradoAveColoradoAve6th
S
t
Building A, 631
Colorado Avenue
Building B, 621
Colorado Avenue
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\2021xxx\D202100734_00_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment\03_MXDs_Projects\D202100734_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment.aprx, CKeen 10/12/2021SOURCE: Los Angeles County, 2021; Nearmap, 2021; ESA, 2021
Figure 2
Aerial Photograph and Project Site
631 Colorado Ave Landmark Assessment
N 0 80
Feet
Project Parcel
Buildings
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1586 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 6 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
No alcoholic beverages were manufactured at the subject property. As such, the subject property
had a primarily commercial rather than industrial function, and therefore it can be properly
classified primarily as a Commercial Vernacular Style property. The warehouse attached to the
commercial storefronts was used for the distribution of alcoholic beverages and had large garage
bays, on-site parking, and a truck storage building, and can be properly classified secondarily as a
Vernacular Industrial Style property. The stylistic classification of the building as commercial
and/or industrial vernacular is explored and documented in this report.
Architectural Description
Site
The subject property is located on a rectilinear lot on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and
7th Street in the Downtown area of Santa Monica. The property contains two brick, single-story,
Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style buildings: Building A constructed in 1937 and Building
B constructed in 1941. Building A faces south toward Colorado Boulevard and encompasses the
full south-to-north depth of the lot; its east side elevation sits on the east property line, and its
west side elevation faces an on-site parking lot; the rear north elevation sits on the north property
line. Building B is located at the west corner of the lot and is oriented to the east toward the
parking area and Building A; its south side elevation sits on the south property line and its west
rear elevation sits on the west property line. There is an alley named 6th Court that runs north to
south along the west side of the subject property. A driveway from 6th Court provides access to
the subject property at its north corner. Building B is located adjacent to the driveway on the
south. The subject property is enclosed by a metal security fence with concrete pylons that runs
along Colorado Avenue between Building A and Building B. To the north side of Building B, an
automated gate allows access to the site off 6th Court. There is additional access to the site
through a pedestrian gate immediately to the west of Building A facing Colorado Avenue.
Originally, site access was directly off Colorado Avenue and not off of 6th Court. There is mature
landscaping including bushes and trees within the property line at the parking lot, with bushes
lining Colorado Avenue, and palm trees lining 7th Street.
Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue
Building A is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building that was
constructed in 1937 with later additions including a second-story addition at its rear north end and
a one-story addition that projects westward at its north corner. Located on the western corner of
Colorado Avenue and 7th Street, Building A is oriented facing Colorado Avenue and extends
northward along 7th Street (Figure 3). Building A is largely rectangular in plan and includes a
second-story addition at its north end and a small one-story projection at the north corner
elevation. Building A is constructed of brick with a reinforced concrete frame and sits on a
concrete slab foundation. Building permits and physical evidence indicate that the original brick
finish has been removed by two sandblasting campaigns that have damaged the original brick and
mortar joints and pointing. The original one-story rectangular portion of the building has an
arched wood truss roof and a horizontal brick parapet. There are skylights and mechanical
equipment on the roof. Originally constructed as a one-story building, a second-story addition at
the north end, and a ground floor wing addition at the north corner were completed between 1998
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1587 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 7 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
and 2002. The second-story addition has a flat roof and is accessed via an interior staircase from
the main ground floor space. The second-story addition has an exterior door opening at its west
end that opens onto a rooftop patio above the ground floor one-story wing addition. All windows
in the original section of Building A have been replaced with new metal industrial-style multi-lite
windows (fixed and hopper assemblies), and there is evidence of brick infill at the location of
former window and door openings that have been closed.
Building A’s south elevation facing Colorado Avenue is comprised of three structural bays
(original) which are divided by vertical fluted concrete pylons incised with vertical groove lines
(Figure 4). The pylons each terminate in a stepped pyramidal capital that rises just above the
fascia and parapet (Figure 5). There is an attached sign on the center bay of the parapet
comprised of individual metal channel letters that reads “Bay Films”. Three large non-original
multi-lite industrial type metal window assemblies sit within each bay, atop a brick bulkhead.
Concrete fascia and a parapet span between the three structural bays and includes horizontal score
lines above and below which correspond with the vertically fluted pylons (Figure 6).
Originally, Building A’s primary facade was located along Colorado Avenue at the south
elevation and included two storefronts within the two outer structural bays that each had a single-
leaf wood and glass entrance door and paired fixed wood windows adjacent to the door. There
was a row of four rectangular transom windows above the doors and windows. The transoms
over the doors were openable hopper windows. There were similar paired fixed wood windows
surmounted by four transoms within the center structural bay. Originally, attached wall signs
were located on the parapet that read from left-to-right, “ABC”, “ABC Distributing Co.” and
“Wine Beer Liquors”. The bulkhead walls below the windows appear to have been stuccoed. A
comparison of a historic photo of the building from 1945 with existing conditions indicates that
the original storefronts have been removed and openings altered. The current windows along
Colorado Avenue sit within original storefront openings, and the lower portion of the two door
openings have been filled in (previously referenced Figure 6). There is evidence of water damage
and graffiti removal on the bulkhead walls on this elevation.
The eastern elevation along 7th Street extends the depth of the lot and includes a non-original
metal-frame 5:4 multi-lite industrial-type window assembly at the south corner of the elevation
(Figures 7 and 8). This elevation is comprised of six regularly spaced structural bays delineated
by its reinforced concrete frame, with brick walls (sandblast damage evident) and a brick parapet
(sandblasted) at the roofline. There is evidence of parapet repair at this elevation, along with
seismic structural reinforcement. Evidence of graffiti removal is apparent. All of the original
windows have been replaced with metal industrial type multi-lite new windows within the
original window openings. A contemporary second-floor addition rises from the final bay at the
northern extent of the elevation, which was constructed with similar red brick and reinforced
concrete framing and has similar multi-lite industrial type metal windows. The northernmost
portion (rear wall) of Building A’s addition consists of a horizontally scored concrete wall at the
second floor, which surmounts a blank brick wall with concrete framing (Figures 9 and 10).
Accessible through a pedestrian gate in the metal fence along Colorado Avenue (Figure 11), or
through a vehicular gate along 6th Court, the asphalt surface parking area for the subject property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1588 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 8 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
occupies the majority of the lot. There is a paved walkway from the pedestrian gate on the south
side of the lot to the current building entrance on the west elevation of Building A. Building A’s
west elevation (Figure 12) faces the parking lot and has a similar in organization to the east
elevation along 7th Street. The west elevation includes six regularly spaced structural bays
delineated by a reinforced-concrete frame, with brick walls and a horizontal brick parapet. The
entire west elevation has been sandblasted as has the exterior and interior of the whole building.
Smaller 4:2 and 3:2 multi-lite metal frame industrial type windows punctuate three of the bays,
while a contemporary recessed entrance sits roughly centered in the elevation. The main entrance
includes a contemporary glass door with sidelites and transom windows (Figure 13).
Comparison of existing conditions with Sanborn maps and aerial photos indicates that the
existing building entrance is in the location of a former garage bay, and that the large fixed multi-
lite industrial window to the north is situated within a second former garage bay. There is also
evidence of an enclosed (bricked) former single door opening that has been converted to a 3:2
window, at the south end of this elevation. Projecting from the final northern bay along the west
elevation sits a new “sunroom” addition constructed of reinforced concrete that features large
multi-lite floor-to-ceiling window assemblies at its visible south and west elevations (Figure 14).
Atop this “sunroom” addition sits a rooftop patio. This addition forms an L-shape at the rear north
corner of the building. The area along the addition and west side of the building is planted with
grass and other decorative landscaping.
The interior includes main floor area with an arched wood ceiling with exposed wood trusses and
rafters (Figure 15). Original brickwork and concrete framing (sandblasted) are exposed
throughout the interior (Figure 16). Some damage/deterioration is evident on the interior
including water intrusion/leaks, efflorescence, sandblasting, and disintegration of the brick and
mortar, and spalling of the concrete (Figure 17). Incompatible mortar patching is also visible at
areas with later brick infill/alteration (Figure 18). The interior includes concrete slab flooring,
contemporary partitions, and a contemporary second story mezzanine addition at the northern part
of the building (Figure 19). The addition includes a metal staircase that leads from the main floor
to a second story mezzanine and offices (Figure 20). The mezzanine level opens to a rooftop
patio above the concrete ground-floor addition. Contemporary drywall and wood framing s abuts
the historic brick and concrete walls, and metal seismic armature tying the structural system can
be seen at the interior (Figure 21).
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1589 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 9 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 3
Building A east facade along Colorado Avenue, view to
west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 4
Building A south facade, view north
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1590 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 10 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 5
Building A south facade with scored parapet and pylons
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 6
Building A south facade with detail of brick bulkhead
(altered) and scored pylons and parapet, and new industrial
type windows in the former storefront opening, view west
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1591 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 11 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 7
Building A east elevation along 7th Street, view west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 8
Building A east elevation, with non-original window in
original opening, view north
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1592 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 12 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 9
Building A east elevation with second-story addition, view
north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 10
Building A north elevation with second-story addition, view
south
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1593 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 13 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 11
Building A west corner with original brick wall (sandblasted)
and concrete pylon, and non-original metal gate, view north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 12
Building A west elevation with contemporary building
entrance at center and ground-floor projecting wing addition
at left, view east
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1594 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 14 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 13
Detail of Building A contemporary recessed entrance, within
altered former garage door opening, view east. Evidence of
parapet repairs is visible above the concrete horizontal beam,
where the brick changes color from above the fifth course to the
top of the parapet. Seismic tie bars are also evident on the
concrete horizontal beams and on the east and west parapets.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 14
Detail of ground-floor addition at Building A north corner of
west elevation, at left, with contemporary non-original window
assembly at right in location of former garage door (lower
portion of door under window has been bricked in), view east
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1595 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 15 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 15
Interior view with open arched ceiling, and exposed wood
trusses and rafters at Building A, view to west. Altered
garage bays have been altered and reused for main
entrance (left) and large window (right).
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 16
Detail of original brickwork (sandblasted) and concrete
beams (altered for seismic improvements) with
contemporary infill window assemblies in original storefront
openings at Building A, south corner facing east.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1596 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 16 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 17
Detail of water damage and efflorescence to brick at
Building A interior wall
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 18
Incompatible and irregular mortar patching at infill area at
Building A interior wall
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1597 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 17 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 19
Building A interior with contemporary second story
staircase
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 20
Second-floor addition at Building A facing rooftop patio over
ground floor wing addition
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1598 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 18 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 21
Detail of contemporary partition walls at juncture with
historic brick and concrete column and beam
Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue
Building B is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building clad in smoothly
finished stucco that was originally constructed in 1941. Located on the western extent of the
subject property, the building extends along 6th Court south to the property line at Colorado
Avenue (Figure 22). A driveway from 6th Court runs along the north end of Building B to the
parking area on the subject property. Building B faces east toward the parking area. The brick
masonry building has a rectangular footprint and a flat roof with a built up exposed brick parapet
(Figure 23). The building’s southern elevation is comprised of a single bay with a concrete
horizontal beam, flanked by concrete pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals.
Building B was originally used for truck storage and loading, and its north elevation formerly
included open bays for truck parking; the openings have been filled in and new windows installed
for offices. A present-day comparison with a historic photo from 1945 indicates that the east
elevation along Colorado Avenue originally included painted advertisements on the east brick
wall for “A. B. C. Beer” and “Budweiser”, and a painted sign on the parapet for “A. B. C.
Distributing Co.”, showing that this south elevation never included openings; it is still a blank
brick wall today and has been sandblasted.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1599 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 19 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
The building’s west elevation abuts 6th Court, an alley way that runs between Colorado Avenue
and Broadway (Figure 24). This elevation has been covered with smooth stucco and has a single
scored line toward the parapet, and no fenestration. A metal automated vehicular gate abuts the
building’s north corner and extents north to the north property line (Figure 25). The north
elevation similarly has no fenestration and is covered with smooth stucco with a single scored
line at the parapet (Figure 26). Metal signage toward the parapet reads: “BAY FILMS
PLATINUM DUNES,” which sits to the right of a short metal ladder that provides access to the
roof.
The eastern elevation facing the parking area, which formerly included multiple open bays for
trucks, was enclosed in the late 1990s or early 2000s. The elevation is clad in smooth stucco and
includes a score line toward the parapet. A centralized contemporary recessed entrance includes a
single lite door with sidelites and transom windows (Figure 27). This configuration mirrors the
contemporary entrance at Building A (Figure 28). A series of three 4:3 multi-lite steel window
assemblies flank either side of the recessed entrance (Figure 29).
A metal security fence extends from the eastern corner of Building B and continues along
Colorado Avenue to the western corner of Building A. The metal security fence is attached to the
pylon and sits above a new concrete wall. New matching pylons similar to the pylons on
Buildings A and B serve as fence posts for the security fence.
At the interior of Building B, original brickwork is visible in several of the studio offices located
in the southern extent and along the western wall of the building (Figure 30). The brick appears
to have once been painted, and has since been sandblasted. The original brick building received
an addition to its north end in 1958, and the original exterior brick wall at the former north
elevation is still present within the building near the building entrance lobby (Figure 31). The
brick here appears to be deteriorating due to water damage. The entire interior has been
remodeled with contemporary materials including drywall at the walls and ceilings (except at the
areas with exposed original brick), cement and rolled carpet flooring, and contemporary doors.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1600 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 20 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 22
Building B south facade along Colorado Avenue, view north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 23
Detail of brick parapet and pylons with stepped pyramidal
capitals at Building B south facade
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1601 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 21 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 24
Building B west elevation along 6th Court alleyway, view
east. Evidence of graffiti removal on wall.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 25
Building B, perspective view of west and north elevations
with corner pylon, smooth stucco cladding, and mechanized
gate, view south
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1602 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 22 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 26
Building B north elevation with smooth stucco cladding and
flanking corner pylons, and contemporary signage, view
west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 27
Building B contemporary recessed entrance along eastern
elevation, facing west
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1603 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 23 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 28
Building B eastern elevation (altered) which has been
infilled since original construction and clad in stucco siding
with new windows, view north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 29
Detail of Building B contemporary steel 4:3 lite windows
with non-original smooth stucco siding, view west
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1604 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 24 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 30
Interior view of original brickwork (sandblasted) at southern
outer wall
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 31
View of Building B interior brickwork of original wall that
was formerly at the exterior northern extent of the building,
prior to new north addition, view to east
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1605 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 25 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Research Results
Settlement and Development of Santa Monica4
The original Santa Monica township was bordered by the Pacific Ocean on the west, present-day
Montana Avenue on the north, present-day Colorado Avenue on the south, and 17th Street on the
east. Over time, the City annexed additional acreage to extend its borders beyond the original plat
map. The result was the creation of a series of distinct neighborhoods around the city. During the
city’s early development, land sales and building construction did not go hand in hand. As a
result, most Santa Monica neighborhoods were constructed in a patchwork manner, using a
variety of era-appropriate styles, up through World War II. This was followed by an intense
period of infill development and re-subdivision after the war.
Colonel Robert S. Baker, a cattleman from Rhode Island via San Francisco, established a sheep
ranch on the bluffs at the northern end of present-day Santa Monica. He subsequently purchased
the land that would comprise Santa Monica’s original townsite. In 1874, Colonel Baker formed a
partnership with Senator John Percival Jones to develop the land that would later become Santa
Monica.5 Jones and Baker organized the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad to link the
mines of Colorado and Nevada to the ocean. They secured rights-of-way and commenced the
construction of a 4,700-footlong wharf (the Long Wharf).6 In 1875, the original townsite of Santa
Monica was surveyed. North-south streets were numbered; east-west streets were named for
states in the Union.
Santa Monica’s promoters encouraged the development of parks, a plaza, and a university as well as
providing ample home sites. The first sale of lots took place on July 15, 1875. Several of Los
Angeles’ prominent citizens built places of business in the town. One brick commercial building,
erected by William Rapp on 2nd Street, is still extant (Rapp Saloon, 1438 2nd Street, 1875; City of
Santa Monica Landmark #1). By November 1875, the railroad had been completed to Santa Monica,
two hotels were attracting patrons, a variety of businesses had opened, and 615 lots had been sold.
However, the auspicious beginning began to crumble as rival rail lines resolved to destroy the
viability of the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad as a shipping and transportation line. By
the late 1870s, Santa Monica the boomtown became a bust. In 1877, Jones sold his Los Angeles
and Independence Railroad, and in 1878 the last ship departed Jones’s Long Wharf, and it was
dismantled. This ushered in a collapse of land values in Santa Monica. By the mid-1880s, tents
that had dotted the beach had given way to makeshift shanties in what became known as “the
beach shack era.”7
4 Historic Resources Group, and Architectural Resources Group, “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources
Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community
Development Department, March 2018. 5 Discussion of Santa Monica’s early settlement largely adapted from PCR Services and Historic Resources Group,
City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation Element, September 2002, 7-11; and Paula A. Scott, Santa Monica: A
History on the Edge (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2004), 9-35. 6 When it opened in 1894, the Long Wharf was the longest wharf in the world. 7 Fred E. Basten, Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: A Pictorial History of Santa Monica, Venice, Marina del
Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga (Santa Monica, California: Hennessey + Ingalls, 2001),19.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1606 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 26 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Real estate entrepreneur Abbott Kinney and business partner Francis Ryan owned a large stretch
of coastline – some of which would become present-day Venice. In 1892, they acquired a large
piece of waterfront property for development as a seaside resort, which became known as Ocean
Park. One of Kinney's first improvements to the site was the construction of a large bathhouse.
The bathhouse remained a popular local attraction throughout the first quarter of the 20th century,
drawing thousands of vacationers “to what had been sand dunes and marshland.”8 In 1898,
Kinney constructed the 1,250-foot-long Ocean Park Pier. Other attractions soon followed,
including a racetrack, auditorium, and casino. The amusement industry drove both the local
economy and the area’s physical development.
Similarly, the bath houses, and later, the Santa Monica Pier provided a hub for Santa Monica’s
early development. It was originally constructed as two adjacent, separately owned piers known
as the Municipal Pier and the Pleasure Pier. The first Municipal Pier was constructed in 1908-
1909 of an experimental concrete and steel construction process. It was advertised as the “largest
concrete pier in the world.”9 In 1921, the pier was reconstructed using a traditional timber
structure, widened, and extended to nearly 1,600 feet.10 Looff’s Pleasure Pier was added in 1916
by Charles and Arthur Looff, a father and son team specializing in the building and operation of
carousels, roller coasters, and amusement parks. The Pier extended over the Santa Monica Bay,
immediately adjacent to the Municipal Pier. The Looffs also constructed the Hippodrome, the
Carousel, and the pier’s first roller coaster.
Despite Santa Monica’s significance as an early recreational destination, residential development
was essentially dormant until the arrival of the Santa Fe Railroad in 1887, which spurred the
initial residential building in “South Santa Monica” (a.k.a. Ocean Park). Although 1887
represented a building boom, by 1892, the full-time population of Santa Monica was only 2,000
people.11
The arrival of the first electric streetcar on April 1, 1896, and the later establishment of the
“Balloon Route” from downtown Los Angeles, spurred further investment in Santa Monica real
estate. A number of new subdivisions were opened during the first five years of the 20th century,
and between 1900 and 1903 the resident population jumped from 3,057 to 7,208. By 1911, five
electrical railway lines served Santa Monica with travel times of 30 to 50 minutes from
downtown Los Angeles.12 The completion of major roadways to the area only increased its
popularity as the automobile became a factor in Southern California growth.
During the 1920s, Santa Monica witnessed a substantial population and building boom. By 1923, it
was estimated that 1,500 people per month were moving to Santa Monica.13 Between 1921 and
8 Leonard Pitt and Dale Pitt, Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County (Berkeley, California:
University of California Press, 1997), 363. 9 James H. Charleston, “Looff’s Hippodrome,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form,
November 1984. 10 Charleston, “Looff’s Hippodrome.” 11 According to newspaper accounts in the Santa Monica Daily Outlook of 1910, Ingersoll’s “great boom” did not
extend to South Santa Monica, where land in the subdivisions of the late 1880s did not sell, and often the property
returned to its original ownership. 12 “Santa Monica Bay New Scene of Great Activity,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1911, IV11. 13 “Beach City Growing at Rapid Rate,” Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1923, V7.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1607 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 27 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1925, over 40,000 people moved to the city. Although previously known as a recreational
destination, the subdivision of tracts away from the amusement zones were changing the city from a
“summer cottage” environment to one where” homes of foreign and domestic architecture give the
community a decidedly residential atmosphere.”14 Boulevard and infrastructure improvements
along Wilshire, Santa Monica, Pico, and Beverly (Sunset) supported these changes.
Even after the stock market crash of 1929, residential construction in Santa Monica continued,
and in 1931 a shortage of homes was reported. One of the key drivers of this shortage was
growing enrollment at the nearby University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). The shortage
continued well into the late 1930s, this time driven by the expansion and influx of workers for the
Douglas Aircraft plant. However, during World War II the cessation of building and shortage of
building materials experienced around the country was felt in Santa Monica as well.15
Since much of Santa Monica had been built out prior to the war, single-family residential
development during the post-World War II period was largely confined to some unimproved
parcels in the Sunset Park area, along with infill development throughout the city, which often
replaced existing buildings. However, since the period after the war also brought a new steady
demand for housing, multi-family housing became the popular choice. Between 1967 and 1968,
only ten out of 1,414 residential building permits were single-family homes. The completion of
the Santa Monica Freeway in 1966 additionally cemented the city’s new role as a commuter
suburb for other parts of Los Angeles.16
Subject Tract and Neighborhood Development
The subject property is located in the downtown area of the original township, which was
subdivided in 1875 and initially contained 150 blocks. The downtown area is predominantly flat
and is bounded by Wilshire Boulevard on the north, Lincoln Boulevard on the east, the Santa
Monica Freeway on the south and Ocean Avenue on the west and contains approximately 512
parcels of mixed-use commercial properties. Colorado Avenue is a primary west-east
commercial corridor along with Wilshire Boulevard, Arizona Avenue, Santa Monica Boulevard,
and Broadway, and Olympic Boulevard. Lincoln Boulevard and Ocean Avenue are the primary
south-north commercial corridors along with 2nd, 4th and 5th Streets, and the 3rd Street Promenade.
As the area grew, residential development clustered within the blocks north of Wilshire
Boulevard, which now lay outside of the Downtown neighborhood boundaries. The area south of
Santa Monica Boulevard assumed a commercial character, while a small “downtown” developed
along 3rd Street. Today, Downtown is predominantly commercial in nature, and its boundaries
exclude areas of the original township where substantial residential development occurred. Only a
few residential properties remain, and of those, many have been rezoned for commercial uses.
Commercial, institutional, and mixed-use buildings comprise the majority of the neighborhood.17
14 “Beautiful Bay District Grows,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1925, F10. 15 Scott, A History on the Edge, 122. 16 Ibid., 131. 17 Architectural Resources Group, “Historic Resources Inventory Update Historic Context Statement,” prepared for
the City of Santa Monica, March 2018, 15-16.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1608 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 28 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
The 1875 map of the City of Santa Monica shows the original city layout and lot division in the
Downtown neighborhood (Figure 32). The land was surveyed and divided into home sites with
additional blocks dedicated to commercial purposes such as hotels to the north, a university to the
east, and a lumber and coal yard along Railroad Avenue to the south. The map shows the Los
Angeles and Independence Railroad route running east-west to the south of the neighborhood.
Once known as Railroad Avenue, present-day Colorado Avenue formed the southernmost extent
of the original tract and which sits as the edge of the industrial area adjacent to the railroad. The
earliest available Sanborn map from 1895 that includes subject parcel depicts the earliest
development on the subject property (which has since been demolished). The map illustrates that
Block 193 was beginning to become developed, with only a few constructed residences (Figure
33). In comparison, Block 192 to the west appears to be about 50% developed. To the east along
Railroad Avenue at 8th Street, the lot on the north corner contained the Santa Monica Electric
Light and Power Company and another commercial-industrial operation occupied the lot to the
east. Adjacent and to the north, the lots were being developed with residences.
By 1902, two more residences had been added on the east side of Block 193 (Figure 34).
Commercial-industrial businesses were beginning to appear with more frequency. Across the
street and to the south, the Bassett and Nebeker Lumber Yard occupied an entire city block
fronting Railroad Avenue and extending into the block on consecutive lots. On the east corner of
Railroad Avenue and 7th Street was the Santa Monica Steam Laundry, with an electric gas and
power plant located on the north side of Railroad Avenue and 8th Street. The 1909 Sanborn
illustrates more residences north of Colorado Avenue (formerly Railroad Avenue), with the
lumberyard still to the south, having expanded its land holdings significantly (Figure 35). The
slightly expanded Santa Monica Steam Laundry remained, and the gas and power plant had
become the Edison Electric Company. By the 1919 Sanborn map, residential development
patterns north of Colorado continued, as did commercial-industrial development along and to the
south of Colorado Avenue (Figure 36). The evident change is the construction of multiple
structures on single lots. The laundry, and various other commercial-industrial businesses,
including the Union Oil Company of California, a feed and fuel yard, and a business with
“distillate tanks,” and a Southern California Edison Company warehouse were located near the
subject property.
According to building permits, the existing improvements on the subject property at 631
Colorado Avenue were developed by A. B. C. Distribution Company beginning in 1937 with the
construction of Building A as a warehouse and offices located on the eastern extent of the
property. Building B was later constructed in 1941 in the southwestern portion of the property as
a truck storage canopy and used for the loading and unloading of inventory. The subject property
was constructed by A. B. C. Distribution Company. The rear of the property, along the northern
and western lot lines, were smaller auxiliary structures likely used for storage. The next Sanborn
map dates from 1950 and documents further changes in the pattern of residential development to
the north of the project site and the commercial-industrial development along Colorado Avenue
(Figure 37). By this time, multi-family residences instead of single-family residences were
becoming more prominent. A printing business, Patten-Blinn Lumber Company, dry cleaners, a
storage business, wood yard, coal and hay storage, tires and battery business, the Southern
California Edison Company warehouse, and an electrical substation remained present still
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1609 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 29 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
remained present in the neighborhood. Newer commercial-industrial businesses included a
blacksmith, machine shop, and an auto and electrical repair, with several surrounding parking
lots, indicating the shift from rail to automobile transportation.
On the 1965 Sanborn map, the neighborhood appears consistent with the previous development of
commercial-industrial businesses to the east along Colorado Avenue and to the south of the
thoroughfare (Figure 38). One block to the north of the project site, many of the lots previously
developed with residences had become redeveloped with offices, parking lots, and apartment
buildings. Along Colorado Avenue, the map shows an increasingly industrial development
reinforced by the nearly completed Santa Monica Freeway – Interstate Highway 10 – just to the
south. Union Oil Company was still in operation at the same location, and new nearby operations
included a telephone company warehouse, bus yard, Santa Monica Schools Maintenance
Department, dog kennels, storage, and auto repair. The lumber yard became Lane Industries
Corporation/metal fabricators, and Santa Monica Transportation System Offices and Service
Departments occupied nearby lots. Just to the east are two trailer park developments that border
the Santa Monica Freeway at Olympic Boulevard. Notably, there are many parking lots to
accommodate the daily influx of customers and workers by car.
A 1994 aerial photograph indicates that a few of the smaller buildings in the neighborhood had
been replaced with larger structures by this time (Figure 39). By the 2021 aerial photograph, the
surrounding neighborhood included several large-scale apartment buildings, which had replaced
smaller apartment buildings and commercial structures, indicating a pattern of redevelopment in
the area (Figure 40)
SOURCE: Santa Monica Conservancy
smconservancy.org/historic-places/history-of-santa-monica/
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 32
Detail of Town of Santa Monica Tract with subject
property outlined in red, 1875
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1610 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 30 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 33
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1895
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 34
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1902
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1611 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 31 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 35
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1909
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 36
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1918
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1612 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 32 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 37
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined
in red, 1950
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 38
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A (green arrow) and B
(Blue arrow) and surrounding neighborhood with subject
property outlined in red, 1965
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1613 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 33 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 39
Aerial photograph depicting subject property and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined
in red, 1994
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 40
Aerial photograph depicting subject property
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 2021
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1614 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 34 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Subject Parcel Development
The first available aerial photo is from 1928 and confirms the subject property was located at the
edge of a residential neighborhood on an established east-west thoroughfare (Figure 41). The
visible structures on the lot were nearly obscured by the trees.
The original residential improvements were replaced with the existing commercial/industrial
improvements in 1937 when Building A was constructed in the eastern extent of the subject
property, along the length of 7th Street, fronting Colorado Avenue (Figure 42). Constructed by
the A. B. C. Distributing Company, Building A appears on a 1938 aerial photograph with several
adjacent auxiliary canopy-type structures along the northern extent of the property, which may
have been used for loading merchandise onto trucks. Building B at 621 Colorado Avenue was
constructed in 1941 at the southern extent of the property, also along Colorado Avenue, and first
appears on the 1950 Sanborn Map (Figure 43) and 1952 aerial photograph (Figure 44).
Constructed to serve the A. B. C. Distributing Company as truck storage, Building B anchored
the parcel, completing an L-shape of ancillary canopy-type structures which extended south and
west from Building A, enclosing a surface parking lot directly accessible off of Colorado Avenue.
Photographs taken in 1945 indicate that a chain link fence delineated the parking lot from
Colorado Avenue.
The 1950 Sanborn map depicted the auxiliary canopy-type structures, which included areas for
wine storage, general storage, and other covered areas which are illegible on the map. The 1952
aerial photograph depicted Building A, Building B, and the series of auxiliary canopy-type
structures interspersed between the two (previously referenced Figures 43 and 44). Several
parked trucks appear in the photograph.
A. B. C. Distribution Company closed in 1953, and likely ceased operation at the subject property
shortly thereafter. By 1955, Aerophysics Development Corporation occupied the subject property
for roughly two years as offices, during which time no visible or documented changes were made
to the site or buildings.
In 1958, the canopy structure to the immediate north of brick Building B was enlarged to
accommodate a space to polish cars, indicating a change in the subject property’s use from an
aerospace office building into an automobile body and paint shop, Keystone Body Shop. The next
aerial photo in 1964 depicted the permitted enlarged canopy structure north of Building B, and
the removal of the auxiliary canopy-type structures along the northern extent of the property
(Figure 45). A Sanborn map published in 1965 further illustrates the removal of the auxiliary
canopy-type structures at the north property line, in addition to the permitted enlarged canopy
structure attached to Building B, which was then being used as a metal spray booth (Figure 46).
Building A was then used as an auto body repair shop, as indicated on the Sanborn map of 1965,
a use which continued at the subject property until the mid-1990s, when both Buildings A and B
were converted into commercial office use after a change in ownership following the 1994
Northridge earthquake.
The remaining auxiliary-canopy type structures along 6th Court were demolished shortly after the
change in ownership, and a 2nd story addition was constructed at the northern extent of Building
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1615 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 35 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
A, all of which is visible in a 2002 aerial photograph (Figure 47). The subject property began its
new use as creative offices for movie production companies, a use which continues today. A new
metal fence with concrete walls and pylons was erected along Colorado Avenue during this
period. In the absence of the auxiliary-canopy type structures in the western extent of the
property, a new gated driveway along 6th Court was established, also visible in the 2002 aerial
photograph. By the 2005 aerial photograph, planted trees appear to be growing in the parking lot
between Buildings A and B, and an additional 1-story addition constructed on to Building A
extended from the west elevation (Figure 48).
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 41
Detail of aerial photograph depicting future site of
Buildings A and B with property outlined in red, 1928
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 42
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Building A with
subject property outlined in red, 1938
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1616 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 36 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 43
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1950
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 44
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B
with subject property outlined in red, 1952
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1617 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 37 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 45
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B
with subject property outlined in red, 1964
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 46
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1965
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1618 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 38 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 47
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B
with subject property outlined in red, 2002
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 48
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B
with subject property outlined in red, 2005
Construction History
Located at 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property is located on the north corner of Colorado
Avenue and 7th Street in the Downtown Neighborhood in the City of Santa Monica.18 The
property is bound by 7th Street to the east, Colorado Avenue to the south, and 6th Court, an
alleyway, to the west. Situated on Block 193, on Lots K and L, the property contains two
18 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1619 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 39 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
buildings: a one-story brick building with a rear second story addition at the east extent (Building
A), and a one-story stucco-clad brick building at the western extent (Building B). A surface
parking lot separates the two buildings from one another and is accessed from along Colorado
Avenue at the southern extent of the site and from 7th Street at the northern extent of the site. The
property is oriented along Colorado Avenue. A metal security fence with cement walls and
pylons extends along Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B. The fence includes a metal
pedestrian gate located immediately west of Building A. A vehicular gated entrance to the
property is accessed from 6th Court alleyway.
Building A
According to Los Angeles County Assessor’s records and the original City of Santa Monica
building permit, the existing Building A was constructed in 1937.19 All building permits for
Building A are included in Table 1, below. The original building permit was issued to A. B. C.
Distributing Company for a single-story brick building for office and warehouse purposes. The
address on this permit was listed as 625 Colorado for Block 193 and Lots K and L. The building
was to measure 50’ x 100’ and was constructed on a 100’ x 150’ lot which indicates that Building
A was constructed to the extent of the lot line along 7th Street. The property then included a
garage or cottage according to the building permit, which was demolished for redevelopment of
the lot. According to the building permit, the specified building material to be used was
“groutlock brick” and the structure would be finished with a composition roof. The building
would be a single story and reach a maximum height of 20 feet. There was no architect or
contractor listed on the permit. One year after construction, an aerial photograph taken in 1938
depicts Building A on the subject parcel (previously referenced Figure 42). The lot at the time
appeared to include several auxiliary buildings and a fence surrounding the perimeter. A
photograph taken in 1945 illustrates Building A roughly 8 years after construction (Figure 49).
Originally, there were two storefront entrances to Building A along the Colorado Avenue
elevation. The south elevation included three bays delineated by fluted concrete pylons. Each bay
included wood frame fixed windows with transom windows above, and bulkheads below. Two
single lite doors sat recessed within the first and third structural bays. The horizontal parapet
between the structural bays was scored along the lower and upper fascia and the rectangular
panels on the parapet spanning the structural bays had painted signage on each of the three panels
that read, right to left, “A. B. C.;” “A. B. C. DISTRIBUTING CO.;” AND “WINE BEER
LIQUORS.” The east elevation, which fronts 7th Street included one wood fixed window with
transom window assembly, and at least two other windows that are difficult to discern due to the
low quality of the image. The east elevation appeared to have exposed brick, with adjacent
mature palm trees lining the sidewalk.
A Sanborn map created in 1950 depicts the building’s continued use for wholesale liquor and
beer, shows that the building construction included reinforced concrete pylons, concrete floors
and beams and a wood truss roof (previously referenced Figure 43). There were two adjacent 1-
story canopy structures located along the western elevation of Building A by 1950. By this time,
Building B was constructed and was used for truck storage for the A. B. C. Distributing
19 Building Permit, 1937— City of Santa Monica, City Clerk.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1620 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 40 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Company. An aerial photograph taken in 1952 depicts these 1-story canopy structures, which
included parked trucks adjacent to Building A (previously referenced Figure 44).
At some point the building must have been painted. Roughly 18 years after original construction,
in 1955, a building permit was issued to sandblast the brick building when Aerophysics
Development Corporation occupied the building. Additional electrical and gas improvements
were made in 1955 according to building permits.
Building A appeared to have been used as a body shop from about 1957 to about 1994. In 1957, a
permit for electrical work was issued to new building owner Jack Hammer when the property was
converted into an auto body shop. It does not appear that any structural changes were made at this
time. A subsequent 1958 building permit indicates that a large, projecting metal sign reading
“Keystone Auto Body” was installed to advertise the business to passers-by along Colorado
Avenue. The sign permit indicates that Building B was then used as a paint shop for the auto
body business. Subsequent building permits show electrical and plumbing improvements were
completed for the property between 1958 and 1993. A 1964 aerial indicates that the adjacent 1-
story canopy structures along the northern property extent had been demolished (previously
referenced Figure 45). The 1965 Sanborn map (previously referenced Figure 46) indicates
Building A’s continued usage as an auto body repair shop, which is also illustrated in the 1986
Sanborn map (Figure 50). The Northridge earthquake in 1994 caused damage to the building, as
indicated by the building safety assessment which indicated “fallen bricks and a rear wall down,”
yet no structural damage was sustained.20 This indicates some unspecified loss of brick from the
building.
With a change in ownership the in following year, 1995, a permit was issued to include 17
parking stalls on the site at the central parking lot between Buildings A and B. Subsequent
permits issued between 1995 and 1996 included extensive tenant improvements to both buildings
and the site. Modifications to Building A indicated a new office use, which was illustrated in a
sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit (Figure 51). The plan included new interior
walls throughout, delineating office spaces, conference areas, storage, and restrooms, in addition
to a new main entrance along the west elevation, where there were formerly 1-story canopies. In
addition, the plan detailed landscaping along the west elevation and the parking lot. Extensive
permits were issued in 1997, including: electrical work; sandblasting at both the exterior and
interior; the raising of a section of 33’ x 50’ of floor; and the reconstruction of 49 linear feet of
parapet wall, which may have been to repair damage from the 1994 Northridge earthquake.
In 1998, a new building permit application was submitted for a second-floor addition and
renovation work, with total valuation of improvements estimated at $100,000. A subsequent 1998
permit was issued to construct a metal fence with concrete pylons. In 2002, an application to
reinstate the previous expired permit to complete the second-floor addition was submitted. The
permit was for a second story addition (50’ x 100’, located at the north extent of the building) and
a one-story addition at the ground floor (25’ x 42’, located to the south of the second story
20 Rapid Evaluation Safety Assessment, Keystone Body Shop, January 17, 1994 [Handwritten ref, no.: DA0239].
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1621 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 41 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
addition) for office production use. By the 2005 aerial photograph, it appears that both the one-
and two-story additions had been constructed (previously referenced Figure 48).
TABLE 1
631 COLORADO AVENUE, BUILDING A
CITY OF SANTA MONICA BUILDING PERMITS21
Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner/ Occupant
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
5/8/1937 B9772 A. B. C.
Distributing Co.
N/A $7,000 One-story groutlock brick
building for office and
warehouse use. 50x100
building on a 100x150 lot
6/29/1937 3127 A. B. C.
Distributing Co.
Smith Brothers (c)
Electricity
6/7/1955 B17842 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Permit for sandblasting a one-
story brick warehouse building
30’ x 60’
8/15/1955 E23172 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Gas Piping
9/16/1955 D15369 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Electrical
11/18/1955 D15686 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Electrical
11/25/1955 D15714 Aerophysics
Development Corporation
N/A Electrical
9/19/1957 E33179 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Plumbing
9/30/1957 D19882 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Electrical
3/24/1958 B23440 Keystone Body
Shop
Owner (C) Metal Projecting Sign, total sign
area 18 sq. ft. Note: two
buildings listed on the site 1.
Paint shop 2. Body shop
3/25/1958 E35922 Keystone Body
Shop
N/A Plumbing
3/31/1958 D20702 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Electrical
6/27/1961 D27575 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Electrical
8/23/1989 P14508 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Plumbing
9/6/1989 E18105 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Electrical
21 Documentation exists for all permits and certificates of occupancy listed in this table.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1622 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 42 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner/ Occupant
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
9/6/1989 P14542 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Plumbing
10/28/1993 E22138 Keystone Auto Body N/A Electrical
1/17/1994 DA0239 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Rapid Evaluation Safety
Assessment Form – Structural
“Fallen bricks, rear wall down”
12/18/1995 B63795 Hershey
Associates
SBLM Architects (A) Permit for 17 parking stalls on
site
3/18/1996 B63795 Sign
Off
Hershey
Associates
N/A Permit for tenant improvements
to both bldgs. Site map and
plans attached incl. landscaping
and parking.
7/21/1997 E24805 Steve Perry Andy Gump Inc. Electrical – temporary power
pole
8/26/1997 97513-066 Bandit Films Desert Blasters Wet sandblast on two buildings
– interior and exterior brick
8/27/1997 B64581 Steve Perry,
Prinzavalli Films /
Colorado-Seven
LLC
N/A $5,000 Repairs – 49 linear feet of
parapet wall on building and
raise floor 33’x 50’
9/18/1997 P20494 Steve Perry Bob Haus (C), ATK
Builders
Plumbing
9/29/1997 E24959 Steve Perry Bob Haus (C) Electrical – 28 under floor boxes
and conduits only
10/7/1997 E24959 Steve Perry Bob Haus, ATK
Builders (C)
New Electrical – supplemental
to permit 9/29/1997
1/7/1998 B64908 Steve Perry Boto Design (A)
Bob Haus (C)
$100,000 Building permit for 2nd floor
addition and renovation
7/29/1998 B65428 Steve Perry Boto Design (A)
Bob Haus (C)
Concrete pylons, wrought iron
fence
6/13/2002 Continuation
of permits –
see note
Bay Films
Feb 2002 Colorado
Seven LLC sells to
500 Pounds of
Dog, Inc.
Boto Design (A) Reinstate expired 1998 permit
to complete work per B64908
and B64581—for a 2-story 50’ x
100’ and a 25’ x 42’ one-story
office production buildings
(plumbing/electrical included).
Change of use: auto repair to
office production 22
6/27/2002 E27611 Michael Bay N/A Temporary power pole
N/D N/A Water piping and gas piping
22 Additionally, the City of Santa Monica Architectural Review Board approved minor changes to the building
exterior and the addition of a fence along Colorado Boulevard on October 20, 1997. The prior property owner
began construction work on the building, with the majority of the improvements completed. However, a final
certificate of inspection was never obtained for the work and upon expiration of those permits, the City required
issuance of a new Administrative Approval and Building Permits. 22 Administrative approval to change the use from auto repair to film production and to add 730 square feet to the
second story of the larger of the two buildings was approved March 24, 2002.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1623 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 43 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: Santa Monica History Museum, Bill Beebe
Collection, photographer: Emerson Gaze. Catalog Number 3.2.4225.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 49
Building A with original storefront configuration along
Colorado Avenue, 1945
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 50
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined
in red, 1986
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1624 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 44 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 51
Site plan for property including Buildings A, B, and
parking lot as included on building permit, 1995
Building B
In 1941, four years after the construction of Building A, a building permit was issued for the
construction of a loading canopy at the western extent of the subject property at 621 Colorado
Avenue. All building available permits are presented in Table 2. The loading canopy was
constructed for use by the A. B. C. Distributing Company, and it likely served as a shelter when
loading trucks with product prior to regional distribution. The canopy was rectangular measuring
16’ x 38’ in plan, 16’ tall, and included a composition roof. Noted Santa Monica architect
Frederic C. Barienbrock, AIA, was listed as the architect for the canopy. Barienbrock had
achieved notoriety by the 1940s period and his knowledge of reinforced groutlock brick masonry,
which was used in Building A, is documented in a Los Angeles Times article from 1934. A
photograph taken in 1945 illustrates Building B’s configuration four years after construction, and
likely reflects its original configuration (Figure 52). The structure was oriented east toward the
central parking lot that was shared with Building A and included five bays for cars or trucks. It
appears that the south elevation, west wall, and the bulkhead at the north elevation were
comprised of brick. A metal chain-link fence once lined Colorado Avenue between Buildings A
and B.
In 1947, a building permit was issued to A. B. C. Distributing Company owner, Glen Moyer, to
enclose the canopy with five pairs of sliding doors, which were to be installed within the five
bays at the eastern elevation. This modification transformed the canopy into a storage building,
and also included the installation of a 3’ platform at the interior for a total valuation of $800. The
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1625 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 45 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
sketch accompanying the building permit illustrated the existing brick canopy walls, the new
sliding doors, and then new platform (Figure 53). A Sanborn map issued in 1950 indicates
several additional auxiliary storage buildings abutting Building B to the north and continuing
along the northern extent of the property line leading to Building A (previously referenced Figure
43). These structures were likely similarly canopies in-type, as indicated by the dashed line on the
Sanborn map, yet they were not comprised of brick, as Building B was, as indicated by the
structural symbols on the map. These auxiliary storage structures are also visible in a 1952 aerial
photograph (previously referenced Figure 44). Building B was sandblasted in 1955, according to
a building permit.
Several building permits were issued in 1958 which included: the enlargement of Building B to
be used to polish cars; a large sign for “Keystone Auto Body;” plumbing; and for cinder block
walls, which were either part of Building B or retaining walls at the site. A sketch accompanying
the permit to enlarge the Building illustrated a “proposed shelter” as a standalone structure
measuring 24’ x 30’ in plan, in the area that is presently used as the property’s driveway along 6th
Court (Figure 54). This canopy is no longer extant today. By the time of a 1964 aerial
photograph, some of the auxiliary storage along the northern property line had been demolished
(previously referenced Figure 45). A 1965 Sanborn map notes Building B’s use as an auto
painting building, with the newly erected canopy addition serving as a metal spray booth
(previously referenced Figure 46).
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the property’s ownership changed, and many building
permits were issued between 1994 and 1995 for neighboring Building A. Some of these permits
illustrate work done to Building B as well. A sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit
illustrates a new entrance to Building B located at the east elevation, and a new restroom in the
southern portion of the building (previously referenced Figure 51). Building B was transformed
from a paint shop into a storage building for office use. The adjacent spray booth was removed
during this time, and a concrete wall extension along 6th Court was illustrated on the site plan. In
1997, Building B’s exterior and interior were sandblasted. It is likely around this time that
Building B was encased in a smooth concrete stucco finish. Evidence of Building B’s original
brick walls remain today, visible at the interior of the building, at the location of the original
structure. The canopy addition has since been enclosed, unifying the disparate structures.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1626 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 46 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
TABLE 2
621 COLORADO AVENUE, BUILDING B
CITY OF SANTA MONICA BUILDING PERMITS23
Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
12/11/1941 B5928 A. B. C. Distributing
Co.
Frederic
Barienbrock (A)
$500
(Day Labor)
Original building permit for a one-
story structure 16’ wide by 38’ in
length and 16’ tall at the highest point
with a composition roof. Use of
building listed as a loading canopy.
3/5/1947 B1401 Glen Moyer Glen Moyer (c) $800 Storage – addition of a loading
platform and doors
10/1/1958 B24734 Keystone Body Shop Owner (C) $1,000 Permit for canopy enlargement –
open walls with metal roof – 24’ x 30’
x 11’ at highest point, use specified
for “polishing cars”
11/28/1958 E38869 Keystone Body Shop Plumbing
8/26/1997 97513-066 Bandit Films Desert Blasters Wet sandblast on two buildings –
interior and exterior brick
SOURCE: Santa Monica History Museum, Bill Beebe Collection, photographer: Emerson Gaze. Catalog
Number 3.2.4225.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 52
Building B when used as a loading canopy for truck
storage, 1945
23 Documentation exists for all permits and certificates of occupancy listed in this table.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1627 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 47 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 53
Sketch plan as included with building permit to modify
Building B with doors, 1947
SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 54
Sketch plan as included with building to construct
addition to Building B, 1958
Method of Construction: Reinforced Groutlock Brick System by
Simons Brick Company
Before brick kilns were established in California, the earliest sources of masonry were adobe,
riverbeds, stone quarries, and constructed with ships’ wood ballasts. 24 The earliest buildings
constructed entirely of brick in California were built in the 1830s and 1840s in the Monterey, San
24 Fred Turner, “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings,” Structural Engineers Association
of California, January 28, 2020, https://www.seaoc.org/news/486967/Revisiting-Earthquake-Lessons---
Unreinforced-Masonry-Buildings.htm
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1628 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 48 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Diego, and San Francisco regions.25 As early as 1854, Sacramento had 500 brick buildings. By
the 1880s, there were 50 large brick manufacturers in the state producing 120 million bricks
annually. By 1900, most small brick manufacturers were forced out of business by larger
manufacturers, most likely due to market dominance. Older bricks may have been inconsistently
fired by small manufacturers resulting in variable strengths and durability.26 This is one of the
reasons that buildings constructed of older brick failed in the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. As
brick manufacturing became more industrialized and consistent, the quality most likely improved.
Simons Brick Company was among the early group of large brick manufacturers in late
nineteenth-century Los Angeles and operated from approximately 1892 to 1952. The company
was first mentioned in Los Angeles newspapers in 1892 in a reference to brick work completed in
Pasadena.27 In 1895, the Simons Brick Company office was listed at South Fair Oaks Avenue,
South Pasadena, and by 1902 the company had an additional brickyard in Boyle Heights, Los
Angeles. A newspaper article published in 1903 explains that Simons Brick Company, “…has a
large force of men and teams at work skimming off the surface of the bluff, . . . the material thus
removed will be used for bricks.”28 In 1904, with the purchase of 30 acres of land in Santa
Monica, Simons Brick Company announced the upcoming establishment of a brick and tile
factory in East Santa Monica.29 In 1906, Simons Brick Company constructed their main brick
factory in Montebello as their other brick factory sites were smaller and becoming less productive
as the material to make the brick was slowly depleted.
In 1925, and at its peak of operation, Simons Brick Company was advertised as the largest brick
manufacturing plant in the world.30 The company associated itself with successful architects and
builders, listing completed projects in their advertising. The Edwards & Wildey Building at 6th
and Grand Avenue in Los Angles, which was designed by the prestigious firm of Walker and
Eisen was constructed with Simons Brick.
One year prior to the 1933 Long Beach earthquake, Simons Brick Company introduced an
innovative new product called groutlock brick. Used to build reinforced brick masonry walls, the
groutlock bricks were hollowed at the inner angles to allow space for reinforcing steel rods sealed
in grout. Reinforced brick is a term that is used to generally describe steel reinforced brick
masonry, while groutlock brick is a specific type of reinforced brick. The use of reinforced brick
masonry has been recorded internationally for over 175 years and has been adapted to a wide
variety of applications throughout its history.31 In the aftermath of the 1933 fatally destructive 6.3
magnitude earthquake, brick sales dropped temporarily as municipalities responded to the threat
25 Ibid. 26 Ibid. 27 "The Pasadena News: Proceedings of the Council in Regular Session," Los Angeles Evening Express, February 22,
1892. 28 Newspaper Entry, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1903. 29 “More New Industries,” Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1904. 30 Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1925. 31 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996
(https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-
masonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1629 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 49 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
of unreinforced masonry. Some cities, including Pasadena, banned the use of brick as a
construction material altogether in an effort to make their communities “earthquake proof.”32
Immediately after the Long Beach earthquake, Simons Brick Company actively marketed this
product. However, public perception of brick masonry was compromised by the mounds of
toppled brick following the seismic event. As a result, reinforced groutlock brick was marketed as
the successful solution to the failure of unreinforced brick masonry. Just nine days after the
quake, Simons Brick Company ran an advertisement in the Los Angeles Times with the headline
“Reinforced Groutlock Brick Masonry is Earthquake Proof!” (Figure 55).33 The advertisement
also included the following:
A careful survey and inspection has been made of all the Reinforced Groutlock
Masonry Walls and Chimneys completed to date and not a crack or any other
defect whatsoever has been found. The Flexible Rigidity feature of these walls,
designed by Mr. Paul E. Jeffers, Structural Engineer, to resist earthquakes is
effective. We will gladly supply anyone interested with a complete list and
location of all jobs completed before and under construction during the recent
earthquake. We particularly invite inspection by all architects, engineers,
building officials and owners. Every claim made for Reinforced Groutlock Brick
Masonry has been verified. Nothing tests earthquake resistant construction better
than a very severe earthquake.34
Following the destruction caused by the 1933 earthquake, the state legislature recognized the
need for state level regulation to ensure uniform building requirements. To that end, the State of
California passed new safety regulations including the Riley Act and the Field Act.35 Prior to
1933, only some larger cities had building departments. The 1933 Riley Act “required all local
governments to review design, issue building permits, and inspect construction for other
buildings.”36 In post-earthquake California, the Riley Act “effectively prohibited new bearing
wall unreinforced masonry construction.”37 In writing about the impact of the Long Beach
earthquake, John Parrish states, “In the affected area, “seventy schools were destroyed and 120
damaged, which represents about 75% of the schools in the area.”38 Further, due to this level of
destruction, the “Field Act took the extraordinary step of revoking local authority for public
schools of grades K-14 and assigning that new regulatory authority to the State Architect,” in an
effort to ensure that school buildings would be safe in future earthquake events.39
32 “News Behind the News,” The Pasadena Post, March 22, 1934. 33 Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1933. 34 Ibid. 35 Fred Turner, “Seventy Years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s Building Stock,” 13th World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada. August 1-6, 2004), Paper No. 313. 36 Ibid. 37 Fred Turner, “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings,” Structural Engineers Association
of California, January 28, 2020, https://www.seaoc.org/news/486967/Revisiting-Earthquake-Lessons---
Unreinforced-Masonry-Buildings.htm 38 John Parrish, “The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and The Field Act, Improving the Design and Building Standards
for California Schools,” https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/earthquakes/long-beach (accessed October 12, 2021. 39 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1630 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 50 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Three months after the 6.3 magnitude tremor, a 1933 Los Angeles Times article (Figure 56)
published an interview with owner Walter Simons about the company’s unique method of
reinforcing this type of masonry construction:
“The process,” Mr. Simons explained, “involves a combination of materials
consisting of steel bars spaced both vertically and horizontally two feet on
centers firmly imbedded in center diaphragm of rich concrete grout. The vertical
steel bars tie the roof to the foundation. The outside of the wall is laid up with
especially shaped bricks that lock with the concrete grout. All wall voids are
completely filled, making a solid homogeneity. The combination develops
enormous flexural or binding resistance. The concrete grout in the center space
between the outer courses of brick is waterproofed. This is opposite to the old
system of applying waterproof mixture to the exteriors.”40
Simons Brick Company excelled in advertising and its groutlock brick product and production
increased by 250% in 90 days, and soon, the company was producing 150,000 bricks a day
according to an article in the Los Angeles Times.41 In August of 1933, Walter Simons had a new
project for the V-O Food Mill in the East Side industrial area [of Los Angeles], and noted that
“several hundred thousand of this new brick will be used in the warehouse buildings.” 42 To
further entice architects and builders to use their product, in November of 1934 Simons Brick
Company sponsored an architectural contest in which the company selected a winning architect
and three honorable mentions who designed residences that could be constructed with reinforced
groutlock masonry. Simons donated the groutlock brick building material to the homeowner,
furthering its dominance in the southern California building industry.43
The physical legacy of Simons Brick Company is evident in the built environment of the greater
Los Angeles area, in California, and beyond. The Simons Brick Company boasted that it was one
of the largest brickyards in the world and shipped up to one million bricks each day before it
closed in 1952. Residents in Los Angeles, San Francisco and the greater southern California
region would continue to encounter this brick as it was widely used in commercial, industrial, and
residential building.44 Due to the Riley and Field Acts, by law virtually any brick masonry
building constructed in California between 1933 and 1952, was to be constructed with reinforced
brick – in many cases, most likely Simons groutlock brick due to its market dominance. The
Montebello site remained in business under owner Walter Simon’s direction until the company
closed in 1952.
40 “Unique Brick Stirs Interest: Inventor Explains New Masonry Style,” Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1933. 41 “East Side Adds New Plant,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1933. 42 Ibid. 43 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 44 Margarita López López, “Restoring History, Brick By Brick,” Latinx Talk, March 24, 2020
https://latinxtalk.org/2020/03/24/restoring-history-brick-by-brick/
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1631 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 51 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: Advertisement, The Los Angeles Times, March 9,
1933 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 55
Advertisement promoting the “earthquake proof”
reinforced groutlock brick masonry as used on a
residence
SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1933 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 56
Newspaper article discussing new groutlock method of
construction, 1933
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1632 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 52 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Frederic C. Barienbrock, Architect of Building B
Frederic Charles (C.) Barienbrock was born in Massachusetts on October 16, 1904, and by 1925
he was living in southern California. Barienbrock received his license in 1934, and the same year
won an honorable mention in an architectural design contest in which Simons Brick Company
was to donate their groutlock brick product for the construction of the exterior walls of the
winning design.45 At that time, Simons Brick Company was aggressively marketing their
groutlock brick in the aftermath of the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. Barienbrock began his own
practice in Santa Monica in 1936.46 The original 1937 building permit for Building A, 631
Colorado Avenue does not list an architect. However, the original 1941 building permit issued for
the construction of Building B includes Santa Monica architect Frederic Charles (C.) Barienbrock
as the architect. The original permit for Building B refers to the canopy as an unenclosed, one-
story brick building constructed for the purpose of the loading and unloading of warehouse
goods. The building permit did not d indicate groutlock brick. Barienbrock became an emeritus
member of the American Institute of Architects in 1946, practicing architecture in Santa Monica
as an independent architect and later as a partner in the firm Barienbrock and Murray for over 50
years. He is known for his civic and institutional projects for the Santa Monica Branch
Courthouse and County Building with Robert Kliegman (1951) and on the post-World War II
additions to Santa Monica High School (Science Building,1954-1956).47 In 1952, his work on a
contemporary modular single-family home was published in Arts & Architecture magazine.48
Barienbrock died in 1978 in Santa Monica.49
Ownership/Occupancy History
The occupancy and ownership history of the subject property illustrates the overall pattern of
economic development along Colorado Avenue from the pre-World War II to post-World War II
periods, to the mid- to late-twentieth century, and through the first two decades of the twenty-first
century. Both buildings on the subject property, Buildings A and B, appear to have been owned
and occupied by the same owners/tenants throughout their history. From post-Prohibition initial
construction as a wholesale liquor distribution office and warehouse, use of the property then
briefly supported post-war classified missile development and atomic research. With the post-war
resurgence of automobile production, the site reflected the dominance of American car culture in
its use as an auto body paint and repair shop along a busy thoroughfare. With the changing
economic focus and explosive growth of media and communications in the twenty-first century,
45 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 46 Nelson White Architectural History + Preservation, “Villa Ruchello: A History, 609 E. Channel Road, Santa
Monica, CA,” Prepared for The Agency, N.D., 7. 47 “Santa Monica Dedicates New County Building,” Los Angeles Times, July 28, 1951; and “$520,000 High School
Building Completed,” Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1956. 48 “A Modular House by Frederic Barienbrock, Architect and Eugene Memmler, Designer,” Arts & Architecture,
April 1952, Vol. 69, No. 4, 30-31 49 American Institute of Architects, Application for Membership, “Frederic Charles Barienbrock,” Application No.
4070, January 7, 1926. AIA Historical Directory website,
https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AHDAA/pages/35823390/ahd1002119.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1633 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 53 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
the property has been home to a series of highly successful film production companies. An
occupancy table with all known tenants and owners is provided in Table 3.
In 1937, during the first few years of the post-Prohibition era, Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue
was constructed specifically for use by the A. B. C. Distributing Company. The A. B. C.
Distributing Company purchased the property from Etta Moxely, an African American woman
who owned and occupied the property prior to the property sale.50 In 1941, 621 Colorado,
Building B was constructed for use as a loading canopy to load and unload inventory. The A. B.
C. Distributing Co. owned and occupied subject Buildings A and B between 1937 and 1954.
Building permit history, city directories, newspaper advertisements, and a subsequent newspaper
article confirm this occupancy.
In 1955, Aerophysics Development Corporation (Aerophysics) expanded its business to occupy
the subject property likely for use as offices.51 The company was founded in Santa Monica in
1951 and by 1956 was experiencing explosive growth. The company had rapidly increased its
staff in a few short years and needed additional space. This location was one of at least 4 other
locations in Santa Monica. Aerophysics researched missile design for the U.S. military and for
the Atomic Energy Commission. It appears that Aerophysics only occupied the parcel for one to
two years before the company relocated to Santa Barbara52
The next owner of the property was the Keystone Body Shop who remained at the site for almost
36 years, from 1958 until 1994. The building permit history documents this occupancy beginning
in 1958 with the addition of a large canopy erected for polishing cars underneath its shelter.
Building A was used as a body shop and Building B used as a paint shop.
In 1995, the city directory listed Hershey Associates as the owner and extensive tenant
improvements were completed in 1996. In 1997, Colorado-Seven, LLC/Steve Perry was the listed
owner and Prinzavalli Films was conducting business at the site. In 2000, Bandit Films appears in
the Haines & Company directory. The ownership remained consistent for the following five years
until the property was sold in 2002 and ownership was transferred from Colorado-Seven, LLC to
500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. From 2002 until the present day, the property has been owned by 500
Pounds of Dog, Inc., and the property has been occupied by film production companies: Bay
Films and Platinum Dunes.
TABLE 3
621 AND 631 COLORADO AVENUE OWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANCY
Year Source Owner/Occupant Notes
1937-
c. 1953
Original Building Permit; Los
Angeles Directory Co.; Building
Permits; San Bernardino County
Sun; Evening Vanguard (Venice)
A. B. C. Distributing Co.;
Glen Moyer [owner and
occupant]
Wholesale Liquor, and
Distributor for Aztec Brewing
Company (1937-1948); Altes
Brewing Company (1948-53)
50 For further information about Etta Moxely, see Nina Fresco’s 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation
Application report (2021). 51 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion
Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 52 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1634 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 54 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Year Source Owner/Occupant Notes
1955 Building Permits Aerophysics Development
Corporation
[owner/occupant or tenant
– unconfirmed]
1958-1994 Pacific Telephone; Pacific Bell; Building Permits; Santa Monica
Rapid Evaluation Safety
Assessment; Cole Information
Services
Keystone Body Shop Inc.; Jack Hammer
[owner and occupant]
Keystone Body Shop and Jack Hammer are both listed
on permits as business and
owner throughout occupancy
c. 1995-1996 Building Permits Hershey Associates
[owner and occupant]
Communications design firm
c. 1997-2000 Building Permits; Cole Information
Services; Haines & Company
Colorado-Seven, LLC;
Prinzavalli Films; Steve
Perry; Bandit Films
[owner and occupant]
c. 2002-Present Building Permits; Haines Co., Inc.;
Cole Information Systems
Michael Bay; Bay Films;
Platinum Dunes; 500
Pounds of Dog, Inc.
[owner and occupant]
Film production companies
occupied both Buildings A
and B
A. B. C. Distributing Company
The A. B. C. Distributing Company was a distributing warehouse/depot for the Aztec Brewing
Company (A. B. C. Brewing Company). The Aztec Brewing Company, or Cerveceria Azteca,
S.A., was a brewery founded in Mexicali, Mexico in 1921 by San Diego businessmen Edward P.
Baker and Herbert Jaffe, and brewing engineer William H. Strouse.53 The American businessmen
established the brewery in Mexico to avoid the constraints imposed by the 1919 federal passage
of the 18th Amendment, the National Prohibition Act, which did not allow for manufacture, sale
or transport of alcohol in the United States.54 Alcohol was still legal in Mexico during
Prohibition, and American crowds travelled to the border-adjacent cities of Mexicali and Tijuana.
In 1920, Tijuana’s population was just over 1,000 people and by 1930, the population had grown
to over 11,000 people.55 The growth in population paralleled the growth of the brewery business
as Aztec Brewing Company and Cerveceria Mexicali, another popular Mexican brewery,
competed and their businesses quadrupled during this period.56
In the Journal of San Diego History, Ernie Liwag asserts that “before Prohibition, San Diego had
approximately 112,000 people, seven breweries and fifty-five saloons.”57 Some of these San
Diegans would visit various parts of Mexico, including Baja, in order to drink alcohol openly. In
1928, the Agua Caliente Casino and Hotel opened in Tijuana, and with an associated horse racing
track opening soon after. Some of the beer for the Agua Caliente Casino and Hotel was supplied
53 Ryan Hand, “Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum website,
https://www.chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/. 54 Ernie Liwag and Matthew Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture,” The Journal of San Diego History 59, nos. 1
and 2 (Winter/Spring 2013): 11. http://sandiegohistory.org/journal/v59-1/v59-1.pdf. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid. 57 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1635 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 55 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
by the Aztec Brewing Company, known as Cerveceria Azteca, S.A. in Mexico, which won a gold
medal at the International Exposition in Seville, Spain in 1929.58
In 1933, with the repeal of the 18th amendment, Prohibition came to an end. The success of the
breweries established in Mexicali and Tijuana during the previous decade dropped dramatically
with the loss of their target market of American tourists, as alcohol was once again legal in the
United States.59 As a result, Aztec Brewing Company founders and entrepreneurs Baker and Jaffe
shifted their equipment and operations back into the United States to establish their company in
San Diego’s Barrio Logan neighborhood. Very quickly, the brewery became the largest of three
breweries in San Diego, brewing A. B. C.–branded beer (Figure 57).60 The company redeveloped
the former site of the Savage Tire Company, invested approximately $450.000 and renovated the
property into a state-of-the-art brewery that could brew up to 100,000 barrels a year initially.61
The company’s production was operating at a high capacity, and product distribution expanded to
Hawaii, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Oregon.62 The company’s sales went from 17th
place to 3rd place in sales west of the Rocky Mountains in only three months after re-opening.63
To handle the demand and distribution of A. B. C. beer, the company designated local distributors
in the west region as soon as the company was relocated in San Diego (Figure 58). A 1933
newspaper advertisement listed six A. B. C. Distributing Company locations serving different
cities in the greater Los Angeles region (Figure 59).64 During the same year, the company
advertised selected days as “A. B. C. Day” featuring A. B. C. beer, claiming “the full pint bottle
brings you value in tune with the New Deal,” reflecting President Roosevelt’s economic New
Deal for the country.65 In San Francisco, a newspaper article expressed how high the demand was
for beer in the early post-Prohibition days.66 Bars were so busy in the years following the repeal
of Prohibition that they were often packed with patrons trying to be served alcohol and
proprietors feared running out of beer. The high demand for beer in the post-Prohibition years
was evident in the number of A. B. C. Distributing Company franchises in Los Angeles, San
Francisco, and the entire west region.67 Building A was constructed in 1937 as a warehouse and
offices. Building B was constructed in 1941 for truck storage for the loading and unloading of
inventory.
In 1948, the Aztec Brewing Company was purchased by the Altes Brewing Company of Detroit.
Coincidentally, the Altes Beer was also referred to as “A. B. C. Beer.” Instead of continuing to
brew the Aztec Brewing Company’s recipe, Altes Brewing Company halted its production after a
58 Sheldon Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953,” West Coaster, September 13, 2018,
https://westcoastersd.com/2018/09/13/a-look-back-san-diego-beer-history-from-1868-to-1953/. 59 Liwag and Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.” 60 Ibid. 61 Sheldon Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953” in West Coaster, San Diego Beer &
Beverage News, September 13, 2018 (https://westcoastersd.com/2018/09/13/a-look-back-san-diego-beer-history-
from-1868-to-1953/, accessed 10/18/2021) 62 Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953.” 63 Ibid. 64 “A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933. 65 Ibid. 66 “Nation Consumes Floods of Beer on ‘Opening Day,” Daily News, April 8, 1933. 67 “A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1636 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 56 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
few years and replaced it with its own Altes Brewing Company beer, which was more in line with
east coast tradition.68 Historian Stanly Baron, in Brewed in America: The History of Beer and
Ale in the United States, explains that from the onset of World War II and through the initial
phase of the post-War period, national brewing companies “used their massive resources to buy
out local breweries across the nation. The national breweries’ dominance in packaged beer, the
increasing barrel taxes, grain rationing, the inability to adapt to stricter food and industrial laws,
and the growing desire for imported beer led to the closure of all the local San Diego brewers by
1953.” 69 Altes Brewing Company was later bought by the National Brewing Company of
Baltimore, Maryland and the San Diego brewery closed in 1953.70
SOURCE: The Journal of San Diego History 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 57
Aztec Brewing Company in San Diego, c. 1933 showing
the state-of-the-art production capability of the newly
renovated brewery in the early post-Prohibition period.
68 Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953.” 69 Ibid. 70 Liwag and Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.”
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1637 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 57 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
SOURCE: The Journal of San Diego History 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 58
Aztec Brewing Company, c. 1933, advertised its
Famous A. B. C. Beer as “Class in a Glass.”
SOURCE: The Los Angeles Times 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 59
Aztec Brewing Company, 1933, listing A. B. C.
Distributing Co. franchises in the Los Angeles area. The
Santa Monica location was not listed, as it was not yet
constructed by this time.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1638 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 58 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Glen Moyer, early owner
Glen A. Moyer operated at least one other A. B. C. Distributing business in Ocean Park, and there
were at least four other distributing locations in the Southern California area. Born in Iowa in
1891, Glenn was living in Wyoming by 1917 and was working as a farmer.71 By 1930, Glen and
his wife Gloria, also referred to as Zora, were living in San Diego where Glen worked as a
machinist at a steel mill.72 It is possible that Glen became familiar with the Aztec Brewing
Company, or the A. B. C. Distributing Company during his time in San Diego, where the
headquarters was located. Eight years later, the 1938 Santa Monica City Directory indicated that
Glen was a manager for A. B. C. Distributing Company and living in Santa Monica.73 Glen was
listed as the owner of the subject property on a 1947 building permit for Building B. By the 1940
U. S. Federal Census, Glen, erroneously listed as “John A Moyer,” was working a distributor for
a brewery.74 Two years later World War II draft registration cards indicate that Moyer was
drafted in 1942, and was self-employed.75 An announcement for his funeral service in 1951
indicated that he was a “founder of a wholesale beverage distributing company.”76
Aerophysics Development Corporation
Aerophysics Development Corporation (Aerophysics) was organized in 1951 by Dr. William
Bollay, a well-known scientist in the field of aeronautics and rocketry.77 The corporation focused
on research and development of highly classified missile research projects for branches of the
United States military, as well as the Atomic Energy Commission. Techniques that were
researched for military purposes would later be applied to industrial and commercial
applications.78
Founded in Santa Monica in 1951, the company experienced rapid expansion in its first five years
and, according to a 1956 article in the Jet Propulsion Archive, “increased its staff from zero to
over five hundred scientists, engineers, technicians, and supporting staff”.79 Building permits
show that Aerophysics occupied 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue between 1954 and 1956. There is
no indication of what specific activities were completed by Aerophysics at this address. During
this period of rapid Post-War expansion, Aerophysics occupied at least four different locations in
Santa Monica.80 The number of Aerophysics employees doubled each year following its
establishment, offering training programs and becoming a source of employment for engineers
and technicians in the area. The Jet Propulsion Archives article further explained, “Many of the
present staff members have been among the leaders in developing the revolutionary advances
71 “Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards,” 1917-1918. 72 “Glen Moyer,” U. S. Federal Census, 1930. 73 “Glenn A (Zora) mgr A B C Distributing Co.” Bay Cities Directory, Published by Los Angeles Directory Co.,
1938, p. 375. 74 “John A. Moyer,” U. S. Federal Census, 1940. 75 “Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942, ancestry.com. 76 “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951. 77 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion
Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 78 Ibid, 79 Ibid. 80 Newspapers.com research of ABC addresses, 1951-1956.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1639 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 59 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
made in the field of aeronautics during the past decade – in supersonic aerodynamics, in jet and
rocket propulsion, and in guided missiles.”81
The corporation became a subsidiary of Studebaker-Packard and in 1956 the Aerophysics
Development Corporation moved its headquarters to a new state-of-the-art plant in Santa Barbara
stating that “the most modern principles of building design are being incorporated in the
construction of Aerophysics Development Corporation headquarters plant to provide the ideal
atmosphere for research.”82
Keystone Body Shop
Keystone Auto Body Shop operated a full-service automobile repair facility including body and
fender repair as well as a paint shop at the subject property from 1958 to about 1994. Keystone
Body Shop, Inc., a California corporation, was incorporated on 6 August 1957, and dissolved on
October 27, 1997.83
Bay Films and Platinum Dunes
Michael Bay is an award-winning American film director and producer and owner of Bay Films,
a film production company that has produced a series of successful high-concept action films
including top-grossing Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and the Transformers film series, among
others.84 Bay formed the production company, Platinum Dunes, with Brad Fuller and Andrew
Form in 2001 to produce films in the horror genre such as The Purge, A Nightmare on Elm Street,
and A Quiet Place.85 According to building permits and city directory sources, Bay Films and
Platinum Dunes have occupied 631 Colorado Avenue since 2002.
81 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion
Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 82 Ibid. 83 Certificate of Dissolution, Corporation Number D-0342151, Keystone Body Shop, Inc., signed by directors H.
George Nojima and Joanne Nojima on October 10, 1997, and filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the
State of California on October 27, 1997.
Additionally, the business is noted in the popular culture of southern California as frequented by Jan Berry of Jan
and Dean musical fame, in the book The Jan and Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live
Performances and Chart Positions, which documents that Jan Berry had his 1958 Chevrolet Corvette repaired at
Keystone Body Shop at 631 Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica. See: Mark A. Moore, “The Jan & Dean Record: A
Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances and Chart Positions, ” Appendix D: Jan Berry, Keystone Auto
Body Shop, Inc. 2016. 84 IMDb, “Michael Bay: Biography,” IMDb website,
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm, accessed 10-13-21. 85 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1640 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 60 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Historic Contexts
Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977)86
Introduction
The Santa Monica area’s first commercial endeavors were based in agriculture. Ranches
specialized in sheep herding, cattle, or various crops, such as lima beans. However, when the first
tourists pitched house tents at Santa Monica’s beaches, commercial ventures such as a general
store and a large sleeping tent were launched, beginning Santa Monica’s long history as a resort
destination. Hotels, bathhouses, and saloons reflecting Santa Monica’s early history as a
recreational destination gave way over time to specialized stores and services as railway and
automobile access made year-round living more feasible. A growing economic base at Douglas
Aircraft created steady demand for commercial growth elsewhere in the city.
Economic engines in Santa Monica included ranching, agriculture, shipping, the entertainment
industry, and the aviation industry. However, the most significant factor in Santa Monica’s
economic development was arguably the city’s prime beachfront location, which has played a
significant role in its development and identity. As a result, Santa Monica has resources
associated specifically with beach tourism and recreation, including pleasure piers and grand
beach-front hotels, in addition to a thriving commercial center that grew exponentially in the
1920s.
The Great Depression and World War II slowed commercial development almost to a halt in
Santa Monica. Building activity declined dramatically beginning in the Great Depression, and
Santa Monica’s tourist attractions struggled. Tourists and locals frequented local beaches, taking
up free recreational activities such as surfing and beach volleyball. During World War II, the
military presence in Santa Monica and the large workforce at Douglas Aircraft Company boosted
business for local leisure activities such as pleasure piers, movie theaters, and restaurants.
After World War II, the population boom and rise in consumer culture spurred retail and
commercial development in Santa Monica. Santa Monica continued to expand its resort- and
tourist-oriented activities throughout the period and embraced its emerging role in the provision
of healthcare and financial services for Los Angeles’ west side.
Theme: Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-
1944)87
This theme addresses commercial development between 1920 and 1945. It explores the continued
growth of Santa Monica between the World Wars, when the downtown commercial core grew
86 Historic Resources Group, and Architectural Resources Group, “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources
Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community
Development Department, March 2018. 87 This theme primarily discusses commercial development in Santa Monica between the World Wars. The period of
significance extends to 1944 to capture the few commercial businesses established in the 1940s; these are largely a
reflection of prewar patterns and the ability of Santa Monica to maintain the tourism industry during the war, and
do not merit a separate “during the war” theme as is warranted in the industrial development section.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1641 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 61 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
beyond its previous boundaries. Santa Monica’s beachside location influenced its continued
commercial development, from the establishment of grand hotels to serve the growing tourism
industry to the construction of the city’s first high-rises and department stores. Commercial
endeavors included beach recreation, tourism, and the expansion of the downtown commercial
core and Ocean Park’s commercial area, serving both the growing permanent population and
seasonal tourists.
Santa Monica experienced continued growth and development following World War I. In the
1920s, Santa Monica’s population jumped from 15,000 to 37,000, the largest increase in the city’s
history.309 Commercial activity increased apace, and buildings were constructed to
accommodate Santa Monica’s new or expanding businesses and increased tourist activity.
Commercial trends that began in the early 20th century continued in the 1920s, with the
establishment of numerous prominent commercial buildings downtown, including the city’s first
skyscrapers, along with the continued development of resort- and tourist-related resources. The
downtown commercial core continued to expand along with the growing population. However,
the Great Depression and World War II slowed commercial development in Santa Monica.
Building activity declined, and new commercial construction was rare. Santa Monica’s tourist
attractions struggled throughout the Great Depression.
This section begins with a brief examination of the continued growth of the downtown
commercial core, followed by a discussion of tourism, recreation, and beach culture in Santa
Monica following World War I through the end of World War II, and the effects of the Great
Depression on Santa Monica. Santa Monica’s commercial development during this period
provided the foundation for postwar economic expansion and contributed to the continued
development of Santa Monica’s identity as a beach resort town.
Sub-Theme: Economic Development: Post Prohibition (1933-1940)
Between 1875 and 1930, Santa Monica’s driving commercial force was “not agriculture,
manufacturing, commerce, or the budding movie industry. Instead, due to its proximity to the
ocean Santa Monica flourished as a leisure destination. Activities such as sea bathing, airplane
flights, drinking, and car racing drew tourists from all over the country to Santa Monica.”88 Since
the late nineteenth century Santa Monica debated the moral dilemma of prohibition as “alcohol
took a firm hold in tourist centers” and “Hotels, restaurants, and entertainment options such as
billiard rooms plied their customers with alcohol. By 1895, Santa Monica had seven saloons, six
restaurants, and two beer gardens.”89 What some citizens viewed as an almost equally increasing
number of churches as saloons, the opposing groups battled. By the late 1880s, a Santa Monica
branch of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union was established with the support of a
wealthy Santa Monica landowner with a Puritan background, Frederick H. Rindge. In 1900, the
first prohibition law in Santa Monica was enacted and by 1902 its success was evident by the fact
that there were no saloons or beer gardens on Sanborn maps. Alcohol could still be sold, as
88 Architectural Resources Group, Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context
Statement, March 2018, 152. 89 Ibid, 163.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1642 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 62 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
restaurants and hotels retained the right to serve drinks with meals costing over 25 cents or, later,
even if it accompanied food.
In 1917, Santa Monica passed the full prohibition of alcohol sales two years before the Eighteenth
Amendment was ratified making the manufacture, transport, and sale of alcohol illegal. Santa
Monica moved its alcohol consumption behind closed doors in speakeasies all over town as well
as in private rooms in the finest hotels. During Prohibition in the 1920s, Santa Monica
experienced its largest population boom and commercial development expanded exponentially in
the downtown area concentrated on 2nd and 3rd Streets between Santa Monica Boulevard and
Colorado Avenue. There was an additional area of commercial activity on Main Street as early as
1918. Ocean Park developed its own commercial center as “shops, movie theaters, hotels lined
the Promenade and Pier Avenue and piers such as Fraser’s Million Dollar Pier were home to
shops, dance halls, saloons, restaurants, and movie theaters.”90 As the “small seaside resort town
was transformed into a metropolitan shopping district,” commercial buildings of two and three
stories rose along the downtown streets.91
At the end of the decade, the Great Depression slowed development: new commercial
construction was rare and tourist attractions struggled. Businesses went bankrupt across the city
and people could no longer afford the attractions of the amusement piers. “Building projects in
Santa Monica declined dramatically during the Depression. Where the city had projects valued at
$3 million begun in 1929, projects started in 1933 were valued at less than $500,000.”92
Since 1921, the Santa Monica pier at the foot of Colorado Avenue was a hub of development and
the city continued to invest in and promote its seaside location to spur its economy. Hotels
constructed during the 1920s and early 1930s included the Palisades Building at the Miramar
Hotel (1924), the Breakers (1926), Sovereign Hotel (1928), Georgian Hotel (1931), Lido Hotel
(1931), and the Shangri-La Hotel (1939). Many of these hotels established private beach clubs
during these years and while tourism slowed, it never disappeared.
During the early 1930s, the Santa Monica Yacht Harbor was constructed with funds from a bond
measure passed in 1931. In 1934, the Santa Monica City Council announced the completion of
the breakwater. The newly completed harbor “boasted 99 yacht moorings, among them Charlie
Chaplin’s yacht, Panacea.” [Context, p. 169.] The economy was revived, and new restaurants and
businesses thrived.
In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Cullen-Harrison Act, permitting the
manufacture and sale of low-alcohol beer and wines (up to 3.2 percent alcohol by volume). In
December of 1933, Prohibition was repealed at the federal level with the ratification of the
Twenty-first Amendment. Notably, the repeal still allowed for prohibition to be maintained at the
state and local levels.93 The economic profile of Santa Monica during the post-Prohibition era
90 Ibid, 163-164. 91 Ibid, 167. 92 Ibid, 171. 93 “Prohibition, United States History [1920-1933]: Repeal,” Encyclopedia Britannica website,
https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933/Repeal.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1643 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 63 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
was one of slowed, but continued growth that depended on tourism, the hotel industry, gambling,
and the flow of alcohol.
Tourism and alcohol consumption were mutually supportive endeavors in these post-Prohibition
years leading up to the outbreak of World War II. The Santa Monica Context states:
Gambling ships moored in the Santa Monica Bay drew gamblers by the score,
and the pastime, though illegal, quickly infiltrated even the most prestigious
Santa Monica businesses. The Casa del Mar beach club ran illegal slot machines
in the 1930s, and Santa Monica restaurants hosted illegal card games disguised as
charity fundraisers. Bookmakers (“bookies”) met bettors in hotel rooms, and
bingo parlors abounded in Ocean Park. An initiative was passed in 1933 banning
gambling on Ocean Park’s piers, and Santa Monica residents petitioned to
eradicate gambling from the city, only to be counteracted by a more popular
petition, signed by local gamblers, to keep gambling in the area.94
During this period, the Downtown commercial core expanded beyond its previous boundaries of
2nd and 3rd Streets and several businesses were established in Santa Monica during the
Depression. These included Merle Norman Cosmetics, which opened the first Merle Norman
Studio in Santa Monica in 1931. In 1936 the successful company added an energized Streamline
Moderne façade to a commercial building on Main Street and “brought hope to Depression-era
Santa Monica.”95 Reinvention was the key to survival and other Santa Monica businesses
adjusted to the environment. The Santa Monica Brick Company “turned to producing tile for
furniture decoration under the name Taylor Tilery. W.I. Simonson took over Santa Monica’s
Packard dealership” in 1937.96
With the outbreak of World War II, commercial development slowed again. However, because of
the military presence in Santa Monica, the leisure industry was able to adapt once again in the
early 1940s.97
Sub-Theme: Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s-
1960s)
The pattern of industrial development along Colorado Avenue was influenced by city founders
Baker and Jones in the very early days of city planning when they brought the Los Angeles and
Independence Railroad to the Long Wharf in Santa Monica Bay. The boundary on the southern
edge of the downtown neighborhood was natural and manmade as the natural arroyo dropped
down below grade, while the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad curved along Railroad
Avenue (now Colorado Avenue). The design that would influence this southern end of the
commercial-industrial side of town was laid out in the original Santa Monica city plan as the edge
of the city extended to the south only as far as the natural arroyo. The original organization of the
94 Ibid. 95 Ibid, 172. 96 Ibid, 173. 97 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1644 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 64 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
city design never really changed; industries changed, but the established early pattern of the city
did not.
While the original downtown commercial core centered on 2nd and 3rd Streets between Santa
Monica Boulevard to the north and Colorado Avenue to the south, the 1895 Sanborn map already
showed the presence of some industrial development along Colorado Avenue. Early Sanborn fire
insurance maps show that the southern-most lots along Railroad Avenue between 8th and 9th
Streets were developed with the Santa Monica Light and Power Company and the adjacent Santa
Monica Lumber Planing and Feed Mill. In subsequent years, Sanborn maps illustrate additional
early development along Colorado Avenue would include Standard Oil Company, Southern
California Edison, and smaller businesses through the 1940s.
Beginning in 1922, Donald Douglas established his own company, Douglas Aircraft, in Santa
Monica. In 1929, after notable successes, he moved its operation to the Santa Monica Airport and
reaped almost immediate rewards:
Douglas “won a competition for the design of the DC series of planes, which eventually
would carry over 95 percent of air traffic. The first DC-1 took off from the Santa Monica
Airport in 1933. The demand for commercial aircraft and the success of Douglas’ planes
resulted in dramatic growth of the company in the 1930s, and it became one of the largest
employers in Santa Monica.”98
In the 1930s, changes in the pattern of transportation would contribute to the development of the
southern edge of the city. The 2018 Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory
explains that in 1935, “Olympic Boulevard was extended towards the beach through the wide
arroyo next to the Pacific Electric tracks, which separated the original townsite from Ocean
Park.99 In 1936, the expansion of Route 66 further connected Los Angeles and Santa Monica and
access from the city to the beach was made easier with the construction of the Palisades Tunnel
(now McClure Tunnel) which was built as a Works Progress Administration (WPA) project.100
The Santa Monica Context states that “Santa Monica had been a distinctly non-industrial city
until the 1930s” – a city with residential development and commercial ventures, but no dedicated
industry.101 The first phase of industrial development in Santa Monica centered around aviation
in the pre-World War II years. This set the stage for the second phase of expanded industrial
growth in the immediate post-war period in the fields of aviation, aerospace, and electronics
beginning in 1946. Even later, major industries would include computers and laser technology.
With the outbreak of World War II, Douglas Aircraft expanded to become one of the largest
defense contractors of the period. The company occupied a 124-acre site at the Santa Monica
Airport and by the end of the war had developed forty distinct “units” that occupied the site with
functions ranging from manufacturing, tooling, metal working, assembly, research and
development, storage, shipping and receiving, auto repair, cafeteria, executive’s club, and
98 Ibid, 248. 99 “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” 2018, pages 246-247. 100 Ibid, 247. 101 Ibid, 246.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1645 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 65 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
engineering.”102 32,000 workers were employed at the Santa Monica plant during the early
1940s.103
“Douglas dominated the city’s economy for years, and its wartime expansion was responsible
for the transformation of the City of Santa Monica from beach resort to bustling industrial
center. Douglas brought a flood of residents, new businesses, social change, and a legacy of
aviation and aerospace that would have ripple effects on the community for decades to
come.”104
In the immediate post-war period, the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce wanted to diversify
the City’s industrial base. The areas of land along the east-west railroad tracks between Colorado
Avenue and Olympic Boulevard were vacant and available for growth and development.105 The
Santa Monica Historic Context Statement explains that “[h]istoric aerial photographs of the area,
combined with Sanborn maps from the 1940s, indicate that industrial development present north
and south of the railroad tracks grew significantly during the postwar period.”106 A resident of the
City of Santa Monica since 1944, John Drescher recalled that “the present industrial corridor
along the area generally bounded by Olympic and Colorado was a wasteland until after World
War II. There were brick pits everywhere.”107 In addition, light industrial businesses operated
alongside dwellings on Colorado and Broadway.108
The Santa Monica Context describes additional factors that promoted post-war industrial growth
in Santa Monica:
the proposed Santa Monica Freeway extension [1966] (contributing to new transportation
opportunities for goods), the continued presence of Douglas Aircraft Company and its related
industries, the development of the former municipal yards along Colorado Avenue north of
Lincoln Boulevard, and the rezoning of residential land for industrial use.109
In the post-World War II phase of development, a number of industrial businesses were
established along the east-west thoroughfare of Colorado Avenue. In 1949, Tavco Inc. “made
aircraft and missile parts as well as contributed to the atmospheric system on the Mercury
capsule.”110 Alpha Engineering Corporation formed an electronics division in 1955. Waldo D.
Waterman returned to 5th Street and Colorado Avenue to continue developing and producing his
Arrowbiles (a flying vehicle prototype). Other notable companies established in Santa Monica
during this period include RAND (1948), Lear Inc. (1949), Aerophysics Development
Corporation (1951), Paper Mate (1957), and the Korad Corporation (1962).111
102 Ibid, 251. 103 Ibid, 254. 104 Ibid, 250. 105 Ibid, 257- 258. 106 Ibid. 107 Ibid, 258. 108 Ibid. 109 Ibid. 110 Ibid, 263. 111 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1646 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 66 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
In 1954, John M. Stahl, who was a leader in the development of industrial areas in southern
California, acquired an irregularly shaped, thirty-five-acre tract of land near the railroad tracks,
bounded by Olympic Boulevard to the south, Colorado Avenue to the north, 26th Street and
Stewart Street to the east, and Cloverfield Boulevard to the west. This area would be developed as
the Stahl Commercial Manufacturing District and would include a division of the RAND
Corporation, Paper Mate, and the Burton Manufacturing Building.112 The City’s planned
diversification of the area’s industrial uses was successful and by 1950, Santa Monica was home
to 140 manufacturing plants of a variety of sizes. By 1962, 250 companies reflecting 60 different
industries were present in Santa Monica.113
Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950)
The advent of the 20th century saw a marked change in how commercial buildings were
constructed. In the 19th century, commercial structures typically went up in small groups with
related architectural elements employed across several buildings or were built as infill with
designs that drew on architectural elements from existing buildings to create visual cohesion.
However, the new century brought with it a heightened sense of individualism, and the owners of
commercial buildings now sought to have their buildings stand out from the surrounding built
environment. The goal of this change was to draw in customers through the architecture of the
building itself, and lead to several general design changes in commercial buildings (representative
example in Winters, California visible in Figure 60). Storefront configurations were changed to
maximize design space and interior light, and ornamentation and color were designed to attract
the eye. These overarching changes in the philosophy of commercial architecture encouraged
window shopping. The rise of plate glass, which allowed for larger, unobstructed display
windows, facilitated the changes in storefront design. American vernacular commercial buildings
took a variety of forms, including single-front, false-front, iron-front, and brick-front types. In
some cases, elements from high-style architecture such as the Romanesque, Italianate, or Modern
styles were incorporated into the design of the front façade. Brick-front was the most popular type
of Commercial Vernacular architecture. These were typically one to three stories tall and tended
to be narrow and deep, rarely more than four bays wide. Storage space or apartments usually
occupied the upper floor or floors. A transom light typically extended over the door and display
windows. This type usually employed one major cornice and other additional decorative elements
to break up the brick front.114
112 Ibid, 269-270. 113 Ibid, 259. 114 Herbert Gottfried and Jan Jennings, American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960 (New York: W.W.
Norton & Company, Inc., 2009), 233-264.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1647 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 67 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00 SOURCE: Gottfried and Jennings, American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 242 Figure 60
Corner brick commercial building in Winters, California, built
circa 1906
According to the Santa Monica Historic Context, “Commercial Vernacular describes simple
commercial structures with little decorative ornamentation, common in American cities and
towns of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They are typically brick in construction, with
minimal decorative detailing.”115 Character-defining features of the architectural style include a
simple rectangular form, flat roof with a flat or stepped parapet, brix cladding on the primary
façade, first story storefronts often with a continuous transom window above, double-hung sash
windows on the second floor if there are more than one floors, segmental arched windows and
door openings on the side and rear elevations, and minimal decorative details, including cornices,
friezes, quoins, or stringcourses. 116
Commercial Vernacular Buildings in Santa Monica
There are several other examples of the Commercial Vernacular building type in Santa Monica
which have previously been identified as potentially significant and significant resources by the
City of Santa Monica. Table 4, below, includes 47 extant Commercial Vernacular buildings in
Santa Monica that were constructed between 1911 and 1961.
115 “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” 2018, 333. 116 Ibid.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1648 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 68 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
TABLE 4
OTHER COMMERCIAL VERNACULAR BUILDINGS IDENTIFIED IN SANTA MONICA117
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1151 11th St. 1926 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of automobile-oriented development
that shaped Santa Monica's
commercial landscape prior to World
War II. Constructed as an auto sales
and service center in 1926, it is
associated with the proliferation of
auto-related services in the early
twentieth century as the automobile
became a dominant mode of
transportation. It is one of few extant
service centers from this formative
period of growth.
1304 12th St. 1910 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit.
Constructed in 1910, the building
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape in
the early decades of the twentieth
century. It is one of relatively few
remaining examples of a mixed-use
commercial building of this era. The
building does not retain sufficient
integrity to be eligible as a
Landmark, but it appears eligible as
a Structure of Merit
1150 18th St. 1930 6L Previously identified as eligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Structure
of Merit. The building was re-
evaluated as part of this 2017
Historic Resources Inventory Update
and does not appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for listing.
1452 2nd St. 1922 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Central Business District
Historic District. However, this area
is no longer eligible as a historic
district. While the property
contributed to the scale, continuity,
and character of the former historic
district, it does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
117 Ibid. 118 All photographs are form Google Street View
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1649 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 69 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1327 5th St. 1930 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit.
Constructed in 1930, the building
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica’s central business district
prior to World War II. The building
does not retain sufficient integrity to
be eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit.
510 Arizona
Ave.
1956 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Central Business Historic
District. However, this area is no
longer eligible as a historic district.
While the property contributed to the
scale, continuity, and character of
the former historic district, it does
not, on its own, appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for local,
state, or federal listing.
202 Bicknell
Ave.
1915 5S3 Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. The boundary for
this district has been revised and no
longer includes this property.
However, the property appears
individually eligible for listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit. It is
a rare remaining example of a 1910s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. The building
does not retain sufficient integrity to
be eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit.
127 Broadway
(Whitworth
Block)
1920 5S3 127-131 Broadway (Whitworth Block)
appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district in the early decades
of the twentieth century. Constructed in 1920, it is one of relatively few
extant commercial buildings from this
formative period of neighborhood
growth.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1650 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 70 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
201 Broadway
or Carmel Hotel
1923 5D3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district prior to World War
II. Constructed in 1928, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. As one of few intact hotels
from this period, it also represents
patterns of economic development
associated with Santa Monica's early
tourism-driven economy
719 Broadway* 1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.
Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth.
1925 Broadway -- 7R Identified by the Quinn Research
Center for its possible association
with the African American community
that historically resided in the Pico
neighborhood of Santa Monica.
Additional research and analysis
regarding this association are
needed to make a determination of
eligibility, so the evaluation could not be completed
2028 Broadway 1934 7R 2020-2028 Broadway was identified
by the Quinn Research Center for its
possible association with the African
American community that historically
resided in the Pico neighborhood of
Santa Monica. Additional research
and analysis regarding this
association are needed to make a
determination of eligibility, so the
evaluation could not be completed.
2015 Main St
(Santa Monica
Farms)
1923 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1651 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 71 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2403 Main St. 1921 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
2503 Main St. 1924 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
2821 Main St. 1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.
Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. The property is also
significant for its association with
artists Sam Francis and Richard
Diebenkorn. Francis and Diebenkorn
were renowned painters who made
invaluable contributions to the
abstract expressionist movement.
They shared a studio in the building
in 1966, before Francis moved his
studio to 345 W. Channel Road.
Diebenkorn remained at the property
until moving to a new studio in 1976.
During this time he began his
celebrated Ocean Park series, a
collection of painting inspired by the
neighborhood. The property is also a
contributor to the Main Street
Commercial Historic District.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1652 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 72 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2924 Main St. 1913 5B Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. It is an rare
remaining example of a 1910s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. Constructed in
1913, it is one of few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth. The
property is also a contributor to the
Main Street Commercial Historic
District.
3008 Main St. 1927 5B Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. It is a rare
remaining example of a 1920s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. Constructed in
1927, it is one of few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth. The
property is also a contributor to the
Main Street Commercial Historic
District
672 Marine St
or Marine
Market
1928 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of neighborhood commercial
development that shaped Santa Monica’s commercial landscape in
the early decades of the twentieth
century
1646 Ocean
Ave.
1924 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Structure of Merit.
Constructed in 1926, the property
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica's commercial landscape prior
to World War II. The building does
not retain sufficient integrity to be
eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1653 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 73 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1633 Ocean
Front Walk (Hot
Dog on a Stick)
1946 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the founding location of
Hot Dog on a Stick. Hot Dog on a
Stick, a fast-food enterprise that
specializes in the sale of corndogs
and other casual dining fare, has
been in continuous operation at this
location since 1946 and is an
established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape. It
has since grown into a national chain
with multiple locations and has
widespread brand recognition. In
addition to local listing, the property
appears eligible for listing in the
National Register and California
Register.
1700 Ocean
Park Blvd.
1945 6L Previously identified as eligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Structure
of Merit. The building was re-
evaluated as part of this 2017
Historic Resources Inventory Update
and does not appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for
individual listing. However, it is
located within the boundaries of the
Ocean Park Boulevard Commercial
Conservation District.
1722 Ocean
Park Blvd.
1941 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit.
Constructed in 1926, the property
represents broad patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II. The
building does not rise to the level of
significance needed to be eligible as
a Landmark, but it appears eligible
as a Structure of Merit.
1727 Ocean
Park Blvd.
(Douglas
Airview Co.
Magazine)
1946 7R 1727 Ocean Park Boulevard was
identified through research and
reconnaissance survey work as part
of the 2017 Historic Resources
Inventory Update. Research
suggested that there may be an
important association between this
building and the Douglas Aircraft
Company, which played a significant
role in Santa Monica's aerospace
economy. Specifically, the building
was identified as the publishing
house of a periodical issued by the
company. However, additional
research and analysis regarding this
association are needed to make a
determination of eligibility
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1654 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 74 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
3015 Ocean
Park Blvd
(International
Association of
Machinists and
Aerospace
Workers
Aeronautical
Lodge No.
1578)
1941 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing broad
patterns of institutional history in
Santa Monica. As early as 1952, the
property was used as a lodge for the
International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers,
a trade union that represented
Douglas Aircraft Corporation
employees during and after World
War II. Prior to its use as a lodge, the
property was also used as a medical
office for Douglas Aircraft workers.
The property's association with the
aviation company reflects the
widespread effect Douglas Aircraft
had on industrial, commercial, and
residential development during and
after the war. Additional research is
needed to determine the period of
significance for this association.
302 Pico Blvd. 1925 5S3 1920s vernacular commercial retail
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. The
property does not retain sufficient integrity to be eligible as a
Landmark, but it appears eligible as
a Structure of Merit.
3101 Pico Blvd.
(McCabe's
Guitar Shop)
1957 5S3 3101 Pico Boulevard (McCabe's
Guitar Shop) appears eligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Landmark.
The property is significant as the
long-term location of a local business
that is important to the commercial
identity of Santa Monica. McCabe's,
a musical instrument store and
concert venue, was established in
1958, and has been at its current
location since 1972. Today, it is an
established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape.
401 Santa
Monica Blvd.
(Security
Building)
1925 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit. The
property represents patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district prior to World War
II. Constructed in 1925, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. The building does not
retain sufficient integrity to be eligible
as a Landmark, but it appears
eligible as a Structure of Merit.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1655 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 75 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1521 Santa
Monica Blvd.
(Busy Bee
Hardware;
Haine &
Batterson
Grocery)
1921 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the long-term location
of a local business that is important
to the commercial identity of Santa
Monica. Busy Bee Hardware, a retail
store that specializes in the sale of
hardware, tools, and industrial
supplies, has been in continuous
operation at this location since 1947
and is an established element of
Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape. Constructed in 1921, the
building is also significant for
representing broad patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.
2301 Santa
Monica Blvd.
1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.
Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth.
2030 Wilshire
Blvd. (The Gas
Lite)
1961 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Landmark. The
property is significant as the long-
term location of a local business that
is important to the commercial
identity of Santa Monica. The Gas
Lite, a themed restaurant, opened in
the 1960s and has been in
continuous operation ever since. The
business is an established element
of Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape.
2313 Wilshire
Blvd.
1926 5S3 2313 Wilshire Boulevard appears
eligible for listing as a Santa Monica
Landmark. The property is significant
for conveying patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica's commercial landscape prior
to World War II. Constructed in 1926,
it is one of relatively few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1656 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 76 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2323 Wilshire
Blvd.
1944 5S3 Long-term location of a local
business that is important to the
commercial identity of Santa Monica.
Snug Harbor, a neighborhood café,
opened in 1941 and appears to have
been in continuous operation at this
location since 1944. The business is
an established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape.
2729 Wilshire
Blvd. (Tinder
Box)
1961 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the long-term location
of a local business that is important
to the commercial identity of Santa
Monica. The Tinder Box, a retail
store that specializes in the sale of
pipes and cigars, has been in
continuous operation at this location
since 1951 and is an established
element of Santa Monica’s
commercial landscape.
2633 Main St. 1934 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2716 Main St.* 1927 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2720 Main St. 1934 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1657 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 77 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2732 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2801 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2810 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2821 Main St. 1923 5B Main Street Commercial Historic
District
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1658 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 78 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2919 Main St. 1912 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2929 Main St. 1922 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2937 Main St. 1922 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2941 Main St. 1911 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2001-2011
Main St.
(Horizons West
Surf Shop)
-- Santa Monica City Landmark
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1659 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 79 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
174 Kinney St.
(Famous
Enterprise Fish
Company)
1926 Santa Monica City Landmark. It was
originally owned by the Pacific
Electric Railway who constructed a
reinforced brick garage, stores and
offices in 1926.119
Summary of Research on Reinforced Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
A targeted search of the industrial zones in the City of Santa Monica was completed in an effort
to identify any extant commercial vernacular or commercial-industrial buildings constructed with
groutlock brick. The industrial zones were identified using the 2012 Land Use Designation &
Current Zoning Districts map, and then a search was completed using Google Earth Pro in each
of the following areas:
Area 1: between Colorado Avenue, Olympic Avenue, and the Santa Monica Freeway north of
Lincoln Boulevard and south of Stewart Street to Bergamot Station
Area 2: between Ocean Park and McKinney on Neilson Way
Area 3: between Pico and Bay south of Lincoln Boulevard and north of 4th Street and
Lincoln Boulevard and Broadway
A second targeted search of industrial buildings within the time period of 1932-1952 was
completed in the Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory (SMHRI).
A total of 27 potential properties were identified in the targeted search (Table 5 in Appendix E).
This group of properties was then cross-referenced with a search of the Public Records at the City
of Santa Monica to obtain the building permits in order to find any documented record of the
specific use of groutlock brick.
Results: Of the 27 identified properties, the oldest comparable structure, located at 1631 10th
Street, dates to 1946 (Figure 61). 1631 10th Street is a 1-story commercial, light manufacturing
building. This building was constructed using the cement beam grid system as seen at Building A,
631 Colorado Avenue. None of the building permits documented the specific use of groutlock
brick. Instead, the reference is general and denotes “reinforced brick” or “reinforced masonry.”
These findings are in line with the overall historic pattern of brick masonry construction. A
Technical Notes article published by the Brick Industry Association, explains that reinforced
brick is a term that is used to generally describe steel reinforced brick masonry, while groutlock
brick is a specific type of reinforced brick. The use of reinforced brick masonry has been
recorded internationally for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications
119 Architectural Resources Group, 174 Kinney Street, Santa Monica, Landmark Assessment Report, March 31, 2015,
page 6.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1660 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 80 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
throughout its history.120 One other early reinforced brick commercial/industrial building in
Santa Monica that is similar to the subject property, with decorative pylons delineating three
structural bays on the primary façade and a warehouse space to the rear, is the designated City
Landmark at 174 Kinney Street, depicted at the bottom of Table 4. In addition, the utilitarian
industrial building at 2920 Nebraska Avenue appears to be another similar example that was
constructed in 1946 (Figure 62).
SOURCE: Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 61
1631 10th Street, a light manufacturing building
constructed in 1947
SOURCE: Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 62
2920 Nebraska Avenue, a utilitarian industrial
building constructed in 1946
120 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996
(https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-
masonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1661 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 81 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Evaluation of Significance
Person(s) of Historical Importance
The original building permit for Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue indicated A. B. C.
Distributing Co. as the original owner, while the original permit for Building B, 621
Colorado Avenue indicate that Glen Moyer was the original owner, and was constructed
to designs by architect Frederic C. Barienbrock.
Glen Moyer was listed as the owner of the subject property on a 1947 building permit.
While an announcement for his funeral service in 2951 indicated that he was a “founder
of a wholesale beverage distributing company,” there was no evidence identified to
suggest that Moyer’s involvement with the distribution industry influenced the economic
development of Santa Monica, nor that he was a person of historical importance.121
Frederic C. Barienbrock’s design for Building B, a loading canopy which was later
modified into a garage for truck storage, does not appear to be a significant project in the
larger body of his work. Building B was later modified to include doors in the 1950s, and
later, completely enclosed and reconfigured at the end of the 20th century. Barientbrock
was known for his residential architecture, and large-scale civic and education buildings,
however, Building B is not a significant work within architect Barienbrock’s portfolio in
Santa Monica.
Statement of other significance
Groutlock brick was a construction method that included reinforced metal rebar within
specially designed interlocking masonry bricks, which promised to be earthquake proof
due to increased strength provided by internal reinforcement. The groutlock brick method
of construction was developed prior to the 1933 earthquake, after which Building A was
constructed. As such, Building A was not a novel building for the incorporation of the
groutlock reinforced brick construction method.
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 the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architectural
style, although it is not a rare example. The Commercial Vernacular style is no longer
prevalent in the City, although several good examples remain. Based upon a review of the
City’s Historic Resources Inventory and a windshield survey of the main corridors of
Santa Monica, it appears that there are still several good examples of the Commercial
Vernacular architectural style within the City of Santa Monica, as shown by Table 4.
Most examples of this style in Santa Monica are in the main commercial district of the
city, of which the subject property is not a part. There is even a potential Main Street
Commercial District of which there are many better examples of the architectural style.
Further, in comparison, the subject property appears to be a modest and altered example
of the Commercial Vernacular style within the city in comparison with the many other
buildings of the style previously identified by the city, as seen in the Santa Monica
Historic resources Inventory and excerpted in Table 4. 174 Kinney St, commonly known
as the former Famous Enterprise Fish Company, is a designated City Landmark that was
121 “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1662 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 82 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
originally owned by the Pacific Electric Railway who constructed a reinforced brick
garage, stores and offices in 1926, which has a similar 3-bay storefront divided by four
vertical pylons.122
Does the structure contribute to a potential historic district?
The structures do not contribute to a potential historic district.
Landmark Criteria
9.56.100(a) (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political or architectural history of the City.
The subject property, a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular building, does not manifest the
cultural and economic history of Santa Monica in its historical type and architecture. The
subject property was not the first commercial or industrial building built along Colorado
Avenue within the Town of Santa Monica Tract, as the original downtown commercial
core was established in the late 1800s, with Colorado Avenue serving as the southern
boundary. By the 1895 Sanborn map, commercial/industrial development was well-
established along Colorado Avenue due to its close proximity to the railroad line. Most of
the commercial development in downtown Santa Monica occurred during the 1920s,
when the small seaside resort transformed into a metropolitan shopping district.
Development in the industrialized area where the subject property lies then included
large-scale lumber, oil and power companies, in addition to smaller commercial/industrial
businesses and aviation-related manufacturing which continued up through the 1940s. In
the post-war period, later development along Colorado Avenue included prominent
businesses associated with aerospace, aviation, and other industries such as Alpha
Engineering Corporation’s electronics division, and Tavco Inc. that contributed to the
atmospheric system on the Mercury capsule.
Building A was built in 1937, and Building B was built in 1941, after the commercial
construction boom of the 1920s, yet prior to the post-war period of commercial/industrial
development in the City. Its construction coincided with the Federal repeal of prohibition
in the United States and the burgeoning beer and alcohol sales that ensued throughout
Southern California and the nation. Its construction was not associated with the local
patterns of commercial or industrial development in Santa Monica. The subject property
has been used as a commercial alcohol beverage wholesale and distribution business, as
an defense research office for Aerophysics, as an automobile body shop by Keystone
Body Shop, and most recently as a film production office for Bay Films Platinum Dunes.
The subject property is a small, commercial improvement that is not representative of a
significant pattern of commercial or industrial development in the City. It does not
exemplify the cultural and economic history of the City of Santa Monica. Therefore, the
subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
While the subject property is tangentially associated with Santa Monica as a
leisure/recreation destination, since the subject property distributed alcoholic beverages
to local and regional restaurants and to individual buyers for consumption, those
businesses/enterprises did not exist or develop further because of the distribution of
alcoholic beverages from the subject property. Therefore, the subject property did not
have a significant influence on economic or recreational patterns of development in Santa
122 Architectural Resources Group, 174 Kinney Street, Santa Monica, Landmark Assessment Report, March 31, 2015,
page 6.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1663 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 83 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Monica. Furthermore, with regard to the aftermath of prohibition, the subject property
was developed in response to local, regional and national legal changes, and the subject
property did not bring these changes about. The headquarters of the company was in San
Diego and the subject property was one of several/many distributing warehouses in the
southern California/Los Angeles region and did not in and of itself have any individual
significance in the distribution and sale of alcoholic beverages. Therefore, the subject
property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
9.56.100(a) (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
Buildings A and B do not appear to meet this criterion. As examples of
Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture, the buildings are considered modest in
comparison to other buildings in the style. They have limited decorative features except
for the concrete scored pylons, parapet, and brickwork. Specifically, the property’s
spatial arrangements, massing, fenestration, materials, and overall form, while
functionally successful, do not reflect the deft aesthetic hand of a master designer.
Furthermore, the subject property has been substantially altered from its original
appearance. The subject property lacks sufficient aesthetic or architectural value and
historic integrity necessary for designation.
9.56.100(a) (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or
national history.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Etta Moxley was an early property
owner and occupied the property when there were previous buildings on the parcel,
which were demolished prior to the construction of the existing improvements. While it
was unusual for African American women to own property in the early 20th century, the
extant buildings are not associated with Moxley and the existing improvements do not
have any material association with her life. Current research does not indicate that this
resource is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or
national history in local, state, or national history.
9.56.100(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 property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. Both Buildings A and B are simple
examples of buildings designed in the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style. Building
B was originally constructed as a loading canopy which was later used as a garage for
truck storage, and was later infilled to its current appearance. The buildings incorporate
architectural features such as minimal decorative detailing, largely simple rectangular
forms, horizontal parapets and concrete pylons. Modifications to both of the buildings
have altered their original design, workmanship, and materials, as well as their function.
All of the original doors and windows have been removed, and contemporary metal
industrial type windows have either been installed, many in the original openings, and
one large new window in a former garage door opening on the west facade. Additionally,
brick infill of door openings has occurred, at an original garage door opening (now the
main entrance) at the two original door openings of the storefronts, and at a man door on
the west elevation of Building A; and the original open bays of Building B have been
entirely infilled. Furthermore, repairs were made to the brick parapet that are clearly
visible on the west facade. These areas of Building A were repaired/infilled with
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1664 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 84 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
salvaged brick to match, but exhibit differences in brick color, mortar application, and
brickwork with lower quality craftsmanship than that of the original construction.
Furthermore, the brick infill and repairs were also sandblasted, so they must have been
completed before the last sandblasting campaign in 1997. The building’s original brick
masonry has been painted at least once and sandblasted at least twice according to
building permits. This has destroyed all of the brick’s original hard-fired finish and
mortar pointing which has resulted in brick-and-mortar deterioration. At least one
pulverized brick was observed in the interior east corner office of the building. Later
modifications include a second-story addition at the northern extent of Building A that
has altered the scale and massing of Building A when viewed from the public right of
way along 7th Street, and a one-story concrete wing on the west elevation at the north
corner of Building A that has altered the original appearance of the west elevation of
Building A when viewed from the public right of way on Colorado Avenue or 6th Court.
Two of the four elevations of Building B have been altered from their original appearance
by an addition to the north end of the building, and by alteration and infill of the east
façade to adapt the building’s use for offices. Furthermore, the two buildings are not rare
examples of the commercial vernacular building type, as shown in Table 4 above. There
are many such examples in the City of Santa Monica that have more architectural merit
and retain higher integrity, such as 174 Kinney Street, a similar reinforced brick
warehouse built in 1926. There are two examples of utilitarian industrial buildings in the
Santa Monica inventory, 2920 and 2944 Nebraska Avenue; 2920 Nebraska Avenue
appears to be a similar example to the subject property that was constructed in 1946.
Therefore, the subject building does not appear to satisfy this criterion as a rare, extant
example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular historical property type.
Buildings A and B do not appear to be eligible as examples of a method of construction.
Building A was constructed with groutlock brick, as indicated on the original building
permit. It is possible that Building B, which was originally constructed as a canopy and
was later used as a garage for truck storage, was also constructed with groutlock brick
based upon physical observation of the brickwork by ESA, and documentary evidence as
the architect of record, Frederic C. Barienbrock was evidently familiar with the building
system as evidenced by his participation in a groutlock brick competition as included in a
1934 newspaper article. Groutlock brick was a construction method that included
reinforced metal rebar within specially designed interlocking masonry bricks, which
promised to be earthquake proof due to increased strength provided by internal
reinforcement.123 Simons Brick Company, the company that produced groutlock brick
operated from 1906 to about 1952. While Building A of the subject property was
documented on the original building permit as constructed of groutlock brick and
concrete framing, our research does not indicate groutlock brick became a highly utilized,
important construction material in Santa Monica as a result of its application at this
building. Further, the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally
for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its
history, and as such groutlock brick was just one reinforced brick masonry system of
many that have been implemented over time.124 The project was not published in any
architectural or engineering journals, nor was its construction method mentioned in any
123 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 124 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996
(https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-
masonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1665 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 85 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
local or regional newspapers.125 Although other examples of reinforced brick masonry
walls with concrete framing are found in Santa Monica, this was a ubiquitous
construction method in southern California and in the United States and the use of
reinforced brick and concrete framing at the subject property did not have a significant
influence on the local, regional or national building industry. Therefore, the subject
property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
9.56.100(a) (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable
builder, designer or architect.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Building A is not a significant or
representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect,
as there was no one listed for the design of the building on the original building permit.
Santa Monica architect Frederic C. Barienbrock was listed as the architect on the original
1941 building permit for Building B, which was originally permitted and constructed as a
canopy structure, which was later converted into a garage for truck storage. While
Barienbrock was an established architect by the 1940s, he was best known for his civic
and institutional work, some of which still remains today including the Modern style
Santa Monica County Courthouse, and the vernacular Modern apartment building at 827-
829 6th Street. As originally constructed, Building B included three brick exterior walls,
with a fourth elevation comprised of open bay for truck parking. The building has been
highly modified over time and is not a significant or representative example of the work
of Frederic C. Barienbrock. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this
criterion.
9.56.100(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.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. At the time of construction, the
subject property was built as a distribution center for alcoholic beverages, in the
industrial part of the City, among several large plants and other commercial businesses
and the building fell into a common pattern of early 20th century industrial development.
The brick structures are located on a corner of a commercial-industrial area, abut a busy
thoroughfare and are both largely obscured by bushes. It is a simple, utilitarian property
with few distinguishing features other than its concrete pylons. As such, the subject
property does not appear to have a unique location, singular physical characteristic, nor is
an established visual feature of a neighborhood or of the City.
125 A search of the Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals for articles or publications about groutlock brick and 631
Colorado Avenue yielded no results. A search for “reinforced brick” more generally yielded two articles: “Products
and Practice: R-B-M Reinforced Brick Masonry,” Architectural Forum, January 1939, 367–70 and “Reinforced
Brick Walls for Surface Shelters: Home Security Bulletin,” Builder, January 1941, 243–45. Several other articles
on the work of Modern architect Eladio Dieste in Uruguay also appeared in this search. None of these articles
appear to be directly relevant to groutlock brick or the property at 631 Colorado Avenue.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1666 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 86 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Structure of Merit
9.56.080 (a) The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory
The resource meets this criterion as it is identified in the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory.
9.56.080 (b) The Structure is a minimum of 50- years of age and meets one of the following
criteria.
The resource meets this criterion as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84
years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941, making it 80 years of age.
9.56.080 (b)(1) The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or
historic type.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. The structure is not a unique or rare
example of an architectural design, detail or historic type. The resource does not have any
distinctive design details and ornamental details are limited to concrete scoring at
Building A, and concrete stepped pyramidal capitals at both buildings. Furthermore, it is
a common form for Commercial/Industrial Vernacular buildings built in the early 20th
century, and is not a unique design or type, nor does it have any distinctive details. There
are also many examples of Commercial Vernacular buildings in Santa Monica that are
better-designed, as previously discussed above and included in Table 4 above.
9.56.080 (b)(2) The Structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.
The resource does not meet this criterion. As stated previously, the structure is not a rare
example of the building type, as discussed above and illustrated in Table 4 above. There
are many such examples in the City of Santa Monica, specifically in the Main Street
Commercial District as well as 174 Kinney Street (1926), and 2920 Nebraska Avenue
(1946).
9.56.080 (b)(3) The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion as it is not a contributor to a potential
historic district.
Historic Integrity
As Buildings A and B have consistently been owned by the same owners, and both buildings
have similarly undergone modifications at the same time. Alterations most notably occurred upon
ownership changes when the buildings were modified to suit new uses. As originally constructed,
Building A included two storefronts within three bays along Colorado Avenue, while Building B
included multiple open bays in order to serve as a truck garage.
The subject property retains integrity of location, as the buildings have not moved over time. The
historic setting has been altered as the original entrance to the subject property was formerly
along Colorado Avenue; and as the early auxiliary buildings that were once a part of the A. B. C.
Distributing Company have since been demolished; and as a new entrance was created in the
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1667 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 87 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
western portion of the site, that also includes a new metal automated gate, whereas the original
entrance to the subject property was off Colorado Avenue. An additional metal gate with new
concrete pylons and a lower concrete wall stretches across the south side of the property from
Building A to Building B, and mature plants cover the formerly exposed Colorado Avenue
elevations of both buildings. Further, the surrounding setting has been altered with the demolition
of smaller buildings, and the construction of large multi-family apartment buildings. The subject
property is presently bordered by mixed development: multi-family housing to the north and east,
and both large- and small-scale commercial developments and some multi-family housing to the
south, and west. A low-rise brick commercial building is located on the lot immediately to the
east of the subject property on the east corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street. To the west of
the subject property, across the alley, is a block of low-rise commercial buildings on Colorado
Avenue that extends to the corner of Colorado Avenue and 6th Street. As such, the subject
property lacks integrity of property setting.
The original design of both buildings has been substantially altered as all of the fenestration has
been either replaced or altered, the entrances have been reconfigured, and the exterior and interior
surfaces sandblasted twice. All that remains intact is the brick, parapet (repaired), and arched
wood truss roof. The original wood and glass storefronts on the south facade located along
Colorado Avenue have been removed and infilled with industrial type metal windows that
substantially detract from the original design intent of Building A, and a new recessed entrance in
a former garage opening was constructed toward the center of Building A’s west elevation. A
contemporary addition at the ground-floor and at the second floor has altered the foot print and
massing of Building A’s design.
Building B was originally designed as an open-bay garage structure, and underwent later changes
to include sliding doors, and later, to include an addition at the north end, expanding the
building’s footprint. The east façade was reconfigured to adapt the building for office use, and a
new entrance and windows were installed, and the entire building covered in smooth concrete
stucco to create a uniform modern industrial look.
As a result of substantial alterations, the subject property lacks integrity of design from its
original construction.
Furthermore, as originally constructed, Building A was built utilizing –the groutlock reinforced
brick system. It is also possible that groutlock brick was also used at Building B. However, heavy
sandblasting of the original bricks and mortar pointing (exterior and interior), infill former door
and garage openings, and parapet repairs, have substantially detracted from the integrity of
materials and workmanship of the subject property. Additionally, nearly the entire exterior of
Building B has been covered in smooth stucco leaving only a portion of the brick surface visible
at the south elevation. On the interior, the wood trusses and open-beam ceilings have also been
sandblasted and no longer have their original sawn wood finish. Therefore, the subject property
lacks integrity of materials and workmanship.
However, the subject property still retains its overall historic feeling and association with the
1930s commercial/industrial development along Colorado Avenue from the post-Depression, pre-
World War II years, although as noted, the property is not a unique example of such
development.
Overall, the subject property lacks historic integrity.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1668 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 88 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Further, there is no remaining historic significance for the former structures that were once
occupied and owned by previous owner, Etta Moxley, as all previous improvements associated
with her life and ownership of the subject property were demolished prior to the construction of
the existing improvements.
Conclusion
In summary, based on current research and the above assessment, the property located at 631
Colorado Avenue does not appear to meet any of the City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria
9.56.100(a)(1) through (a)(6) as discussed above. However, it does meet Structure of Merit
criterion 9.56.080(a) as it was previously identified in the City’s Historic Inventory. It also meets
the Structure of Merit 50-year age criterion 9.56.080(b) as Building A was constructed in 1937
making it 84 years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941 making it 80 years of age.
However, the subject property does not meet criteria 9.56.080 (b)(1) through (3) as discussed
above, and therefore is ineligible as a Structure of Merit.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1669 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 89 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
References
“A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933.
“A Modular House by Frederic Barienbrock, Architect and Eugene Memmier, Designer.” Arts &
Architecture, April 1952, Vol. 69, No. 4, 30-31.
“Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica,
Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956.
American Institute of Architects, Application for Membership, “Frederic Charles Barienbrock,”
Application No. 4070, 1926. [AIA Historical Directory:
https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/].
“Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934.
Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: A Pictorial History of Santa Monica,
Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga. Santa Monica,
California: Hennessey + Ingalls, 2001.
“Beach City Growing at Rapid Rate,” Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1923.
“Beautiful Bay District Grows,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1925.
Certificate of Dissolution, Corporation Number D-0342151, Keystone Body Shop, Inc., signed by
directors H. George Nojima and Joanne Nojima on October 10, 1997, and filed in the
Office of the Secretary of State of the State of California on October 27, 1997.
Charleston, James H. “Looff’s Hippodrome,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory
Nomination Form, November 1984.
“East Side Adds New Plant,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1933.
Encyclopedia Britannica. Online Version. https://www.britannica.com
“Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951.
“$520,000 High School Building Completed,” Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1956.
“Glen Alvin Moyer.” U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards.” 1917-1918, Ancestry.com.
“Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942, Ancestry.com.
“Glenn A (Zora) mgr A B C Distributing Co.” Bay Cities Directory, Published by Los Angeles
Directory Co. 1938.
“Glen Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census. 1930.
Gottfried, Herbert and Jan Jennings. American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960.
New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2009.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1670 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 90 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
Hand, Ryan. “Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum website,
https://www.chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/, n.d.
Historic Resources Group and Architectural Resources Group. “City of Santa Monica: Historic
Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement.” Prepared for City of Santa
Monica Planning & Community Development Department, 2018.
IMDb, “Michael Bay: Biography,” IMDb website,
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm, accessed 10-13-21.
“John A. Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census, 1940.
Kaplan, Sheldon. “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953,” West Coaster,
September 13, 2018.
Liwag, Ernie and Matthew Schiff. “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.” The Journal of San Diego
History, 59, nos. 1 and 2, Winter/Spring 2013.
López López, Margarita. “Restoring History, Brick By Brick,” Latinx Talk, 2020.
Moore, Mark A. The Jan & Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances
and Chart Positions, 2016.
“More New Industries,” Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1904.
“Nation Consumes Floods of Beer on ‘Opening Day,” Daily News, April 8, 1933.
Nelson White Architectural History + Preservation. “Villa Ruchello: A History, 609 E. Channel
Road, Santa Monica, CA.” Prepared for the Agency, n.d.
“News Behind the News,” The Pasadena Post, March 22, 1934.
Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1925.
Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1933.
Newspaper Entry, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1903.
Parrish, John, “The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and The Field Act, Improving the Design and
Building Standards for California Schools.” California Department of Conservation, n.d.
PCR Services and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation
Element, 2002.
Pitt, Leonard and Dale Pitt. Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County.
Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1997.
“Prohibition, United States History [1920-1933]: Repeal,” Encyclopedia Britannica website,
https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933/Repeal.
“Santa Monica Bay New Scene of Great Activity,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1911.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1671 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 91 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
“Santa Monica Dedicates New County Building,” Los Angeles Times, July 28, 1951.
Scott, Paul A. Santa Monica: A History on the Edge (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2004).
"The Pasadena News: Proceedings of the Council in Regular Session," Los Angeles Evening
Express, February 22, 1892.
Turner, Fred. “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings.” Structural
Engineers Association of California, 2020.
Turner, Fred. “Seventy Years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s Building Stock.” 13th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 2004.
“Unique Brick Stirs Interest: Inventor Explains New Masonry Style,” Los Angeles Times, June
18, 1933.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1672 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1673 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment A
Professional Qualifications
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1674 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1675 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Margarita Jerabek-Bray, Ph.D., has 32 years of professional practice in the
United States with an extensive background in historic preservation,
architectural history, and historical archaeology. She specializes in American
Architecture, Modern and Contemporary Architecture, Urban History and
Design, and Cultural Landscape, and is a regional expert on Southern California
architecture. Her qualifications and experience meet and exceed the Secretary
of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in History, Architectural
History, and Archaeology. Margarita assists clients with strategic advice and
historic preservation consultation services to support project success. Highly
experienced and solution oriented, she provides historic resources management
and preservation consultation services for all stages of project development,
from due diligence through planning and design, to preparation of required
documentation for environmental review and permitting. She provides expert
historic preservation services for environmental review and, when necessary,
implements mitigation requirements and preservation treatment measures.
Margarita is a highly experienced and respected authority in the evaluation,
management and treatment of historic properties, and is expert in the
preparation of legally defensible documentation for compliance with Sections
106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and local
ordinances and planning requirements. She has managed and conducted
hundreds of projects for public and private clients throughout California and the
United States, and as primary investigator she has authored numerous historic
resources technical reports, plan reviews, HABS/HAER/HALS reports, salvage
inventories, rehabilitation plans, relocation plans, construction monitoring
reports, interpretive programs, as well as curated exhibits, provided input for
interpretive websites and assisted in the development of content for
documentary films.
Margarita Directs ESA’s Southern California Historic Resources Practice, leading
a team of historians, architectural historians, and preservation specialists who
are a part of ESA’s more than 30-member Cultural Resources Group. She has
conducted a broad range of planning and technical studies for development
projects throughout Los Angeles County. Her relevant on-call contracts with
various municipalities and agencies throughout the Southland and her West
Hollywood experience, including historic resource assessments for commercial,
industrial, studio, and residential resources, is summarized below.
EDUCATION
Ph.D., Art History,
University of California,
Los Angeles
M.A., Architectural
History, School of
Architecture, University
of Virginia
Certificate of Historic
Preservation, School of
Architecture, University
of Virginia
B.A., Art History,
Oberlin College
32 YEARS
EXPERIENCE
AWARDS
2020 Gold Nugget Merit
Award, PCBC, Best
Rehabilitation Project
2018 Merit Award,
Environmental Analysis
Document, Association
of Environmental
Professionals
2016 Preservation
Design Award,
Interpretive Exhibit,
California Preservation
Foundation
2014 Preservation
Award, Los Angeles
Conservancy
2014 Westside Prize,
Westside Urban Forum
2014 Design Award:
Westside Urban Forum
2012 Preservation
Design Award,
California Preservation
Foundation
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1676 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Relevant Experience
Agency On-Call Preservation Contracts. Margarita currently manages ESA’s on‐
call preservation consulting contracts with the City of Santa Monica, City of
Hermosa Beach, and serves as principal investigator for historic resources for
our on-call contracts with the City of Los Angeles’s Department of Public Works
Bureau of Engineering, and Los Angeles Unified School District.
Policy Documents. Margarita has contributed her preservation planning
expertise to several projects including Lincoln Specific Plan (Whittier), and CPA-
7 (Culver Studios). Her knowledge of preservation policy and law is also
demonstrated in the Citywide Survey and General Plan Update completed by ESA
for the City of Hermosa Beach, and the Culver City General Plan Update.
City of Santa Monica On-Call Historic Preservation Services, Santa Monica, CA.
Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. Dr. Jerabek is the primary
point of contact and contract administrator for ESA’s on-call contract for
historic preservation services with the City of Santa Monica. Under her 12-year
tenure, ESA’s historic division has prepared hundreds of studies including
preliminary assessments, landmark assessments, structure of merit assessments,
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards plan reviews and preservation
recommendations, landscape assessments, character-defining features reports
and CEQA impacts analyses.
Historic Resources and Preservation Consultation Service for Santa Monica City
Hall, City of Santa Monica, CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural
Historian. Prepared a Section 106 Effects Evaluation report and provided
mitigation services pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement for Structural
Seismic Upgrades, ADA Improvements, Relocation of Wood Paneling, and
Adaptive Re-use of the Historic Jail under a grant from the Federal Emergency
Management Administration (FEMA). Dr. Jerabek was the primary point of
contact, provided project management and agency coordination, and served as
principal architectural historian for the project. ESA prepared a HABS report for
the historic jail located in the northeast wing of City Hall; conducted Plan
Reviews and provided preservation recommendations for the seismic upgrades;
reviewed proposed ADA improvements and provided recommendations to
avoid impacts; reviewed the wood paneling relocation plans and worked with
the City to select a qualified master craftsman and conducted construction
monitoring for the project; reviewed the jail rehabilitation project for
conversion of the two-story jail into an IT Center and offices and provided
design consultation for conformance with the Standards, including in-kind
replacement of the historic windows; curated, designed and oversaw
installation of an interpretive exhibit in the IT Center lobby. Follow-on services
for the City included Preservation Consultation and Monitoring for restoration of
the entrance to City Hall, and Paint Analysis and color recommendations for
repainting City Hall. Dr. Jerabek also conducted a Landscape Analysis and
provided Plan Reviews for the City’s Ken Genser Square and Tongva Park
projects that received a 2014 Design Award from the Westside Urban Forum.
City of Hermosa Beach On-Call Historic Preservation Services. Project Director.
ESA has performed a number of surveys, Certificate of Appropriateness, and
CEQA compliance reviews for historic structures while serving as a historic
preservation consultant for the City of Hermosa Beach. Projects include historic
resources surveys on three of the oldest commercial buildings in the downtown
area of Hermosa Beach for the City of Hermosa Beach: Bank of America Building
at 90 Pier Avenue, the Hermosa Hotel at 26 Pier Avenue, Art Deco-style
Community Center, and the Neoclassical Revival-style Bijou Theatre located at
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
California Preservation
Foundation
Santa Monica
Conservancy
Society of Architectural
Historians, Life Member
American Institute of
Architects (AIA),
National Allied Member
Neutra Institute, Fellow
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1677 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
1221-1227 Hermosa Avenue. ESA prepared a comprehensive assessment of
each building, and reviewed all plans for compliance under the local
preservation ordinance and CEQA, which stipulate the use of the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as mitigation. Upon implementation
of rehabilitation work on the Bijou, ESA also monitored all construction work
until final completion. ESA was later commissioned to undertake a Certificate of
Appropriateness and CEQA compliance review of interior tenant improvements
to the Bijou Theater for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards. ESA has carried out site reviews of the work to examine the scope
and nature of selective demolition and new construction, provided guidance on
technical preservation matters, and undertook a substantial completion review
of the works. Most recently, ESA provided project review for tenant
improvements, and conducting construction monitoring and oversight for
restoration of ornamental plasterwork in the Bijou Building. Additionally, ESA
provided paint analysis and restoration treatment recommendations for the Art
Deco-style Hermosa Beach Community Center.
Hermosa Beach General Plan Update and EIR, City of Hermosa Beach, CA. Project
Manager for Cultural Resources/Principal Architectural Historian. Managed
ESA’s Cultural Resources scope of work and collaborated with Raimi &
Associates and PMC to provide consulting services to the City of Hermosa Beach
for preparation of a Comprehensive Integrated General Plan and Coastal Land
Use Plan Update and EIR Focused on Sustainability and Low Carbon Future.
Directed city-wide reconnaissance survey to identify potentially eligible
historical resources. Developed historic contexts and themes for the City’s
historical resources. Reviewed and provided recommendations for revisions to
the preservation ordinance. Provided input for preparation of historic
preservation goals and policies for the General Plan update. Managed
preparation of the cultural resources technical report, and oversaw preparation
of the historic resources, archaeological and paleontological discussions and
analyses for the EIR.
City of Long Beach, Environmental Consultation and HABS Documentation.
Margarita has assisted the City of Long Beach by preparing documentation for
the City Hall and Library Complex HABS and associated landscape plaza; she
provided historic resources support for the City’s EIR, and prepared
documentation for the Atlantic Theater HABS and an Interpretive Exhibit for
installation in the new North Long Beach Public Library.
City of Whittier, Preservation Consultation Services for the Public Library
Rehabilitation Project. Margarita lead a Historical Resources Assessment and
Impacts Analysis and provided design consultation for rehabilitation of the
Modern-style Whittier Library. Constructed in 1958, the property is significant
for its association with Mid-Century Modernism, postwar period institutional
properties, and architect William Henry Harrison. ESA found that the library
possesses sufficient historical significance and architectural merit to convey its
significant as an individual resource under National Register Criteria A and C.
Margarita’s role on the project was to direct and manage the ESA project team,
coordinate with the architect and City, provide review and internal quality
assurance/quality control to the ESA team in the preparation of both the
Historic Resources Assessment to evaluate the significance and integrity of the
building, as well as for the plan review that was conducted to evaluate the
proposed project’s conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and hearing attendance. ESA is
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1678 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
currently completing a HABS report as baseline documentation for the
rehabilitation project.
City of Burbank, Historic Preservation Consultation Services. Margarita directed
preparation of ESA’s historic resources technical report and CEQA impacts
analysis, and prepared the historic section of the IS/MND for the Burbank
Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project, which evaluated the eligibility of the
Burbank Reservoir facility and analyzed the potential impacts of the Project for
compliance with the CEQA. Margarita directed preparation of ESA’s historic
resources technical report and historic resources EIR section for the Burbank
Bob Hope Airport Replacement Terminal Project EIR, which evaluated the
eligibility of the buildings and structures for eligibility as a potential historic
district and as individual resources, and analyzed the potential impacts of the
Project for compliance with the CEQA. While the Airport did not appear eligible
as a historic district, ESA evaluated 11 hangars and buildings over 45 years in
age as potential individual resources. The majority of the buildings and
structures were found ineligible, however, Hangars 1 and 2, which are the
earliest intact hangars, were recommended eligible for the National Register,
California Register, and for local listing. Under contract with the City of
Burbank, Margarita managed and conducted a historic resources impacts
analysis and plan review for Rehabilitation of the Casting Building as a Fitness
Center, by Marmol Radziner and Associates, AIA, located in the Disney Studio’s
Historic District. The Project repurposed and expanded the existing 4,000
square feet Casting Building on the Studio Lot by about 8,700 square feet for an
Employee Fitness Center adjacent to the historic Commissary. Margarita
provided design consultation for conformance with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards to rehabilitate the Casting Building as a fitness center. To
reduce potential impacts, Margarita prepared a HABS report to record the
Casting Building in professional large format HABS photographs and a narrative
history and description of the building.
SoCal Historic Resource Surveys. Margarita has managed and conducted several
large historic resources survey projects including three surveys for the
Adelante‐Eastside (Boyle Heights), Wilshire Center/Koreatown, and Normandie
5 redevelopment areas that were among the earliest to utilize SurveyLA tools
and methods and to employ the Multiple Property Documentation Approach,
working in close collaboration with the Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources.
These surveys have been incorporated into the Los Angeles Citywide Survey.
Other notable accomplishments include Hermosa Beach Citywide Survey, and
Santa Monica North of Wilshire Survey for which she served as Project Director.
Mills Act Applications and Architectural Conservation. Margarita has assisted
applicants in Los Angeles, Beverly Hills and West Hollywood with the
preparation of Mills Act Applications. Her expertise in the preservation of
Modern architecture is represented by the Landmark nomination and Mills Act
Application for Victor Gruen’s Rosenstiel Residence, 1210 Coldwater Canyon
Drive in Beverly Hills. Her forward-looking landmark nomination for a Mills Act
application for the Post-Modern Sun Tech Townhomes in Santa Monica,
illustrates her broad ranging knowledge in resources of the recent past. Her
conservation and interpretation skills are represented by the award-winning
Montebello Home Savings and Loan project that involved cleaning and
restoration of the historic bank building and art works designed by Millard
Sheets Studio, and design and installation of a 5-panel interpretive exhibit and
rediscovery of a lost tapestry originally designed for the building, for which she
received a California Preservation Design Award, 2016. Her in-depth and
award-winning preservation work includes the RMS Queen Mary Survey of Fine
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1679 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
and Decorative Art, the RMS Queen Mary Historic Structure Report, and the
Queen Mary Conservation Management Plan (California Preservation
Foundation Preservation Design Award, 2012).
Environmental Documentation and Compliance with CEQA. Margarita has
prepared a full range of CEQA documentation for historic preservation projects
throughout greater Los Angeles including Categorical Exemption Letters,
assessments and plan reviews for Certificates of Appropriateness, Initial
Studies/MNDs, Focused EIRs, and EIRs. A partial list of important
environmental documents for projects in Los Angeles involving substantial
historical analysis completed by Dr. Jerabek-Bray includes the LAX Specific Plan
Amendment Study EIR, Academy of Motion Pictures Project EIR, The New
Century Plan EIR for Westfield, Washington Square EIR, Sunset Doheny Mixed‐
Use EIR, One Santa Fe Mixed‐Use MND, Lindbrook & Gayley Mixed‐Use MND,
6230 Sunset Mixed-Use Project EIR, Hollywood Center EIR, Palladium EIR, Sunset
and Crescent Heights EIR, and Yucca and Argyle EIR. In Santa Monica she
contributed to the Fairmont Miramar Hotel & Bungalows Revitalization Plan EIR,
St. John’s Health Center Development Agreement Addendum EIR, Santa Monica
Pier Gangway Project and Phase 4 Structural Upgrade, and CEQA support for the
Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District-Wide Facilities Plan. In Pasadena
her experience includes the Glenarm Power Plant Repowering Project EIR. In
Long Beach she provided expertise and support for the Art Exchange
Redevelopment Project EIR support, and the Golden Shore Master Plan EIR.
Educational Facilities and University Campuses, CA. Principal
Investigator/Project Manager. Dr. Jerabek-Bray has conducted numerous
evaluations of school and university campuses throughout Southern California.
Under ESA’s on-call contract with the Los Angeles Unified School District, she
has managed and completed over 30 task orders involving historic resources,
including campus assessments, character-defining features analysis, and project
reviews for compliance with CEQA. For example, Margarita managed and
conducted preparation of a historic resources technical report for Jefferson
High School and provided preservation design consultation for this site-specific
school upgrade and modernization project under the District’s School Upgrade
Program (SUP). The proposed project included the rehabilitation of existing
character-defining buildings and landscapes, demolition and removal of non-
contributing buildings, and construction of new facilities. Rehabilitation work
included modernization and seismic upgrade to existing buildings. Because the
school site is considered a historical resource under CEQA, Margarita provided
design consultation for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards to reduce potential project impacts to less than significant. Once
project plans were developed, Margarita oversaw review of the proposed
project by ESA historic staff and completed impacts analysis findings regarding
potential project impacts to identified historical resources that would be
affected by the project. Margarita also provided project management, oversight
and contributed to the preparation of CEQA and NEPA procedural guidelines to
help the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to comply with the
historical resources requirements of CEQA and NEPA, and to implement
practical approaches to preserving culturally significant resources whenever
possible. The LAUSD’s Office of Environmental Health and Safety requested the
preparation of CEQA and NEPA guidelines, in addition to design guidelines and
treatment approaches, specifically in support of the School Upgrade Program,
and generally to guide ongoing repair and maintenance work on these sites. The
guidelines build upon the District’s ongoing efforts to identify historical
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1680 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
resources, including the recently updated Historic Context Statement, survey of
55 campuses, creation of an ArcGIS-compatible database with current and
previous survey results, and a Historic Resources Inventory. Dr. Jerabek-Bray
worked with LAUSD and facilities staff to determine the scope, class, and type of
projects that would impact historical resources and need to be addressed in the
procedural guidelines. As a final work product, Dr. Jerabek-Bray authored a
CEQA and NEPA procedural guidelines document that included the following
sections: introduction, regulatory setting, environmental setting, project
description, management and planning guidelines, procedural low charts for
CEQA and NEPA/Section 106, and standard mitigation measures.
Margarita served as the project manager and principal investigator for the
district-wide cultural resources survey for Long Beach Unified School District
(LBUSD) which included the evaluation of 70 potentially eligible District school
facilities for listing in the National Register and California Register, and included
preservation guidelines for the district-wide facilities modernization program.
She conducted CEQA Compliance reviews for select projects including
rehabilitation of Long Beach Polytechnic Auditorium and Woodrow Wilson
Auditorium. Margarita completed a district-wide historic resources survey for
the Santa Monica Unified School District, and provided preservation
consultation for modernization and additions to selected school sites.
As part of the larger USC Master Plan Project Margarita prepared a historic
resources analysis for the USC Student Union Project IS/MND evaluating the
Formalist Modern Norman Topping Center and impacts to the adjacent
Commons Building and surrounding historic district. She also prepared a HABS
report for the Schoenburg Institute at USC. Other HABS reports for educational
facilities include the Gymnasium at the University of La Verne, and the
Administration Building at Harvard-Westlake Academy.
Harkham Hillel Hebrew Academy Renovation and Expansion Project, Historic
Resources Assessment and Impacts Analysis, Beverly Hills, CA. Principal
Investigator/Project Manager. Margarita directed the historic significance analysis
of two school buildings—the original Oakhurst Building designed by master
architect Sydney Eisenshtat in 1963 in the Modern Style and the Doheny Building
constructed in 1989 and designed by Harshad Patel. She oversaw preparation of an
intensive-level Historic Resource Assessment Report for the two buildings in
accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s requirements for
preparing historic resource evaluation reports. ESA found that the Oakhurst
Building is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the
California Register of Historical Resources under criteria A/1 and C/3, but it did not
meet the requirements for local eligibility under the City of Beverly Hills criteria.
The client plans to rehabilitate the existing buildings, which would be updated for
current use and continue to function as school buildings. The proposed project
would add two additions to the rear of the property in order to accommodate
additional classroom and gymnasium space. Margarita oversaw preparation of a
character-defining features analysis and provided design consultation for
conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to reduce potential
project impacts to less than significant. She also conducted an impacts analysis of
the proposed project and prepared a preservation plan that was incorporated into
the project as a project design feature to ensure the project would meet the
Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The project has been reviewed and
approved by the City of Beverly Hills as an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1681 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Rehabilitation of the Dunbar Hotel, 4255 S. Central Avenue, Los Angeles, CA.
Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. As a Project Manager, Dr.
Jerabek-Bray directed a careful space-by-space inventory of character-defining
features (including all windows) associated with the Dunbar Hotel’s period of
significance (1928-1970). This included photo documentation of each feature
along with a written description, condition, and treatment options. ESA
recorded 425 character- defining features and spaces into an electronic
database. Dr. Jerabek was principal author for the rehabilitation report that
included a project description, methods, historical background and construction
history, accompanied by historic photographs, an architectural description of
existing conditions, a maintenance plan for high-integrity features, a restoration
plan for low-integrity features, and a replication plan. The written report also
provided a list of any issues and concerns that should be taken into account
during the building rehabilitation and for the long-term preservation of the
Dunbar Hotel. The hotel reopened in June 2013 as a senior living facility amidst
local fanfare, “An encore for the historic Dunbar Hotel,” Los Angeles Times, June
11, 2013. The project was the recipient of the 2014 Westside Prize from the
Westside Urban Forum and recipient of a 2014 Preservation Award from the
L.A. Conservancy.
Historical Resources and Preservation Consulting Services for The Culver Studios,
Culver City, CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. Since late
2014, Dr. Jerabek-Bray and ESA’ s Historic Resources Practice has provided a
suite of services including historical resources evaluation, environmental
review and documentation, and historic preservation consultation services for
the CPA-6 Specific Plan, and the CPA-7 Specific Plan known as “The Innovation
Plan,” a blueprint for the future of The Culver Studios. Dr. Jerabek is the point
of contact for historic services, attends client and city meetings, attends public
hearings, provides technical direction and advice, directs and conducts the
preparation of report deliverables, directs and conducts construction
monitoring, and acts as the City’s preservation officer for the Innovation Plan.
The Plan will transform the 14.3-acre Studio into a new media production hub,
keeping the Studio on the vanguard of changing production practices in the
entertainment industry. The Culver Studios is a motion picture studio in
downtown Culver City established in 1919 by Thomas Ince, and eventually
became the home of RCA, one of the “Big Eight” major motion picture companies
in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The Studio was the production site of
historically significant motion pictures like King Kong, Gone with the Wind, and
Citizen Kane. The Innovation Plan will restore and re-group historic structures
adjacent to the Mansion, build new support buildings near existing historic
sound-stages, and establish a creative campus in the core of the 14.3-acre studio
lot. The Studio’s 100-year history will be showcased, historic bungalows will be
preserved, and original landscaping in front of the Mansion will be
restored. The Innovation Plan balances the need to provide state-of-the-art
studio facilities, while retaining the Studio’s unique ambiance and prominent
place in the community. ESA surveyed and evaluated the Studio’s historical
resources, provided input to the development of The Plan to reduce impacts to
historical resources, completed HABS report for Bungalows S, T, U and V,
prepared a Relocation and Rehabilitation Plan for the bungalows, conducted
construction monitoring for relocation of the bungalows, conducted plan
reviews for tenant improvements to the Mansion and associated historic
buildings in the historic core, conducted a landscape analysis, and provided
documentation and input for the landscape restoration. ESA also prepared the
environmental documentation for The Innovation Plan EIR, and is
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1682 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
implementing the mitigation program for historical resources including HABS
documentation of Stages 2/3/4 and a salvage program, preparation of a
preservation plan for the Studio, and development of an interpretive program
for the Studio.
Historic Resources and Preservation Consultation Services for the
Redevelopment of the Fred C. Nelles State Reform School, Whittier, CA. Project
Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. The Fred C. Nelles Correctional
Facility is a listed California State Landmark, and is significant as the state’s first
reform school for boys. The 1920s-1930s Tudor Revival-style campus is
currently vacant and will soon be redeveloped as a multi-use residential and
commercial project, “The Groves”, entitled under the certified Lincoln Specific
Plan EIR. For over a decade, Dr. Jerabek-Bray has been providing Historic
Resources and Preservation Consultation services to the developer, Brookfield
Homes. Work began with preparation of a historic resources assessment report
to clarify the regulatory status and assessed the potential eligibility of a historic
district. No district was found to be present, but eight individual resources
were identified. Margarita conducted an opportunities and constraints analysis
and provided input to the developer on managing impacts to historic resources
and the feasibility of adaptive reuse of the individual buildings for the project.
She directed preparation of feasibility studies for the EIR, that were peer
reviewed by the City’s consultants. She provided peer review of the Lincoln Plan
EIR on behalf of the developer, and attended city meetings and hearings for the
EIR. Once the EIR was certified, she worked with the developer’s architect to
prepare rehabilitation plans for the individual resources to be retained and
adaptively reused. The rehabilitation plans were peer reviewed by the City and
the City’s preservation consultant. She directed ESA’s historic team in the
completion of a HABS/HALS for the campus, with photography by Positive
Image. She also worked with Eye-Glass Productions on a documentary film, and
oral histories. Dr. Jerabek-Bray assisted the client to implement a full suite of
mitigation measures including a heritage trail, a signage program, oral histories,
salvage program, and construction monitoring for rehabilitation historic
buildings. She recently completed consultation services and construction
monitoring for adaptive reuse of the school’s Commissary as a community
center (The Commons), which is the first historic building to be restored. The
Commons project received a Gold Nugget merit award (2020) for best
rehabilitation project from Pacific Coast Builders Conference (PCBC).
Home Savings and Loan Art and Architecture Conservation Services, Interpretive
Exhibit, Montebello, CA. Project Manager/Principal Investigator. Margarita
provided project management and oversight for the conservation work of the
art and architecture and an interpretive exhibit for the Montebello branch of
Home Savings and Loan Association. Constructed in 1973, the Montebello
branch was designed by Millard Sheets (1907–1989), an accomplished,
nationally prominent artist and designer, with integrated art works by the
Millard Sheets Design Company. The building and art works were preserved in
preparation for the building’s new use as a medical office by PIH Health. ESA
provided oversight for the conservation work undertaken by Preservation Arts.
Additionally, Margarita assisted with the development of a project schedule,
conducted conservation monitoring and documentation, and provided project
oversight during the implementation of the conservation project to ensure that
the cleaning and repair of the art works and exterior architectural materials
was conducted in accordance with accepted standards for art and architectural
conservation work, that the work completed is of acceptable quality, and that
the project stayed on schedule and within budget. After the conservation work
was completed, she oversaw the development of an interpretive exhibit to
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1683 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
beautify the interior and protect the building’s important art, architecture, and
history. The exhibit contains professionally mounted permanent narrative
panels and photographic enlargements with captions illustrating the key
information about the Montebello Branch and its historic use. One of the
highlights of the interpretive exhibit is a reproduction of the original tapestry
hung its original location for which ESA coordinated with the Mingei
International Museum. The project was the recipient of a prestigious 2016
Preservation Design Award from the California Preservation Foundation.
Rancho Los Amigos South Campus EIR, County of Los Angeles, Department of
Public Works, Downey. CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian.
The County of Los Angeles (County) proposes redevelopment of a portion of the
Rancho Los Amigos (RLA) South Campus which is located in the City of Downey.
The 74-acre RLA South Campus was the home of the “Los Angeles County Poor
Farm” that was established in 1880s to provide room and board to indigent
citizens in exchange for agricultural labor, then served as an infirmary and later
evolved into a hospital facility in 1932. The RLA South Campus functioned as a
major hospital complex from 1956 to the 1990s, when it was abandoned. The
RLA South Campus is currently unoccupied and has been designated as the RLA
Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places. The County is
proposing redevelopment of a 21-acre portion of the RLA South Campus with
County uses, including a Sheriff’s Station Crime Laboratory, Internal Services
Department Headquarters, and Probation Department Headquarters. The
project will include supporting parking and installation of utilities and other
features on a site that has been abandoned for nearly 30 years. Building
demolition and/or repurposing or relocation of existing buildings will be
required. ESA lead the CEQA process on behalf of the County, including
preparation of all technical studies in support of a full-scope EIR for the RLA
South Campus Project. This included a Historic District Evaluation,
archaeological surveys, traffic, water supply, arborist services, and all other
CEQA-required topics. ESA is also served in an Executive Consultant role to the
County, to advise on other potential future projects at the RLA Campus.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1684 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Alison Garcia Kellar
Senior Architectural Historian
Alison is a senior architectural historian with 9 years of professional and academic
experience with a background in historic preservation, design, and museum
collections. Her work with historic resources and cultural heritage in California
has included managing and authoring historic resource assessments, National
Register Nominations, historic structure reports, feasibility studies, Federal
Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, in addition to extensive archival
research and resource documentation. Alison applies her understanding of
preservation design and historic interiors to inform impacts analyses of proposed
development and recommendations for adaptive reuse.
Relevant Experience
Earl Carroll Theatre Historic Structure Report, Los Angeles, CA. Senior
Architectural Historian. Alison was the lead author of the Historic Structure Report
created for the rehabilitation of the historic Earl Carroll Theatre in Hollywood.
Constructed in 1938, the property is significant for its association with owner-
operator Earl Carroll, Hollywood nightlife, and architect Gordon B. Kaufmann. The
theatre is a listed LA Historic-Cultural Monument and has been identified as
eligible for the National Register. In recent years, the theatre has been rented by
television network studios as sound stages, and as a result some public areas
have been modified over time. Alison conducted supplemental in-depth research,
participated with the creation of a detailed interior and exterior character-
defining features analysis, and assisted with the analysis of the theatre’s current
condition. She developed recommendations in compliance with the SOI
standards that sensitively guide stakeholders with ongoing preservation efforts.
Celes King III Swimming Pool Historic American Building Survey, Los Angeles,
CA. Senior Architectural Historian, Deputy Project Manager. ESA was hired to
conduct HABS documentation for the City of Los Angeles Park and Recreation
Department. Constructed in the early 1960s, the Celes King III Swimming Pool was
designed by architect Albert Criz in the Mid-Century Modern-Expressionist style.
Alison conducted in-depth research related to the history of the surrounding
recreational complex, construction of the swimming pool, architect, and
neighboring communities.
Alpine Village Preservation Consulting Services, Unincorporated Los Angeles
County, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Alison was the lead author of the
preliminary historical significance evaluation determination for the Alpine Village
complex, a European-style shopping center located near Torrance, California.
Comprised of seven buildings constructed between 1969 and 1974, the complex is
an example of an increasingly rare type of roadside architecture, and retains high
historic integrity. Alison participated in conducting in-depth construction
chronology research, determining the complex’s period of significance, and
EDUCATION
MS, Historic
Preservation, University
of Pennsylvania
BA, Design, University of
California at Davis
9 YEARS EXPERIENCE
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
Latinos in Heritage
Conservation, Education
Committee Member
California Preservation
Foundation, Member
Society of Architectural
Historians, Southern
California Chapter
Member
National Trust for
Historic Preservation,
Member
AWARDS
Albert Binder Travel
Fellowship, 2012 and
2013
PennDesign
Departmental Grant,
2011-2013
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1685 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.
Page 2
identified both interior and exterior character-defining features for the property
to help guide ongoing planning efforts.
Whittier Public Library, Whittier CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Alison was
the lead author of the Historic Resources Assessment which determined that the
library is significant as an individual resource under National Register Criteria A
and C. Constructed in 1958, the property is significant for its association with Mid-
Century Modernism, postwar period institutional properties, and architect
William Henry Harrison. Alison assembled the construction history for the library
and the Whittier Civic Center. She created a detailed character-defining features
analysis identifying significant and contributing features at the property’s
interior, exterior, and site. Alison coordinated with the project architect to ensure
that the project met the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOI) in order to
meet community’s contemporary needs while respecting the building’s historic
character. Alison authored and oversaw the production of a HABS report to
document the library building prior to selective demolition and project
construction.
Benjamin Franklin Elementary School Historic Resource Evaluation and
Mitigated Negative Declaration, San Diego, CA. Senior Architectural Historian.
Alison conducted an HRA for the 1930s, 40s, and 50s-designed elementary school
campus. The property was found to be a historic district eligible for its association
with the post-war development of the Kensington neighborhood, and for its
association with two master San Diego architects. The proposed project was
reviewed for compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and a
CEQA analysis was performed, resulting in the Mitigation Measures and design
considerations for future construction within the district. Alison authored and
oversaw the production of a HABS report to document the campus and its
buildings prior to project construction.
1202 3rd Street Promenade Preservation Consulting, Santa Monica, CA. Senior
Architectural Historian. Constructed in 1949 as a JC Penny department store, the
commercial building was designed in the Late Moderne style. ESA previously
worked to produce a Landmark Assessment Report, and today, the property is
recognized as a City of Santa Monica Landmark. Alison conducted a SOI
Standards conformance review of a proposed tenant improvement project for a
Certificate of Appropriateness.
1221 Hermosa Avenue Preservation Consulting, Hermosa Beach, CA. Senior
Architectural Historian. ESA serves as a historic preservation consultant to the City
of Hermosa Beach, and has a longstanding relationship with the building at 1221
Hermosa Boulevard, known as the Bijou Building. The building is a former historic
theatre and bank designed in the NeoClassical Revival style, constructed in 1923.
Alison evaluated proposed tenant improvement modifications including the
removal of non-original features and the retention of original features related to
original theatre and bank uses. Alison has conducted design reviews which
included an understanding of all modifications to the space over time, character-
defining features analyses, and reviews of proposed plans against CEQA
thresholds and the SOI Standards for compliance. Alison is currently participating
with overseeing the construction monitoring efforts for the theatre space as part
of this ongoing project.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1686 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.
Page 3
Universal Hilton Historic Resources Technical Report and Environmental
Impacts Report for 555 W Universal Terrace Parkway, Los Angeles, CA. Senior
Architectural Historian. The Universal Hilton Hotel was designed by master
architect, William L. Pereira in 1983 in the Postmodern style. As one of Pereira’s
final commissions, the hotel building was originally part of a master plan and was
designed to accommodate visitors to the expanding Universal Theme Parks.
Alison conducted in-depth architect and postmodern style research, and
evaluated the property for historic significance as part of the Historic Resources
Technical Report.
Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Plan Program, Cultural Resource
Assessment, Seal Beach, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The Los Cerritos
Wetlands Restoration EIR project will reinstate historic wetlands to a previously
developed oil rig/production site that has been in operation since the early 20th
century. As part of the larger restoration plan program, ESA was hired to conduct
a cultural resources study to observe, document, and prepare preliminary
mitigation measures related to identified built environment resources. Alison
collaborated with the archeology team during a field visit to identify potential
sites for later investigative studies. She reviewed historic aerial photographs, and
conducted research to determine the companies and general ages of oil-industry
related infrastructure including oil rigs, operations sheds, and decommissioned
tank farms. Mitigation recommendations presented for the structures included
Historic Resource Assessment reports to be conducted in the future.
3325 Monterey Road CEQA Impacts Analysis and Design Review, San Marino,
California. Senior Architectural Historian. A two-story Art Deco style single-family
residence, constructed in 1927 in San Marino, California was determined to be a
historic resource. Proposed modifications to the residence included a two-story
rear addition and building rehabilitation. Alison assisted with preservation design
consultation and conducted a plan review for conformance with the SOI
Standards for the proposed project. She coordinated with the project architect to
better convey preservation components of the proposed work into the drawing
set for city review. The review required a character-defining features analysis to
determine the level of significance of the remaining features.
Golden Gate Village Historic Resource Evaluation, Marin City, CA. Architectural
Historian. The highly-intact Golden Gate Village low-income housing complex was
constructed in 1958 to house many of the former Marinship workers and their
families. Designed by prominent mid-century designers including Aaron G. Green,
John Carl Warnecke, and Lawrence Halprin, the property serves as an example of
a well-designed housing complex, significant as a product of post-war urban
development and for its prominent mid-century designers. Alison performed the
site visit and conducted research through local and private archival repositories,
plan analysis, and interviews, to produce the report narrative and historic
evaluation for the property. Today, the property is listed on the National Register
of Historic Places.
McDonnell Hall/Our Lady of Guadalupe Chapel Historic Structure Report, San
Jose, CA. Architectural Historian. Constructed as a parish church in 1914, the
building moved to its current location in 1953. Here, the building served as a
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1687 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.
Page 4
newly formed Catholic Mission, the Center of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The
property is associated with civil rights activist and labor rights leader Cesar
Chavez, and the mid-20th century Mexican American civil rights movement. Alison
assisted with the research, production, and design recommendations, including
bringing the building back to its appearance during its period of significance,
which required a meticulous analysis of the building’s historic integrity. The
property today is listed as a National Historic Landmark.
Historic YMCA Hotel Preservation Consulting in the Embarcadero, San
Francisco, CA. Senior Architectural Historian, Project Manager. Built in the early
20th century, the building was formerly a YMCA hotel used by young navy men and
is currently a hotel along the waterfront with an adjacent YMCA recreational
center. The hotel was proposing modifications which included rehabilitation work
and reconfiguring the interior lobby space. Alison researched and documented
the interior evolution by reviewing old plans, movies filmed on-location, post
cards, and existing fabric. She established the building’s construction chronology
with a focus on the building’s public spaces at the interior, overseeing the entire
production of the report and created recommendations to update the client’s
proposed plans which included acceptable sensitive modifications to historic
features and recommendations for potential future demolition.
Palo Alto History Museum Historic Preservation Consulting, Palo Alto, CA.
Architectural Historian. The Spanish Revival style Roth Building was the original
location of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation. The former medical building is
undergoing a conversion into a local history museum with gallery space,
interpretive areas, and archival and study rooms. Alison assisted with secondary
research efforts of both the medical foundation and the building, upon
modifications to the museum’s scope of work. She conducted a Part 2 Federal
historic rehabilitation tax credit application review which included
recommendation to best comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Historic Preservation.
Half Moon Bay Barn and Jail Museum Historic Resource Evaluation and
Preservation Consulting, Half Moon Bay, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The
City of Half Moon Bay was working with a local historical society to implement a
history museum at the site of its early 20th century jail and adjacent barn. Alison
conducted an in-depth historic resource assessment then reviewed proposed
plans for buildings and site modifications to accommodate gallery space, offices,
and archival storage. Coordinating with project architects, she assisted with the
creation of recommendations for project compliance with the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.
Toscano Hotel Preservation Consulting, Sonoma State Historic Park,
Sonoma, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The two-story wood framed Toscano
Hotel was constructed in the 1850s and is a contributing resource to the Sonoma
Plaza National Historic Landmark District and the Sonoma Plaza National
Register Historic District. Alison conducted a Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
reviews of proposed changes to the interior of the building. Proposed changes
included the conversion of a portion of the building from a hotel saloon museum
display area into a retail concession area for the California State Parks. Project
recommendations included sensitive design solutions to maintain original
features.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1688 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Robin Rundle
Architectural Historian
Robin brings a unique set of skills and expertise to the southern California cultural
resources group. With extensive experience in arts and architecture, she
conducted primary archival research in Florence, Italy and was an archivist at the
Getty Research Institute. Focusing on multimedia production, oral history, and
arts education, Robin has created and managed projects for corporate,
commercial, and non-profit clients. Ranging from documentary to kiosk-based
interactive programs, audio tours and oral histories, she has completed
productions for clients including SoCalGas and Southern California Edison, the
Beall Center for Art + Technology, the Bowers Museum, the Orange County
Museum of Art, and the University of California. In addition, she has completed
various historic preservation projects in southern California, specifically Phase I of
the video documentation of the 76-acre Rocketdyne Factory in Canoga Park for
ESA, Robinson’s Beverly Hills, and the Annenberg Beach House in Santa Monica.
Robin has considerable experience interviewing artists, architects, and subject
matter experts. Additionally, she served as an interviewer for the USC Shoah
Foundation -- The Institute for Visual History and Education. Robin is committed
to promoting deep understanding through interpretive content.
Relevant Experience
Kun House II, Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Nomination (LAHCM),
Los Angeles, CA.
Architectural Historian. Robin co-authored the Los Angeles Historic Cultural
Monument Landmark nomination for Kun House II, designed by master architect
Richard Neutra. The nomination involved archival research and physical
inspection of the property as well as an analysis of the home’s significance as an
example of Neutra’s small-scale residential designs.
Lockwood Avenue Elementary School Character Defining Features Matrix ,
Los Angeles, CA.
Architectural Historian. Robin identified character-defining features of the 1936 Art
Deco / Streamline Moderne Lockwood Avenue Elementary School and provided
preservation recommendations and treatments for the Los Angeles Unified
School District (LAUSD).
Main and Naud, Historic Resources Assessment, Los Angeles, CA.
Architectural Historian. An assessment of three mid-century industrial buildings
on the site of the former Carnation Company Ice Cream and Milk Plant in the
Central City North Community Plan Area (CPA). Robin conducted extensive
research on this multi-building complex for milk and ice cream production,
storage, and distribution against four historic contexts of evaluation eligibility.
EDUCATION
MA, Art History, Syracuse
University, Florence, Italy
BA, History/Art History,
University of California,
Irvine
AWARDS
The Florence Fellowship,
Graduate Studies in
Italian Renaissance Art,
Syracuse University
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1689 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment B
Building Permits
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1690 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1691 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1692 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1693 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1694 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1695 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1696 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1697 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1698 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1699 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1700 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1701 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1702 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1703 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1704 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1705 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1706 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1707 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1708 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1709 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1710 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1711 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1712 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1713 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1714 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1715 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1716 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1717 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1718 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1719 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1720 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1721 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1722 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1723 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1724 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1725 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1726 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1727 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1728 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1729 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1730 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1731 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1732 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1733 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1734 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1735 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1736 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1737 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1738 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1739 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1740 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1741 Attachment: Property
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1742 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 :
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1743 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 :
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1744 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1745 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1746 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1747 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1748 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1749 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1750 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1751 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1752 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1753 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1754 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1755 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1756 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1757 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1758 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1759 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1760 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1761 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1762 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1763 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1764 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1765 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1766 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1767 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1768 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1769 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1770 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1771 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1772 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1773 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1774 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1775 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1776 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1777 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1778 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1779 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1780 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1781 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1782 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1783 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment C
Sanborn Maps
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1784 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1785 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90401
August 09, 2021
6610038.3
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1786 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Certified Sanborn Results:
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
page-
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris &
Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track
historical property usage in approximately 12,000
American cities and towns. Collections searched:
Library of Congress
University Publications of America
EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™
Limited Permission To Make Copies
Sanborn® Library search results
Contact:EDR Inquiry #
Site Name: Client Name:
Certification #
PO #
Project
1986
1965
1950
1918
1909
1902
1895
1891
08/09/21
631 Colorado Ave
631 Colorado ESA
626 Wilshire Blvd
Santa Monica, CA 90401
6610038.3
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Rrundle@esassoc.com
The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by ESA were identified for the
years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from
Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant
rights for commercial reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Results can be
authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn.
The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the collection as of the
day this report was generated.
AA11-4A72-B169
NA
Maps Provided:
NA
Certification #: AA11-4A72-B169
ESA (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the
limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be
permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's
copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot
be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY
EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE
OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,
WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any
analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to
provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.
Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2021 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of
Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
6610038 3 2
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1787 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
page-
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn
Fire Insurance map sheets.
1986 Source Sheets
1986
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
1986
Volume 1N, Sheet 50
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 60
1965 Source Sheets
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 60
1965
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
1950 Source Sheets
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 16
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 38
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 39
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 42
6610038 3 3
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1788 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
page-
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn
Fire Insurance map sheets.
1950 Source Sheets
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 50
1918 Source Sheets
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 16
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 38
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 39
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 42
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 50
1909 Source Sheets
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 8
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 12
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 13
6610038 3 4
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1789 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
page-
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn
Fire Insurance map sheets.
1902 Source Sheets
1902
Volume 1, Sheet 5
1902
Volume 1, Sheet 9
1895 Source Sheets
1895
Volume 1, Sheet 7
1895
Volume 1, Sheet 8
1891 Source Sheets
1891
Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 5
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1790 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1986
1986
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1S, Sheet 60
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
Volume 1N, Sheet 50
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
6610038 3 6
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1791 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name:
Address:
City, ST, ZIP:
Client:AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1965
1965
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90401
ESA
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Copyright
6610038 3 7
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1792 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name:
Address:
City, ST, ZIP:
Client:AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1965
1965
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90401
ESA
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Copyright
6610038 3 8
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1793 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name:
Address:
City, ST, ZIP:
Client:AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1965
1965
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90401
ESA
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Copyright
6610038 3 9
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1794 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name:
Address:
City, ST, ZIP:
Client:AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1965
1965
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
Santa Monica, CA 90401
ESA
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Copyright
6610038 3 10
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1795 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1950
1950
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 50
Volume 1, Sheet 42
Volume 1, Sheet 39
Volume 1, Sheet 38
Volume 1, Sheet 16
6610038 3 11
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1796 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1918
1918
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 50
Volume 1, Sheet 42
Volume 1, Sheet 39
Volume 1, Sheet 38
Volume 1, Sheet 16
6610038 3 12
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1797 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1909
1909
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 13
Volume 1, Sheet 12
Volume 1, Sheet 8
6610038 3 13
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1798 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1902
1902
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 9
Volume 1, Sheet 5
6610038 3 14
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1799 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1895
1895
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 8
Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 15
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1800 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.
Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection.0 Feet 150 300 600
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169AA11-4A72-B169
1891
1891
Order Date:08/09/2021
Certification #
Site Name:
Address:
631 Colorado
631 Colorado Ave
City, ST, ZIP:Santa Monica, CA 90401
EDR Inquiry:6610038.3
Client:ESA
Copyright
Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 16
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1801 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment D
Table 5. Summary of Research
on Reinforced Brick Buildings in
Santa Monica
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1802 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1803 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-1 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH ON REINFORCED BRICK BUILDINGS IN SANTA MONICA
Address Year Built Notes
Area 1
1001 Colorado 1960 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
1546 14th Street 1957 Single-story brick building,
auto body shop
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1415 Colorado 1955 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1804 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-2 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1519 Colorado 1956 Single story-brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
wood frame and stucco
(this note signifies the brick
is a veneer)
1601 Colorado 1955
Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
wood frame and stucco
(this note signifies the brick
is a veneer)
1631 Colorado 1958 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1805 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-3 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
2235 Colorado 1970 No permit records
2800 Colorado 1984 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Image Unavailable
1630 Colorado 1959 Single-story brick building, commercial industrial
1740 Stewart 1967 Single-story brick building,
commercial industrial
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1806 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-4 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1220 Olympic 1968 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1201 Olympic 1949 Single-story brick building,
commercial-industrial
1660 Euclid 1966 Single-story brick building,
renovated commercial
Building Permit Notes:
brick
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1807 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-5 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1630 Euclid 1955 Single-story brick building,
renovated commercial-
industrial
Building Permit Notes:
masonry
1716 12th Street 1972 Single-story brick building,
commercial-industrial
Building Permit Notes:
concrete block
1635 12th Street 1979 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1808 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-6 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1101 Olympic 1955 Single story brick building,
commercial-industrial
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
1639 11th Street 1961 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
1631 10th Street 1946 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
masonry and concrete
(concrete beam grid
system)
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1809 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-7 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
929 Olympic 1957 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
concrete
1661 9th Street 1957 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1668 9th Street 1955 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1810 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-8 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
1660 Lincoln 1953 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Area 2
2910 Main
Street
1913 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
1940 alteration, 1945
alteration at interior and to
front brick, 1945 permit
granted to A. B. C.
2802 Main
Street
1946 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1811 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica
631 Colorado Avenue E-9 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021
2926 Main
Street
1948 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
cement block
177 Pier
Avenue
1909 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
Area 3
2012 Lincoln 1967 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1812 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Attachment E
DPR Forms
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1813 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Page 1 of 24 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
P1. Other Identifier: ____
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County Los Angeles and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T ; R ; ☐ of ☐ of Sec ; B.M.
Address 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue City Santa Monica Zip 90401
UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11S , 362445.82 mE/ 3764920.97 mN
e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate)
APN: 4291-023-009
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property is located on a rectilinear lot on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the
Downtown area of Santa Monica. The property contains two brick, single-story, Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style
buildings: Building A constructed in 1937 and Building B constructed in 1941. Building A faces south toward Colorado
Boulevard and encompasses the full south-to-north depth of the lot; its east side elevation sits on the east property line,
and its west side elevation faces an on-site parking lot; the rear north elevation sits on the north property line. Building
B is located at the west corner of the lot and is oriented to the east toward the parking area and Building A; its south side
elevation sits on the south property line and its west rear elevation sits on the west property line.
[See Continuation Sheets]
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6 (1-3 story commercial building)
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District
☐ Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (view, date,
accession #) 631 Colorado Avenue,
view west, August 2021
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic ☐
Prehistoric ☐ Both
1937/Los Angeles County Assessor
*P7. Owner and Address:
Michael Bay, 500 Pounds of Dog,
Inc., 9100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite
1000, Los Angeles, CA
*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation,
and address) Alison Garcia Kellar,
ESA, 626 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
*P9. Date Recorded: December
2021
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive Pedestrian
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey
report and other sources, or enter "none.")
ESA, 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa
Monica, California: City Landmark
Assessment and Evaluation Report,
December 2021
*Attachments: ☐NONE ☐Location Map ☒Continuation Sheet ☒Building, Structure, and Object Record
☐Archaeological Record ☐District Record ☐Linear Feature Record ☐Milling Station Record ☐Rock Art Record
☐Artifact Record ☐Photograph Record ☐Other (List):
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other
Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1814 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica *NRHP Status Code 6Z
Page 2 of 24
B1. Historic Name:
B2. Common Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
B3. Original Use: Commercial B4. Present Use: Commercial
*B5. Architectural Style: Commercial/Industrial Vernacular
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Located at 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property is located on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street
in the Downtown Neighborhood in the City of Santa Monica.1 The property is bound by 7th Street to the east, Colorado
Avenue to the south, and 6th Court, an alleyway, to the west. Situated on Block 193, on Lots K and L, the property
contains two buildings: a one-story brick building with a rear second story addition at the east extent (Building A), and a
one-story stucco-clad brick building at the western extent (Building B). A surface parking lot separates the two buildings
from one another and is accessed from along Colorado Avenue at the southern extent of the site and from 7th Street at
the northern extent of the site. The property is oriented along Colorado Avenue. A metal security fence with cement walls
and pylons extends along Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B. The fence includes a metal pedestrian gate
located immediately west of Building A. A vehicular gated entrance to the property is accessed from 6th Court alleyway.
[See Continuation Sheets]
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:
Brick construction, minimal decorative detailing, flat roof, simple rectangular form
B9a. Architect: N/A b. Builder: N/A
*B10. Significance: Theme Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977); Pre-World War II Commercial
Development (1920-1944), Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s-1960s); and Early 20th
Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950) Area Downtown Santa Monica
Period of Significance 1937-1941 Property Type Commercial Applicable Criteria
(Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
Based on current research and assessment, the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to meet any
of the City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria 9.56.100(a)(1) through (a)(6) as discussed above. However, it does meet
Structure of Merit criterion 9.56.080(a) as it was previously identified in the City’s Historic Inventory. It also meets the
Structure of Merit 50-year age criterion 9.56.080(b) as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84 years of age, and
Building B was constructed in 1941 making it 80 years of age. However, the subject property does not meet criteria
9.56.080 (b)(1) through (3), and therefore is ineligible as a Structure of Merit. [See Continuation Sheets]
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
*B12. References:
[See Continuation Sheets]
B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Alison Garcia Kellar, ESA
*Date of Evaluation: December 2021
1 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory.
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
(This space reserved for official comments.)
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1815 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 3 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
*P3a. Description (continued):
There is an alley named 6th Court that runs north to south along the west side of the subject property. A
driveway from 6th Court provides access to the subject property at its north corner. Building B is located
adjacent to the driveway on the south. The subject property is enclosed by a metal security fence with
concrete pylons that runs along Colorado Avenue between Building A and Building B. To the north side of
Building B, an automated gate allows access to the site off 6th Court. There is additional access to the site
through a pedestrian gate immediately to the west of Building A facing Colorado Avenue. Originally, site
access was directly off Colorado Avenue and not off of 6th Court. There is mature landscaping including
bushes and trees within the property line at the parking lot, with bushes lining Colorado Avenue, and palm
trees lining 7th Street.
Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue
Building A is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building that was constructed in
1937 with later additions including a second-story addition at its rear north end and a one-story addition
that projects westward at its north corner. Located on the western corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th
Street, Building A is oriented facing Colorado Avenue and extends northward along 7th Street. Building A
is largely rectangular in plan and includes a second-story addition at its north end and a small one-story
projection at the north corner elevation. Building A is constructed of brick with a reinforced concrete frame
and sits on a concrete slab foundation. Building permits and physical evidence indicate that the original
brick finish has been removed by two sandblasting campaigns that have damaged the original brick and
mortar joints and pointing. The original one-story rectangular portion of the building has an arched wood
truss roof and a horizontal brick parapet. There are skylights and mechanical equipment on the roof.
Originally constructed as a one-story building, a second-story addition at the north end, and a ground
floor wing addition at the north corner were completed between 1998 and 2002. The second-story
addition has a flat roof and is accessed via an interior staircase from the main ground floor space. The
second-story addition has an exterior door opening at its west end that opens onto a rooftop patio above
the ground floor one-story wing addition. All windows in the original section of Building A have been
replaced with new metal industrial-style multi-lite windows (fixed and hopper assemblies), and there is
evidence of brick infill at the location of former window and door openings that have been closed.
Building A’s south elevation facing Colorado Avenue is comprised of three structural bays (original) which
are divided by vertical fluted concrete pylons incised with vertical groove lines. The pylons each terminate
in a stepped pyramidal capital that rises just above the fascia and parapet. There is an attached sign on
the center bay of the parapet comprised of individual metal channel letters that reads “Bay Films”. Three
large non-original multi-lite industrial type metal window assemblies sit within each bay, atop a brick
bulkhead. Concrete fascia and a parapet span between the three structural bays and includes horizontal
score lines above and below which correspond with the vertically fluted pylons.
Originally, Building A’s primary facade was located along Colorado Avenue at the south elevation and
included two storefronts within the two outer structural bays that each had a single-leaf wood and glass
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1816 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 4 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
entrance door and paired fixed wood windows adjacent to the door. There was a row of four rectangular
transom windows above the doors and windows. The transoms over the doors were openable hopper
windows. There were similar paired fixed wood windows surmounted by four transoms within the center
structural bay. Originally, attached wall signs were located on the parapet that read from left-to-right,
“ABC”, “ABC Distributing Co.” and “Wine Beer Liquors”. The bulkhead walls below the windows appear to
have been stuccoed. A comparison of a historic photo of the building from 1945 with existing conditions
indicates that the original storefronts have been removed and openings altered. The current windows
along Colorado Avenue sit within original storefront openings, and the lower portion of the two door
openings have been filled in. There is evidence of water damage and graffiti removal on the bulkhead
walls on this elevation.
The eastern elevation along 7th Street extends the depth of the lot and includes a non-original metal-
frame 5:4 multi-lite industrial-type window assembly at the south corner of the elevation. This elevation is
comprised of six regularly spaced structural bays delineated by its reinforced concrete frame, with brick
walls (sandblast damage evident) and a brick parapet (sandblasted) at the roofline. There is evidence of
parapet repair at this elevation, along with seismic structural reinforcement. Evidence of graffiti removal is
apparent. All of the original windows have been replaced with metal industrial type multi-lite new windows
within the original window openings. A contemporary second-floor addition rises from the final bay at the
northern extent of the elevation, which was constructed with similar red brick and reinforced concrete
framing and has similar multi-lite industrial type metal windows. The northernmost portion (rear wall) of
Building A’s addition consists of a horizontally scored concrete wall at the second floor, which surmounts
a blank brick wall with concrete framing.
Accessible through a pedestrian gate in the metal fence along Colorado Avenue, or through a vehicular
gate along 6th Court, the asphalt surface parking area for the subject property occupies the majority of the
lot. There is a paved walkway from the pedestrian gate on the south side of the lot to the current building
entrance on the west elevation of Building A. Building A’s west elevation faces the parking lot and has a
similar in organization to the east elevation along 7th Street. The west elevation includes six regularly
spaced structural bays delineated by a reinforced-concrete frame, with brick walls and a horizontal brick
parapet. The entire west elevation has been sandblasted as has the exterior and interior of the whole
building. Smaller 4:2 and 3:2 multi-lite metal frame industrial type windows punctuate three of the bays,
while a contemporary recessed entrance sits roughly centered in the elevation. The main entrance
includes a contemporary glass door with sidelites and transom windows.
Comparison of existing conditions with Sanborn maps and aerial photos indicates that the existing
building entrance is in the location of a former garage bay, and that the large fixed multi-lite industrial
window to the north is situated within a second former garage bay. There is also evidence of an enclosed
(bricked) former single door opening that has been converted to a 3:2 window, at the south end of this
elevation. Projecting from the final northern bay along the west elevation sits a new “sunroom” addition
constructed of reinforced concrete that features large multi-lite floor-to-ceiling window assemblies at its
visible south and west elevations. Atop this “sunroom” addition sits a rooftop patio. This addition forms an
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1817 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 5 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
L-shape at the rear north corner of the building. The area along the addition and west side of the building
is planted with grass and other decorative landscaping.
The interior includes main floor area with an arched wood ceiling with exposed wood trusses and rafters.
Original brickwork and concrete framing (sandblasted) are exposed throughout the interior. Some
damage/deterioration is evident on the interior including water intrusion/leaks, efflorescence,
sandblasting, and disintegration of the brick and mortar, and spalling of the concrete. Incompatible mortar
patching is also visible at areas with later brick infill/alteration. The interior includes concrete slab flooring,
contemporary partitions, and a contemporary second story mezzanine addition at the northern part of the
building. The addition includes a metal staircase that leads from the main floor to a second story
mezzanine and offices. The mezzanine level opens to a rooftop patio above the concrete ground-floor
addition. Contemporary drywall and wood framing s abuts the historic brick and concrete walls, and metal
seismic armature tying the structural system can be seen at the interior.
Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue
Building B is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building clad in smoothly finished
stucco that was originally constructed in 1941. Located on the western extent of the subject property, the
building extends along 6th Court south to the property line at Colorado Avenue. A driveway from 6th Court
runs along the north end of Building B to the parking area on the subject property. Building B faces east
toward the parking area. The brick masonry building has a rectangular footprint and a flat roof with a built
up exposed brick parapet. The building’s southern elevation is comprised of a single bay with a concrete
horizontal beam, flanked by concrete pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals.
Building B was originally used for truck storage and loading, and its north elevation formerly included
open bays for truck parking; the openings have been filled in and new windows installed for offices. A
present-day comparison with a historic photo from 1945 indicates that the east elevation along Colorado
Avenue originally included painted advertisements on the east brick wall for “A. B. C. Beer” and
“Budweiser”, and a painted sign on the parapet for “A. B. C. Distributing Co.”, showing that this south
elevation never included openings; it is still a blank brick wall today and has been sandblasted.
The building’s west elevation abuts 6th Court, an alley way that runs between Colorado Avenue and
Broadway. This elevation has been covered with smooth stucco and has a single scored line toward the
parapet, and no fenestration. A metal automated vehicular gate abuts the building’s north corner and
extents north to the north property line. The north elevation similarly has no fenestration and is covered
with smooth stucco with a single scored line at the parapet. Metal signage toward the parapet reads:
“BAY FILMS PLATINUM DUNES,” which sits to the right of a short metal ladder that provides access to
the roof.
The eastern elevation facing the parking area, which formerly included multiple open bays for trucks, was
enclosed in the late 1990s or early 2000s. The elevation is clad in smooth stucco and includes a score
line toward the parapet. A centralized contemporary recessed entrance includes a single lite door with
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1818 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 6 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
sidelites and transom windows.This configuration mirrors the contemporary entrance at Building A. A
series of three 4:3 multi-lite steel window assemblies flank either side of the recessed entrance.
A metal security fence extends from the eastern corner of Building B and continues along Colorado
Avenue to the western corner of Building A. The metal security fence is attached to the pylon and sits
above a new concrete wall. New matching pylons similar to the pylons on Buildings A and B serve as
fence posts for the security fence.
At the interior of Building B, original brickwork is visible in several of the studio offices located in the
southern extent and along the western wall of the building. The brick appears to have once been painted,
and has since been sandblasted. The original brick building received an addition to its north end in 1958,
and the original exterior brick wall at the former north elevation is still present within the building near the
building entrance lobby. The brick here appears to be deteriorating due to water damage. The entire
interior has been remodeled with contemporary materials including drywall at the walls and ceilings
(except at the areas with exposed original brick), cement and rolled carpet flooring, and contemporary
doors.
P5a. Photographs (continued):
Building A south facade, view north
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1819 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 7 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building A east elevation along 7th Street, view west
Building A east elevation with second‐story addition, view north
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1820 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 8 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building A west elevation with contemporary building entrance at center and ground‐floor projecting
wing addition at left, view east
Building A interior with contemporary second story staircase
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1821 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 9 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building B south facade along Colorado Avenue, view north
Building B, perspective view of west and north elevations with corner pylon, smooth
stucco cladding, and mechanized gate, view south
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1822 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 10 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building B contemporary recessed entrance along eastern elevation, facing west
View of Building B interior brickwork of original wall that was formerly at the exterior northern
extent of the building, prior to new north addition, view to east
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1823 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 11 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
*B6. Construction History (continued):
Building A
According to Los Angeles County Assessor’s records and the original City of Santa Monica
building permit, the existing Building A was constructed in 1937. The original building permit
was issued to A. B. C. Distributing Company for a single-story brick building for office and
warehouse purposes. The address on this permit was listed as 625 Colorado for Block 193 and
Lots K and L. The building was to measure 50’ x 100’ and was constructed on a 100’ x 150’ lot
which indicates that Building A was constructed to the extent of the lot line along 7th Street. The
property then included a garage or cottage according to the building permit, which was
demolished for redevelopment of the lot. According to the building permit, the specified building
material to be used was “groutlock brick” and the structure would be finished with a composition
roof. The building would be a single story and reach a maximum height of 20 feet. There was no
architect or contractor listed on the permit. One year after construction, an aerial photograph
taken in 1938 depicts Building A on the subject parcel. The lot at the time appeared to include
several auxiliary buildings and a fence surrounding the perimeter. A photograph taken in 1945
illustrates Building A roughly 8 years after construction. Originally, there were two storefront
entrances to Building A along the Colorado Avenue elevation. The south elevation included
three bays delineated by fluted concrete pylons. Each bay included wood frame fixed windows
with transom windows above, and bulkheads below. Two single lite doors sat recessed within
the first and third structural bays. The horizontal parapet between the structural bays was
scored along the lower and upper fascia and the rectangular panels on the parapet spanning
the structural bays had painted signage on each of the three panels that read, right to left, “A. B.
C.;” “A. B. C. DISTRIBUTING CO.;” AND “WINE BEER LIQUORS.” The east elevation, which
fronts 7th Street included one wood fixed window with transom window assembly, and at least
two other windows that are difficult to discern due to the low quality of the image. The east
elevation appeared to have exposed brick, with adjacent mature palm trees lining the sidewalk.
A Sanborn map created in 1950 depicts the building’s continued use for wholesale liquor and
beer, shows that the building construction included reinforced concrete pylons, concrete floors
and beams and a wood truss roof. There were two adjacent 1-story canopy structures located
along the western elevation of Building A by 1950. By this time, Building B was constructed and
was used for truck storage for the A. B. C. Distributing Company. An aerial photograph taken in
1952 depicts these 1-story canopy structures, which included parked trucks adjacent to Building
A.
At some point the building must have been painted. Roughly 18 years after original
construction, in 1955, a building permit was issued to sandblast the brick building when
Aerophysics Development Corporation occupied the building. Additional electrical and gas
improvements were made in 1955 according to building permits.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1824 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 12 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building A appeared to have been used as a body shop from about 1957 to about 1994. In
1957, a permit for electrical work was issued to new building owner Jack Hammer when the
property was converted into an auto body shop. It does not appear that any structural changes
were made at this time. A subsequent 1958 building permit indicates that a large, projecting
metal sign reading “Keystone Auto Body” was installed to advertise the business to passers-by
along Colorado Avenue. The sign permit indicates that Building B was then used as a paint
shop for the auto body business. Subsequent building permits show electrical and plumbing
improvements were completed for the property between 1958 and 1993. A 1964 aerial indicates
that the adjacent 1-story canopy structures along the northern property extent had been
demolished. The 1965 Sanborn map indicates Building A’s continued usage as an auto body
repair shop, which is also illustrated in the 1986 Sanborn map. The Northridge earthquake in
1994 caused damage to the building, as indicated by the building safety assessment which
indicated “fallen bricks and a rear wall down,” yet no structural damage was sustained.1 This
indicates some unspecified loss of brick from the building.
With a change in ownership the in following year, 1995, a permit was issued to include 17
parking stalls on the site at the central parking lot between Buildings A and B. Subsequent
permits issued between 1995 and 1996 included extensive tenant improvements to both
buildings and the site. Modifications to Building A indicated a new office use, which was
illustrated in a sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit. The plan included new interior
walls throughout, delineating office spaces, conference areas, storage, and restrooms, in
addition to a new main entrance along the west elevation, where there were formerly 1-story
canopies. In addition, the plan detailed landscaping along the west elevation and the parking lot.
Extensive permits were issued in 1997, including: electrical work; sandblasting at both the
exterior and interior; the raising of a section of 33’ x 50’ of floor; and the reconstruction of 49
linear feet of parapet wall, which may have been to repair damage from the 1994 Northridge
earthquake.
In 1998, a new building permit application was submitted for a second-floor addition and
renovation work, with total valuation of improvements estimated at $100,000. A subsequent
1998 permit was issued to construct a metal fence with concrete pylons. In 2002, an application
to reinstate the previous expired permit to complete the second-floor addition was submitted.
The permit was for a second story addition (50’ x 100’, located at the north extent of the
building) and a one-story addition at the ground floor (25’ x 42’, located to the south of the
second story addition) for office production use. By the 2005 aerial photograph, it appears that
both the one- and two-story additions had been constructed.
Building B
In 1941, four years after the construction of Building A, a building permit was issued for the
construction of a loading canopy at the western extent of the subject property at 621 Colorado
1 Rapid Evaluation Safety Assessment, Keystone Body Shop, January 17, 1994 [Handwritten ref, no.: DA0239].
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1825 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 13 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Avenue. The loading canopy was constructed for use by the A. B. C. Distributing Company, and
it likely served as a shelter when loading trucks with product prior to regional distribution. The
canopy was rectangular measuring 16’ x 38’ in plan, 16’ tall, and included a composition roof.
Noted Santa Monica architect Frederic C. Barienbrock, AIA, was listed as the architect for the
canopy. Barienbrock had achieved notoriety by the 1940s period and his knowledge of
reinforced groutlock brick masonry, which was used in Building A, is documented in a Los
Angeles Times article from 1934. A photograph taken in 1945 illustrates Building B’s
configuration four years after construction, and likely reflects its original configuration. The
structure was oriented east toward the central parking lot that was shared with Building A and
included five bays for cars or trucks. It appears that the south elevation, west wall, and the
bulkhead at the north elevation were comprised of brick. A metal chain-link fence once lined
Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B.
In 1947, a building permit was issued to A. B. C. Distributing Company owner, Glen Moyer, to
enclose the canopy with five pairs of sliding doors, which were to be installed within the five
bays at the eastern elevation. This modification transformed the canopy into a storage building,
and also included the installation of a 3’ platform at the interior for a total valuation of $800. The
sketch accompanying the building permit illustrated the existing brick canopy walls, the new
sliding doors, and then new platform. A Sanborn map issued in 1950 indicates several
additional auxiliary storage buildings abutting Building B to the north and continuing along the
northern extent of the property line leading to Building A. These structures were likely similarly
canopies in-type, as indicated by the dashed line on the Sanborn map, yet they were not
comprised of brick, as Building B was, as indicated by the structural symbols on the map. These
auxiliary storage structures are also visible in a 1952 aerial photograph. Building B was
sandblasted in 1955, according to a building permit.
Several building permits were issued in 1958 which included: the enlargement of Building B to
be used to polish cars; a large sign for “Keystone Auto Body;” plumbing; and for cinder block
walls, which were either part of Building B or retaining walls at the site. A sketch accompanying
the permit to enlarge the Building illustrated a “proposed shelter” as a standalone structure
measuring 24’ x 30’ in plan, in the area that is presently used as the property’s driveway along
6th Court. This canopy is no longer extant today. By the time of a 1964 aerial photograph, some
of the auxiliary storage along the northern property line had been demolished. A 1965 Sanborn
map notes Building B’s use as an auto painting building, with the newly erected canopy addition
serving as a metal spray booth.
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the property’s ownership changed, and many building
permits were issued between 1994 and 1995 for neighboring Building A. Some of these permits
illustrate work done to Building B as well. A sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit
illustrates a new entrance to Building B located at the east elevation, and a new restroom in the
southern portion of the building (previously referenced Building B was transformed from a paint
shop into a storage building for office use. The adjacent spray booth was removed during this
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1826 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 14 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
time, and a concrete wall extension along 6th Court was illustrated on the site plan. In 1997,
Building B’s exterior and interior were sandblasted. It is likely around this time that Building B
was encased in a smooth concrete stucco finish. Evidence of Building B’s original brick walls
remain today, visible at the interior of the building, at the location of the original structure. The
canopy addition has since been enclosed, unifying the disparate structures.
*B6. Significance (continued):
Person(s) of Historical Importance
The original building permit for Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue indicated A. B. C.
Distributing Co. as the original owner, while the original permit for Building B, 621
Colorado Avenue indicate that Glen Moyer was the original owner, and was constructed
to designs by architect Frederic C. Barienbrock.
Glen Moyer was listed as the owner of the subject property on a 1947 building permit.
While an announcement for his funeral service in 2951 indicated that he was a “founder
of a wholesale beverage distributing company,” there was no evidence identified to
suggest that Moyer’s involvement with the distribution industry influenced the economic
development of Santa Monica, nor that he was a person of historical importance.2
Frederic C. Barienbrock’s design for Building B, a loading canopy which was later
modified into a garage for truck storage, does not appear to be a significant project in the
larger body of his work. Building B was later modified to include doors in the 1950s, and
later, completely enclosed and reconfigured at the end of the 20th century. Barientbrock
was known for his residential architecture, and large-scale civic and education buildings,
however, Building B is not a significant work within architect Barienbrock’s portfolio in
Santa Monica.
Statement of other significance
Groutlock brick was a construction method that included reinforced metal rebar within
specially designed interlocking masonry bricks, which promised to be earthquake proof
due to increased strength provided by internal reinforcement. The groutlock brick
method of construction was developed prior to the 1933 earthquake, after which Building
A was constructed. As such, Building A was not a novel building for the incorporation of
the groutlock reinforced brick construction method.
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 the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architectural
style, although it is not a rare example. The Commercial Vernacular style is no longer
prevalent in the City, although several good examples remain. Based upon a review of
the City’s Historic Resources Inventory and a windshield survey of the main corridors of
Santa Monica, it appears that there are still several good examples of the Commercial
Vernacular architectural style within the City of Santa Monica, as shown by Table 4.
2 “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1827 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 15 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Most examples of this style in Santa Monica are in the main commercial district of the
city, of which the subject property is not a part. There is even a potential Main Street
Commercial District of which there are many better examples of the architectural style.
Further, in comparison, the subject property appears to be a modest and altered
example of the Commercial Vernacular style within the city in comparison with the many
other buildings of the style previously identified by the city, as seen in the Santa Monica
Historic resources Inventory and excerpted in Table 4. 174 Kinney St, commonly known
as the former Famous Enterprise Fish Company, is a designated City Landmark that
was originally owned by the Pacific Electric Railway who constructed a reinforced brick
garage, stores and offices in 1926, which has a similar 3-bay storefront divided by four
vertical pylons.3
Does the structure contribute to a potential historic district?
The structures do not contribute to a potential historic district.
Landmark Criteria
9.56.100(a) (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political or architectural history of the City.
The subject property, a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular building, does not manifest the
cultural and economic history of Santa Monica in its historical type and architecture. The
subject property was not the first commercial or industrial building built along Colorado
Avenue within the Town of Santa Monica Tract, as the original downtown commercial
core was established in the late 1800s, with Colorado Avenue serving as the southern
boundary. By the 1895 Sanborn map, commercial/industrial development was well-
established along Colorado Avenue due to its close proximity to the railroad line. Most of
the commercial development in downtown Santa Monica occurred during the 1920s,
when the small seaside resort transformed into a metropolitan shopping district.
Development in the industrialized area where the subject property lies then included
large-scale lumber, oil and power companies, in addition to smaller commercial/industrial
businesses and aviation-related manufacturing which continued up through the 1940s. In
the post-war period, later development along Colorado Avenue included prominent
businesses associated with aerospace, aviation, and other industries such as Alpha
Engineering Corporation’s electronics division, and Tavco Inc. that contributed to the
atmospheric system on the Mercury capsule.
Building A was built in 1937, and Building B was built in 1941, after the commercial
construction boom of the 1920s, yet prior to the post-war period of commercial/industrial
development in the City. Its construction coincided with the Federal repeal of prohibition
in the United States and the burgeoning beer and alcohol sales that ensued throughout
Southern California and the nation. Its construction was not associated with the local
patterns of commercial or industrial development in Santa Monica. The subject property
has been used as a commercial alcohol beverage wholesale and distribution business,
as an defense research office for Aerophysics, as an automobile body shop by Keystone
Body Shop, and most recently as a film production office for Bay Films Platinum Dunes.
The subject property is a small, commercial improvement that is not representative of a
3 Architectural Resources Group, 174 Kinney Street, Santa Monica, Landmark Assessment Report, March 31, 2015, page 6.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1828 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 16 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
significant pattern of commercial or industrial development in the City. It does not
exemplify the cultural and economic history of the City of Santa Monica. Therefore, the
subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
While the subject property is tangentially associated with Santa Monica as a
leisure/recreation destination, since the subject property distributed alcoholic beverages
to local and regional restaurants and to individual buyers for consumption, those
businesses/enterprises did not exist or develop further because of the distribution of
alcoholic beverages from the subject property. Therefore, the subject property did not
have a significant influence on economic or recreational patterns of development in
Santa Monica. Furthermore, with regard to the aftermath of prohibition, the subject
property was developed in response to local, regional and national legal changes, and
the subject property did not bring these changes about. The headquarters of the
company was in San Diego and the subject property was one of several/many
distributing warehouses in the southern California/Los Angeles region and did not in and
of itself have any individual significance in the distribution and sale of alcoholic
beverages. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
9.56.100(a) (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
Buildings A and B do not appear to meet this criterion. As examples of
Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture, the buildings are considered modest in
comparison to other buildings in the style. They have limited decorative features except
for the concrete scored pylons, parapet, and brickwork. Specifically, the property’s
spatial arrangements, massing, fenestration, materials, and overall form, while
functionally successful, do not reflect the deft aesthetic hand of a master designer.
Furthermore, the subject property has been substantially altered from its original
appearance. The subject property lacks sufficient aesthetic or architectural value and
historic integrity necessary for designation.
9.56.100(a) (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or
national history.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Etta Moxley was an early property
owner and occupied the property when there were previous buildings on the parcel,
which were demolished prior to the construction of the existing improvements. While it
was unusual for African American women to own property in the early 20th century, the
extant buildings are not associated with Moxley and the existing improvements do not
have any material association with her life. Current research does not indicate that this
resource is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or
national history in local, state, or national history.
9.56.100(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
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1829 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 17 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a
study.
The property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. Both Buildings A and B are simple
examples of buildings designed in the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style. Building B
was originally constructed as a loading canopy which was later used as a garage for
truck storage, and was later infilled to its current appearance. The buildings incorporate
architectural features such as minimal decorative detailing, largely simple rectangular
forms, horizontal parapets and concrete pylons. Modifications to both of the buildings
have altered their original design, workmanship, and materials, as well as their function.
All of the original doors and windows have been removed, and contemporary metal
industrial type windows have either been installed, many in the original openings, and
one large new window in a former garage door opening on the west facade. Additionally,
brick infill of door openings has occurred, at an original garage door opening (now the
main entrance) at the two original door openings of the storefronts, and at a man door on
the west elevation of Building A; and the original open bays of Building B have been
entirely infilled. Furthermore, repairs were made to the brick parapet that are clearly
visible on the west facade. These areas of Building A were repaired/infilled with
salvaged brick to match, but exhibit differences in brick color, mortar application, and
brickwork with lower quality craftsmanship than that of the original construction.
Furthermore, the brick infill and repairs were also sandblasted, so they must have been
completed before the last sandblasting campaign in 1997. The building’s original brick
masonry has been painted at least once and sandblasted at least twice according to
building permits. This has destroyed all of the brick’s original hard-fired finish and mortar
pointing which has resulted in brick-and-mortar deterioration. At least one pulverized
brick was observed in the interior east corner office of the building. Later modifications
include a second-story addition at the northern extent of Building A that has altered the
scale and massing of Building A when viewed from the public right of way along 7th
Street, and a one-story concrete wing on the west elevation at the north corner of
Building A that has altered the original appearance of the west elevation of Building A
when viewed from the public right of way on Colorado Avenue or 6th Court. Two of the
four elevations of Building B have been altered from their original appearance by an
addition to the north end of the building, and by alteration and infill of the east façade to
adapt the building’s use for offices. Furthermore, the two buildings are not rare examples
of the commercial vernacular building type, as shown in Table 4 above. There are many
such examples in the City of Santa Monica that have more architectural merit and retain
higher integrity, such as 174 Kinney Street, a similar reinforced brick warehouse built in
1926. There are two examples of utilitarian industrial buildings in the Santa Monica
inventory, 2920 and 2944 Nebraska Avenue; 2920 Nebraska Avenue appears to be a
similar example to the subject property that was constructed in 1946. Therefore, the
subject building does not appear to satisfy this criterion as a rare, extant example of a
Commercial/Industrial Vernacular historical property type.
Buildings A and B do not appear to be eligible as examples of a method of construction.
Building A was constructed with groutlock brick, as indicated on the original building
permit. It is possible that Building B, which was originally constructed as a canopy and
was later used as a garage for truck storage, was also constructed with groutlock brick
based upon physical observation of the brickwork by ESA, and documentary evidence
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1830 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 18 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
as the architect of record, Frederic C. Barienbrock was evidently familiar with the
building system as evidenced by his participation in a groutlock brick competition as
included in a 1934 newspaper article. Groutlock brick was a construction method that
included reinforced metal rebar within specially designed interlocking masonry bricks,
which promised to be earthquake proof due to increased strength provided by internal
reinforcement.4 Simons Brick Company, the company that produced groutlock brick
operated from 1906 to about 1952. While Building A of the subject property was
documented on the original building permit as constructed of groutlock brick and
concrete framing, our research does not indicate groutlock brick became a highly
utilized, important construction material in Santa Monica as a result of its application at
this building. Further, the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded
internationally for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications
throughout its history, and as such groutlock brick was just one reinforced brick masonry
system of many that have been implemented over time.5 The project was not published
in any architectural or engineering journals, nor was its construction method mentioned
in any local or regional newspapers.6 Although other examples of reinforced brick
masonry walls with concrete framing are found in Santa Monica, this was a ubiquitous
construction method in southern California and in the United States and the use of
reinforced brick and concrete framing at the subject property did not have a significant
influence on the local, regional or national building industry. Therefore, the subject
property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
9.56.100(a) (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable
builder, designer or architect.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Building A is not a significant or
representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect,
as there was no one listed for the design of the building on the original building permit.
Santa Monica architect Frederic C. Barienbrock was listed as the architect on the
original 1941 building permit for Building B, which was originally permitted and
constructed as a canopy structure, which was later converted into a garage for truck
storage. While Barienbrock was an established architect by the 1940s, he was best
known for his civic and institutional work, some of which still remains today including the
Modern style Santa Monica County Courthouse, and the vernacular Modern apartment
building at 827-829 6th Street. As originally constructed, Building B included three brick
exterior walls, with a fourth elevation comprised of open bay for truck parking. The
4 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 5 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996
(https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brick-masonry---
introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021). 6 A search of the Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals for articles or publications about groutlock brick and 631 Colorado
Avenue yielded no results. A search for “reinforced brick” more generally yielded two articles: “Products and Practice: R-B-
M Reinforced Brick Masonry,” Architectural Forum, January 1939, 367–70 and “Reinforced Brick Walls for Surface Shelters: Home Security Bulletin,” Builder, January 1941, 243–45. Several other articles on the work of Modern architect
Eladio Dieste in Uruguay also appeared in this search. None of these articles appear to be directly relevant to groutlock brick
or the property at 631 Colorado Avenue.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1831 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 19 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
building has been highly modified over time and is not a significant or representative
example of the work of Frederic C. Barienbrock. Therefore, the subject property does not
appear to satisfy this criterion.
9.56.100(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.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. At the time of construction, the
subject property was built as a distribution center for alcoholic beverages, in the
industrial part of the City, among several large plants and other commercial businesses
and the building fell into a common pattern of early 20th century industrial development.
The brick structures are located on a corner of a commercial-industrial area, abut a busy
thoroughfare and are both largely obscured by bushes. It is a simple, utilitarian property
with few distinguishing features other than its concrete pylons. As such, the subject
property does not appear to have a unique location, singular physical characteristic, nor
is an established visual feature of a neighborhood or of the City.
Structure of Merit
9.56.080 (a) The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory
The resource meets this criterion as it is identified in the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory.
9.56.080 (b) The Structure is a minimum of 50- years of age and meets one of the following
criteria.
The resource meets this criterion as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84
years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941, making it 80 years of age.
9.56.080 (b)(1) The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or
historic type.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. The structure is not a unique or rare
example of an architectural design, detail or historic type. The resource does not have
any distinctive design details and ornamental details are limited to concrete scoring at
Building A, and concrete stepped pyramidal capitals at both buildings. Furthermore, it is
a common form for Commercial/Industrial Vernacular buildings built in the early 20th
century, and is not a unique design or type, nor does it have any distinctive details.
There are also many examples of Commercial Vernacular buildings in Santa Monica that
are better-designed, as previously discussed above and included in Table 4 above.
9.56.080 (b)(2) The Structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.
The resource does not meet this criterion. As stated previously, the structure is not a
rare example of the building type, as discussed above and illustrated in Table 4 above.
There are many such examples in the City of Santa Monica, specifically in the Main
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1832 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 20 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Street Commercial District as well as 174 Kinney Street (1926), and 2920 Nebraska
Avenue (1946).
9.56.080 (b)(3) The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The resource does not appear to meet this criterion as it is not a contributor to a
potential historic district.
Historic Integrity
As Buildings A and B have consistently been owned by the same owners, and both buildings
have similarly undergone modifications at the same time. Alterations most notably occurred
upon ownership changes when the buildings were modified to suit new uses. As originally
constructed, Building A included two storefronts within three bays along Colorado Avenue, while
Building B included multiple open bays in order to serve as a truck garage.
The subject property retains integrity of location, as the buildings have not moved over time.
The historic setting has been altered as the original entrance to the subject property was
formerly along Colorado Avenue; and as the early auxiliary buildings that were once a part of
the A. B. C. Distributing Company have since been demolished; and as a new entrance was
created in the western portion of the site, that also includes a new metal automated gate,
whereas the original entrance to the subject property was off Colorado Avenue. An additional
metal gate with new concrete pylons and a lower concrete wall stretches across the south side
of the property from Building A to Building B, and mature plants cover the formerly exposed
Colorado Avenue elevations of both buildings. Further, the surrounding setting has been altered
with the demolition of smaller buildings, and the construction of large multi-family apartment
buildings. The subject property is presently bordered by mixed development: multi-family
housing to the north and east, and both large- and small-scale commercial developments and
some multi-family housing to the south, and west. A low-rise brick commercial building is
located on the lot immediately to the east of the subject property on the east corner of Colorado
Avenue and 7th Street. To the west of the subject property, across the alley, is a block of low-
rise commercial buildings on Colorado Avenue that extends to the corner of Colorado Avenue
and 6th Street. As such, the subject property lacks integrity of property setting.
The original design of both buildings has been substantially altered as all of the fenestration has
been either replaced or altered, the entrances have been reconfigured, and the exterior and
interior surfaces sandblasted twice. All that remains intact is the brick, parapet (repaired), and
arched wood truss roof. The original wood and glass storefronts on the south facade located
along Colorado Avenue have been removed and infilled with industrial type metal windows that
substantially detract from the original design intent of Building A, and a new recessed entrance
in a former garage opening was constructed toward the center of Building A’s west elevation. A
contemporary addition at the ground-floor and at the second floor has altered the foot print and
massing of Building A’s design.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1833 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 21 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Building B was originally designed as an open-bay garage structure, and underwent later
changes to include sliding doors, and later, to include an addition at the north end, expanding
the building’s footprint. The east façade was reconfigured to adapt the building for office use,
and a new entrance and windows were installed, and the entire building covered in smooth
concrete stucco to create a uniform modern industrial look.
As a result of substantial alterations, the subject property lacks integrity of design from its
original construction.
Furthermore, as originally constructed, Building A was built utilizing –the groutlock reinforced
brick system. It is also possible that groutlock brick was also used at Building B. However,
heavy sandblasting of the original bricks and mortar pointing (exterior and interior), infill former
door and garage openings, and parapet repairs, have substantially detracted from the integrity
of materials and workmanship of the subject property. Additionally, nearly the entire exterior of
Building B has been covered in smooth stucco leaving only a portion of the brick surface visible
at the south elevation. On the interior, the wood trusses and open-beam ceilings have also
been sandblasted and no longer have their original sawn wood finish. Therefore, the subject
property lacks integrity of materials and workmanship.
However, the subject property still retains its overall historic feeling and association with the
1930s commercial/industrial development along Colorado Avenue from the post-Depression,
pre-World War II years, although as noted, the property is not a unique example of such
development.
Overall, the subject property lacks historic integrity.
Further, there is no remaining historic significance for the former structures that were once
occupied and owned by previous owner, Etta Moxley, as all previous improvements associated
with her life and ownership of the subject property were demolished prior to the construction of
the existing improvements.
*B12. References (continued):
“A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933.
“A Modular House by Frederic Barienbrock, Architect and Eugene Memmier, Designer.” Arts &
Architecture, April 1952, Vol. 69, No. 4, 30-31.
“Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica,
Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956.
American Institute of Architects, Application for Membership, “Frederic Charles Barienbrock,”
Application No. 4070, 1926. [AIA Historical Directory: https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/].
“Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1834 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 22 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: A Pictorial History of Santa Monica,
Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga. Santa Monica, California:
Hennessey + Ingalls, 2001.
“Beach City Growing at Rapid Rate,” Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1923.
“Beautiful Bay District Grows,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1925.
Certificate of Dissolution, Corporation Number D-0342151, Keystone Body Shop, Inc., signed by
directors H. George Nojima and Joanne Nojima on October 10, 1997, and filed in the Office of
the Secretary of State of the State of California on October 27, 1997.
Charleston, James H. “Looff’s Hippodrome,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory
Nomination Form, November 1984.
“East Side Adds New Plant,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1933.
Encyclopedia Britannica. Online Version. https://www.britannica.com
“Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951.
“$520,000 High School Building Completed,” Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1956.
“Glen Alvin Moyer.” U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards.” 1917-1918, Ancestry.com.
“Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942, Ancestry.com.
“Glenn A (Zora) mgr A B C Distributing Co.” Bay Cities Directory, Published by Los Angeles
Directory Co. 1938.
“Glen Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census. 1930.
Gottfried, Herbert and Jan Jennings. American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960.
New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2009.
Hand, Ryan. “Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum website,
https://www.chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/, n.d.
Historic Resources Group and Architectural Resources Group. “City of Santa Monica: Historic
Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement.” Prepared for City of Santa Monica
Planning & Community Development Department, 2018.
IMDb, “Michael Bay: Biography,” IMDb website,
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm, accessed 10-13-21.
“John A. Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census, 1940.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1835 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 23 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Kaplan, Sheldon. “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953,” West Coaster,
September 13, 2018.
Liwag, Ernie and Matthew Schiff. “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.” The Journal of San Diego
History, 59, nos. 1 and 2, Winter/Spring 2013.
López López, Margarita. “Restoring History, Brick By Brick,” Latinx Talk, 2020.
Moore, Mark A. The Jan & Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances
and Chart Positions, 2016.
“More New Industries,” Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1904.
“Nation Consumes Floods of Beer on ‘Opening Day,” Daily News, April 8, 1933.
Nelson White Architectural History + Preservation. “Villa Ruchello: A History, 609 E. Channel
Road, Santa Monica, CA.” Prepared for the Agency, n.d.
“News Behind the News,” The Pasadena Post, March 22, 1934.
Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1925.
Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1933.
Newspaper Entry, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1903.
Parrish, John, “The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and The Field Act, Improving the Design and
Building Standards for California Schools.” California Department of Conservation, n.d.
PCR Services and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation
Element, 2002.
Pitt, Leonard and Dale Pitt. Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County.
Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1997.
“Prohibition, United States History [1920-1933]: Repeal,” Encyclopedia Britannica website,
https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933/Repeal.
“Santa Monica Bay New Scene of Great Activity,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1911.
“Santa Monica Dedicates New County Building,” Los Angeles Times, July 28, 1951.
Scott, Paul A. Santa Monica: A History on the Edge (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2004).
"The Pasadena News: Proceedings of the Council in Regular Session," Los Angeles Evening
Express, February 22, 1892.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1836 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial
CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
Page 24 of 24
DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)
Turner, Fred. “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings.” Structural
Engineers Association of California, 2020.
Turner, Fred. “Seventy Years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s Building Stock.” 13th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 2004.
“Unique Brick Stirs Interest: Inventor Explains New Masonry Style,” Los Angeles Times, June
18, 1933.
6.B.f
Packet Pg. 1837 Attachment: Property Owner's Historic Assessment Report (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 22ENT-0015 Appeal of Landmark Designation 21ENT-0125 ADDRESS: 631 Colorado Avenue APPELLANT: 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. PROPERTY OWNER: 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request:
Appeal of the Landmarks Commission designation 21ENT-0125 for the designation of the building at the corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street and for the property as a Landmark Parcel.. DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, APRIL 12, 2022 AT 6:30 PM LOCATION: City Council Chamber, Second Floor, Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California
HOW TO COMMENT:
The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. Members of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the public hearing via email to councilmtgitems@santamonica.gov or via mail to City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Room 102, Santa Monica, California 90401. Written public comment submitted before 12:00 p.m. on the day of the
meeting will be available for online viewing. All written comments shall be made part of the public record. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments. You may also comment in person at the City Council hearing. Please check the agenda for more detailed instructions on how to comment in person.
Address your comments to: City Clerk Re: 22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Appeal VIA EMAIL: councilmtgitems@santamonica.gov VIA MAIL: 1685 Main Street, Room 102 Santa Monica, 90401 MORE INFORMATION: If you want more information about this project, please contact Stephanie Reich at (310) 458-2200 ext.6490, or by e-mail at stephanie.reich@santamonica.gov. For disability-related accommodations, please contact (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. Every attempt will be made to provide the requested accommodation. All written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines serve City Hall and the Civic Center area. The Expo Line terminus is located at Colorado Avenue and Fourth Street, and is a short walk to City Hall. Public parking
is available in front of City Hall, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free). 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. ESPAÑOL : Esto es una noticia de una audiencia pública para revisar applicaciónes proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas más información, favor de llamar a Carmen Gutierrez en la División de Planificación al número (310) 458-8341.
6.B.g
Packet Pg. 1838 Attachment: 631 Colorado Appeal Hearing Notice April 12 (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
1
FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN THE MATTER OF
THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK
DENIAL OF A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 22ENT-0015
LOCATED AT 631 COLORADO AVENUE
AS A CITY LANDMARK OR STRUCTURE OF MERIT
SECTION I. On March 19, 2021, 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc., the owner of the property at 631 Colorado
Avenue, filed a demolition permit application. On May 20, 2021, Nina Fresco, on behalf of the Santa Monica
Conservancy, submitted historic resource designation application 21ENT-0125 to nominate the property at
631 Colorado Avenue as a Landmark, with a revised application submitted on January 9, 2022.The
Landmarks Commission, having held a Public Hearing on January 10, 2022 found that
the subject property at 631 Colorado Avenue and building located at the corner of
Colorado Avenue and 7th Street met one or more the of the criteria for designation as a
City Landmark as enumerated in SMMC 9.56.100. On January 20, 2022, 500 Pounds of
Dog, Inc. filed a timely appeal of the Commission’s decision. The City Council, on appeal,
having held a Public Hearing on June 14, 2022 hereby denies the designation of 631
Colorado Avenue as a City Landmark or Structure of Merit based on the following findings:
LANDMARK CRITERIA
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(1). It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural,
social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
The property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political, or architectural history or development of Santa Monica.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American residential
neighborhood, replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. As such, the residential
and outbuildings related to the cultural and social history of this area during that period are no
longer extant, and the existing buildings do not share the same association.
The subject property is one of the first industrial buildings built in this specific southeast area of
downtown but does not appear to be a significant aspect of the larger trend of industrial
development in Downtown or Santa Monica as a whole. Industrial buildings were being built
throughout the City in the pre-war era, particularly in the nearby Pico neighborhood, in large
groupings around and adjacent to transportation outlets. Furthermore, the property’s original use
as a distributor for the Aztec Brewing Company does not exemplify the economic development
patterns Santa Monica was experiencing at this time. As mentioned above, Santa Monica’s
aviation industry was the primary source of industrial development prior to World War II. The City
of Santa Monica was not known for its alcohol distribution nor is this building the headquarters
or a notable location for the Aztec Brewing Company’s operations, which included various
distribution warehouses throughout the Southwest. Additionally, the two existing buildings on the
parcel were built as part of a collection of three buildings with a wood-framed platform that all
served a specific purpose in the distribution of alcoholic beverages. As a result of the loss of the
6.B.h
Packet Pg. 1839 Attachment: STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
2
third building and rear platform, as well as the infill of the Auxiliary Building that was originally a
loading canopy and addition of fencing along Colorado Avenue, the site no longer reads as an
alcohol distribution center.
Constructed in the industrial vernacular style, the Main Building lacks the primary character
defining features that would qualify it as a light industrial building, such as loading docks and
doors, and oversized bays of continuous industrial steel sash on two or more façades. Both
buildings appear to be built in the vernacular style with minimal Streamline Modern styling, and
neither building on the site is a notable example of the Streamline Moderne style, and there is
no evidence to suggest this building was influential to the architectural development of the city.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado does not appear significant under Criterion 1.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(2). It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy
interest or value.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue were constructed for industrial, utilitarian
purposes. Thousands of industrial buildings were constructed throughout Southern California
during pre- and post-World War II building booms. As such, the buildings do not possess special
aesthetic or artistic interest or value, and do not appear to be significant under Criterion 2.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(3). It is identified with historic personages or with important events
in local, state or national history.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American neighborhood,
replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa Monica Landmark
Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley, a prominent figure in the
African American community, lived in one of the four residential cottages. Since the residential
and outbuildings related to this cultural and social history are no longer extant, the existing
buildings on the property do not share the same association.
The Aztec Brewing Company obtained the permits for both buildings currently on site. Following
the end of Prohibition, the Aztec Brewing Company had various distribution warehouses
throughout the Southwest. Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the Aztec
Brewing Company was owned or operated by any historic personages. Research did not reveal
any evidence to suggest that the remaining businesses associated with the site were owned or
operated by historically significant individuals. Research also did not reveal any evidence of
association with an important historic event.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 3.
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue are examples of industrial vernacular
construction in the years prior and during World War II. Industrial buildings constructed during
this time featured limited exterior details as they were not intended to attract pedestrians for
commercial use and were utilitarian by nature. While the modest use of Streamline Moderne
6.B.h
Packet Pg. 1840 Attachment: STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
3
elements is visible on both buildings, the few features alone do not make these buildings notable
examples of the Streamline Moderne style. The construction and features of both structures are
not notable in any way and have been modified over time. Lastly, as indicated on 1950 Sanborn
Maps around Santa Monica’s industrial cores, such as along rail lines or present-day freeways,
brick industrial buildings were not a rarity for the City.
On the original permit for the Main Building, the construction material is indicated as Groutlock
brick, a building material produced by the Simons Brick Company. However, a physical
assessment of the site indicates that the brick is not an example of Groutlock, but rather another
type of grouted masonry, described as Port Costa Key. A few scattered examples of what appear
to be the Port Costa Key bricks are visible and have stepped notching at the top of the brick.
Although this building material is visible, it was not used for the entire building, or if it was, only
a few examples of this type of brick are visible from the exterior. As discussed above, many
solutions for increasing the earthquake resistance of masonry buildings were explored in the
aftermath of the Long Beach Earthquake, including experimentation with new masonry shapes.
These shapes included the Groutlock brick, which had a diagonal or beveled edge, and the Port
Costa Key brick, which had interlocking “notches.” However, subsequent engineering studies in
the decades after World War II revealed that a special masonry shape was not necessary when
good workmanship and an appropriate mortar mix was employed, and the new masonry shapes
ostensibly fell out of use. The Groutlock and Port Costa Key bricks were a short-lived experiment
in construction technology following the Long Beach earthquake. Research did not indicate that
they were ever widely used or influential to later developments in construction technology. As
such, it does not appear that the use of these brick shapes was an important building technique.
Therefore, neither building at 631 Colorado Avenue appears to be significant under Criterion 4.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(5). It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product
of a notable builder, designer or architect.
Research into the construction history of 631 Colorado Avenue did not reveal the name of the
architect or the builder for the Main Building. The architect for the Auxiliary Building was identified
on the 1941 building permit as Frederic Barienbrock. Frederick Barienbrock was a local architect
that worked in Santa Monica for 50 years. Barienbrock was responsible for the designs of 1725
Main Street, 827 6th Street, 829 6th Street, and the 1951 addition to the Santa Monica Courthouse
and County Building wing of the Santa Monica Civic Center. While Barienbrock appears to have
been a successful local architect, his work is not particularly noteworthy and he is not an
important architectural figure in the history of the city or the region. Additionally, the utilitarian
canopy would not be a notable example of his work, and it no longer conveys its original design
intent due to modifications on all elevations.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be significant under Criterion
5.
SMMC 9.56.100(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.
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is located in a portion of Santa Monica’s original
township that is now referred to as the Downtown neighborhood. The property is surrounded by
residential, commercial, and industrial properties ranging from one to four stories in height. The
6.B.h
Packet Pg. 1841 Attachment: STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
4
subject property is an unremarkable infill site that, although part of the original township, does
not appear to be an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood or City.
Therefore, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be significant under Criterion
6.
STRUCTURE OF MERIT CRITERIA
9.56.080(A): The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue was individually identified in the 2018 Historic Resources
Inventory (HRI) Update and assigned a status code of 5S3, indicating that the property appeared
to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation for conveying
patterns of industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica and being
one of one of relatively few extant industrial buildings in this area from the pre‐World War II
period. However, based on further analysis, the property does not appear to merit designation.
9.56.080(B): The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the following
criteria:
The subject property is a minimum of 50 years of age as it was constructed in 1914.
Therefore, the structure is eligible for further consideration under the following criteria:
(B)(1). The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail
or historical type.
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue is over fifty years of age, but it is not a unique or
rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type. As discussed above, the
buildings are industrial vernacular buildings with utilitarian purposes that are ubiquitous
throughout Santa Monica’s industrial areas, such as the Pico neighborhood, and Southern
California as a whole.
(B)(2). The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer
prevalent.
The subject property represents the industrial vernacular style which is still represented
in the City in large numbers. While the resource is one of the few remaining industrial
buildings in the southeastern portion of the Downtown, it is not rare when considered with
the larger inventory of buildings in the industrial areas of Santa Monica. Industrial
development in this area was not as historically prevalent in Downtown as other areas in
the city, such as the Pico neighborhood. Further north on Colorado Avenue there are
numerous extant examples of similarly scaled industrial development.
(B)(3). The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property is not located within any previously identified potential historic
district, and a historic district is unlikely to exist in the area surrounding 631 Colorado
Avenue. The subject property is surrounded by commercial, industrial, and multi-family
buildings of various styles, sizes, and construction dates. They are not visually or
historically unified and do not form a significant or cohesive grouping. Therefore, the
property does not appear significant as a Structure of Merit under this criterion.
6.B.h
Packet Pg. 1842 Attachment: STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
5
SECTION ll. Parcel Designation
Because staff is not recommending designation of the structures, staff does not recommend
designation of the parcel.
SECTION lll. I hereby certify that the above Findings and Determination accurately
reflect the final determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica on June 14,
2022 as determined by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
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 of the
proceedings relating to this designation. 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.
Respectfully Submitted
June 14, 2022
Sue Himmelrich, Mayor
Attest:
Stephanie Reich,
Landmarks Commission Secretary
6.B.h
Packet Pg. 1843 Attachment: STOA22ENT-0015 631 Colorado Council Appeal STOA [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 1
Appellant/Property Owner: 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
Address: 631 Colorado Avenue
Applicant: Santa Monica Conservancy
SUPPLEMENT TO APPEAL FORM
The subject property does not merit designation as a City Landmark. The composition of the
Landmarks Commission’s 4-2 vote (with one recusal) is telling. The Commission’s Architect
Historian (i.e., Dr. Kenneth Breisch1) voted against and spoke against the designation, as did
Commissioner Amy Green, who is a Professional Associate with the American Institute for
Conservation of Historic & Artistic Works (AIC) and holds a certificate in historic preservation
from the University of Southern California and a Master of Arts degree from Antioch University.
Licensed architect Richard Brand was unable to participate due to his residence’s proximity to
the subject property.
Dr. Breisch criticized the Landmarks Commission’s motion to designate:
Yes, I would say I’m not very happy with this, the way it’s moving
forward, for a number of reasons. I think there is a major question
on integrity that’s lacking here. And that I don’t think the building
really reflects--I don’t know what it reflects. I guess it reflects
maybe the whole scope of the history of the building, but I don’t
think that’s what we’re here to designate.
I’m a little confused by the statement of significance in terms of
the reinforced masonry construction, which I don’t think has been
proven one way or another. And I went and looked very closely at
it, and I couldn’t figure out exactly what was going on, I have to
say. And that was in no small part because the building’s been
sandblasted twice. And in terms of the significance of materials
and workmanship, for example, it’s not there.
So, if we’re looking at this building as an example of a particular
type of masonry construction, it doesn’t exist anymore.
Sandblasting is really a major problem in terms of not just
1 Dr. Breisch is founder, and then served as Director, of the USC Graduate Programs in
Historical Preservation and is an associate professor at USC’s School of Architecture and the
Dornsife Department of American Studies and Ethnicity. He is a past president of the Society of
Architectural Historians. He has served on the Board of The Vernacular Architecture Forum. He
holds a Ph.D. in Art History from the University of Michigan.
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1844 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 2
designation, but of course, the way you treat buildings after
they’ve been designated. And this thing is just been decimated.
And it’s been repointed to the point where it’s just pretty
disgusting workmanship.
So, if we’re sort of mixing these things together, there are new
windows, the entry’s been moved and really there’s no integrity
whatsoever to this structure in terms of the masonry, and whether
it’s groutlock or not, which I really am doubtful about. So, the
thing we’re designating should really reflect something of the
history of the place. And if it’s been so altered with sandblasting in
the ‘50s and changing windows and moving entryways, then I just
don’t see that working for me.
I am absolutely sympathetic to recognizing the earlier African-
American neighborhood and community that was there, but I don’t
think this is really the place to do it. It could maybe be added, but
we’ve gone through this before I think. There’s a wonderful
memorial to Biddy Mason in Downtown LA, but that’s not a
historic landmark. It commemorates what was there and is no
longer there, that’s been erased, and that’s what we’ve got here.
So, that bothers me too, I think, to be recognizing that.
With all due respect Commissioner Sloan, I think that there were
previous occupants before the African-Americans were there. And
I think we have a park just down the street that recognizes that as
well.
It’s just bothersome to me that we keep layering on these things
that don’t really reflect the nature of the Landmark Ordinance and
what it’s intended to do. So, that’s my problem.
To use a real important architectural technical term, it’s cute. But I
don’t think it rises to the level of being a landmark. I don’t think it
rises to that level.
Commissioner Green also criticized the motion to designate this building as a Landmark:
Thank you, Commissioner Breisch. You pretty much said what
was in my head.
In terms of the sandblasting, it not only alters the appearance, but it
actually alters the structural integrity of the materials. It weakens
them. So, we’re talking about landmarking something that is not
anywhere near what it was when it was built.
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1845 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 3
And the other piece of it that has been bothering me is this
association with the African-American neighborhood, because the
building itself, the existing structure, has nothing to do with who
lived there before. And so, if we’re commemorating the
predecessors, I don’t understand what that has to do with the
structure itself.
And so, I’m also having a hard time supporting this. And I think
it’s a beautiful building. I like the building itself. That was my
feeling when I went and looked at it yesterday. I was attracted to it,
but that has nothing to do with whether or not it rises to the
standards of designation. So, it’s cute, as Commissioner Breisch
said. I like the details, but again, that doesn’t help me want to
landmark it. That’s it.
Vice Chair Breisch and Commissioner Green therefore made two legally
important points. First, it is indisputable that the current building has been
substantially altered since its original construction as a warehouse, and to the
extent the basis for the property’s nomination is the use of so-called groutlock
brick, all of the brick has been sandblasted beyond recognition. Second, the
Commission’s vote was largely motivated not by an assessment of the existing
improvements on the subject property but by a desire to in some form recognize
an African American resident (Etta Moxley). While such recognition no doubt has
virtue outside of the context of the Landmarks Ordinance, there is no basis under
the Landmarks Ordinance as currently written to designate the unrelated existing
building for preservation based on association with Ms. Moxley, who never
owned, lived in or worked in the current buildings.
Professional Evaluations by Credentialed Experts
The City’s independent architectural history consultants at GPA Consulting similarly concluded,
based on their thorough research and evaluation, that the property does not meet any of the
criteria for designation as a City Landmark and does not warrant designation as a Landmark:
Conclusions
The property at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to be
eligible under any of the Santa Monica Landmark Criteria, nor
does it appear to merit recognition as a Structure of Merit. The
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1846 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 4
property was identified as individually eligible for local listing or
designation through survey evaluation for conveying patterns of
industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa
Monica.
However, during the additional analysis conducted for this report,
it was revealed that the grouping of industrial buildings at 631
Colorado Avenue has been modified and does not have an
important association with a significant aspect of Santa Monica’s
industrial history. In the event the property had retained its original
design and configuration, the property as a whole would still be an
example of a ubiquitous, industrial property type in Santa Monica
and Southern California that does not possess the distinctive
characteristics of a specific style or property type. Research did not
reveal any other potential significant associations with important
persons or events, or the cultural, social, economic, political, or
architectural history of Santa Monica, and the property does not
appear likely to contribute to a potential historic district.
Therefore, GPA concludes that neither building on the property
appears to warrant designation as a Landmark or Structure of
Merit.
(GPA Landmark Assessment Report, p. 21.)
Furthermore, Margarita Jerabek-Bray,2 Ph.D., of ESA--a consultant whom the City often retains
but who was retained this time by the property owner--also reached the same conclusion: “[T]he
property located at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to meet any of the City of Santa
Monica Landmarks Criteria.” (ESA’s City Landmarks Assessment and Evaluation Report, p.
88.) And Ms. Jerabek further found that, due to extensive alterations to the building, including
sandblasting of the brick surfaces at least twice, as well as: alteration or replacement of the
windows, reconfiguration of the entrances, and alteration of the setting: “the subject property
lacks historic integrity.” (ESA Report, p. 87.)
And now a third expert has evaluated the property. Like the other two experts, Jenna Snow
writes: “It is my professional opinion that the subject property does not meet any of the City
2 Ms. Jaerabek-Bray received her Ph.D. in Art History from UCLA, as well as a Master
of Arts in Architectural History from the University of Virginia and a Bachelors of Arts in Art
History from Oberlin College. Her qualifications meet and exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards in History, Architectural History and Archaeology.
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1847 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 5
Landmark criteria set forth in the Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic District Ordinance.”
(Snow Report, p. 1.) In support of her conclusion, Ms. Snow explains:
As demonstrated in the earlier reports, as well as this
memorandum, the Main Building at the subject property is not
significant under criterion 1. As an industrial building . . . [i]t was
not the earliest industrial building in the area, nor is it the last.
None of the business that occupied the building were shown to
have made significant contributions to their specific fields while
occupying the subject property. Finally, there are no extant
buildings at the subject property associated with Etta Moxley.
Under criterion 4, while the building may have used groutlock
brick construction, this is not a historically significant method of
construction. Further, there is no evidence that its use in the Main
Building influenced its use in any other building activities in the
area. The Main Building at 631 Colorado Boulevard does not rise
to the level of significance to warrant designation as a City of
Santa Monica Landmark. (Snow Report, p. 11.)
Ms. Snow also writes:
631 Colorado Boulevard has undergone substantial changes since
it was constructed in 1937 and does not retain integrity . . . The
subject property does not resemble its historic appearance, neither
from 1937 nor from the 1960s. Even if the property were to be
found to have significance, it does not retain sufficient integrity to
convey that significance. (Snow Report, pp. 10-11.)
As noted in the City’s 2018 HRI Update Survey Report:
In addition to meeting any or all of the designation criteria . . . the
National Park Service requires properties to possess historic
integrity. Historic integrity is the ability of a property to convey its
significance and is defined as “the authenticity of a property’s
historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical
characteristics that existed during the property’s historic period.”
(City of Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory
Update Survey Report (Aug. 9, 2018) p. 26, citing to National
Register Bulletin 16A.)
All of the experts agree that the building’s integrity is highly degraded. The City’s expert found:
While the Main Building retains some aspects of physical integrity,
its overall integrity has been diminished through exterior
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1848 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 6
modifications, including two additions, sandblasting, and the
introduction of contemporary new elements. The Auxiliary
Building does not retain integrity as it has been largely
reconstructed, and the integrity of the site overall has been lost
through the demolition of buildings and structures associated with
the alcohol distribution operation, reconfiguration of its street
access, enclosure with a privacy fence, and contemporary paving
and landscaping for the surface parking lot. As a result, the
property no longer retains sufficient physical integrity to reflect its
original use.
(GPA Report, p. 21; emphasis added.)
This building was evaluated numerous times during the City’s periodic historic resource
assessments, but it was never identified as a potential resource until the 2018 Historic Resources
Inventory Update. That longstanding omission from the City’s HRI is telling. It’s not as though
the building suddenly become for significant. It has never been an important building.
Housing Element Designation as Suitable Site for Housing
Additionally, the subject property is specifically identified on the City’s October 2021 Suitable
Sites Inventory (“SSI”) as a site highly likely for housing development. (See 6th Cycle 2021-2029
Housing Element, App. F, p. F-68.) Moreover, this site was also identified in the prior Housing
Element’s Suitable Sites Inventory. (5th Cycle 2013-2021 Housing Element.) And as such (i.e.,
as a Category 2 Site), the property was “re-evaluated to determine suitability for housing
potential” in the Housing Element Update. (2021-2029 Housing Element, App. F, p. F-8.) Per its
listing on the SSI, this site is categorized as having “high potential” for housing development.
(Id.)
According to the City’s newest Housing Element (submitted to the State Department of Housing
& Community Development in November), all such sites were “filtered” to exclude “parcels
with existing Landmarks or Historic Resources.” (Id. at p. F-1.) In fact, this property is one of the
parcels that the City has already represented to the State Department of Housing & Community
Development (“HCD”) at least twice has having high potential for development for housing. And
indeed, consistent with that evaluation, the property was under contract for sale to a housing
developer until the Landmarks Commission’s vote.
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1849 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 7
And now, with the ink barely dry on the page, the Landmarks Commission has designated the
property as a City Landmark. Indeed, the Landmark Application was filed on May 20, 2021—
almost five months before the 6th Cycle Housing Element was adopted, and even before the
Suitable Sites Inventory was published on June 2, 2021. Indeed, Planning Commissioner Fresco,
together with her colleagues on the Planning Commission, endorsed the Suitable Sites Inventory
as part of the Housing Element Update. (See Resolution # 21-011 (PCS), § 2, stating in part:
“Based on substantial evidence set forth in Chapter 4, Summary of Land Available for Housing,
and Appendix F, Suitable Site Inventory Report of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, the existing
uses on nonvacant sites identified in the SSI to accommodate lower income housing are likely to
be discontinued during the planning period, and therefore do not constitute an impediment to
additional residential development during the period covered by the Housing Element” and
further representing that “Parcels with existing uses that were not likely to be discontinued
during the planning period were not examined for suitability, as follows: . . Parcels with existing
historic resources.”) Commissioner Fresco and her fellow Planning Commissioners approved
that Resolution while this very landmark application was pending. See also Gov’t Code §
65583.3(a) (“The local government shall ensure, to the best of its knowledge, that the inventory
of land submitted to the department [of Housing & Community Development] is true and
correct.”).
The City Council’s role on appeal is to take a bigger picture view of the landmark nomination, in
as much as the Landmarks Ordinance provides that even for properties meeting any of the six
criteria for designation (which the credentialed and qualified experts agree it does not), the City
has the discretion to approve or deny the nomination:
For purposes of this Chapter, the Landmarks Commission may [not
“must”] approve the landmark designation of a structure,
improvement, natural feature or an object if it finds that it meets
one or more of the following criteria . . .
(Landmarks Ordinance § 9.56.100(A).)
This site’s longstanding suitability (since at least 2013) and “high potential” for housing
development should trump the Landmark Designation Application on appeal. Designation of this
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1850 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 8
site as a Landmark Parcel undercuts the credibility of the City’s Housing Element and its SSI
analysis.
Etta Moxley/Historical Site Issue
Also, it is important to note that the Landmarks Ordinance does not provide for designation of
historical sites, separate and apart from existing buildings and improvements. Thus, any and all
references to Etta Moxley are completely irrelevant to consideration of this property as a
potential Landmark. In this regard, the designation of landmarks in Santa Monica is reserved for
buildings, not sites:
“Any building, structure, place, site, work of art, landscape feature,
plantlife, life-form, scenic condition or other object constituting a
physical betterment of real property, or any part of such
betterment.”
(Landmarks Ordinance § 9.56.030(I) & (J).)
Without discounting the historical significance of Ms. Moxley, the law applicable to this
property’s nomination has no place for designating a building as a City Landmark when the
building being designated did not even exist at the time of the historic person’s residence at the
property. The Landmarks Commission completely ignored the counsel of the City’s Deputy City
Attorney in this regard:
Deputy City Attorney Heidi von Tongeln reminded the
Commission that their review must be based on existing
improvements to the property, not improvements that are no longer
extant.
(Landmarks Commission Meeting Minutes (Jan. 10, 2022), p. 7.)
Here, the record is clear that the housing that Ms. Moxley once occupied no longer exists on the
subject property. (See Nomination Application (“One cottage and a garage from the Moxley
period of ownership remained [when the current buildings were constructed] on the north-west
edge of the parcel. The other cottages were demolished.”).)
This fact is also evidenced in the City’s expert’s report:
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1851 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Page | 9
“Since the residential and outbuildings related to this cultural and
social history [with Etta Moxley] are no longer extant, the existing
buildings on the property do not share the same association.”
(GPA Report, p. 16.)
Thus, Finding #1, as relied upon by the Landmarks Commission for this designation, is
completely misguided:
The subject parcel is also significant for its association with Etta
Vena Moxley (1870-1950), a dedicated life-long leader in the
African American Women’s Club movement in the State of
California, Los Angeles and in Santa Monica. She lived at 631
Colorado Avenue from 1898 – 1927 and continued to own it until
1937. Etta Moxley was a member of a leading group of Los
Angeles and Santa Monica African American activists striving for
social justice and equal rights for people of all races. Etta Moxley
was associated with a number of significant groups often in
leadership roles
That said, the appellant property owner has no objection to a commemorative marker or other
interpretive installation paying respect to Ms. Moxley and her achievements.
No Structure of Merit Application
There is no structure of merit application, therefore it is unnecessary to evaluate those criteria.
That said, the consultants for the City and the property owner have both independently
confirmed that the property does not meet the criteria for designation as a structure of merit.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, we agree with the findings for denial as previously set forth in the
Staff Report to the Landmarks Commission.
6.B.i
Packet Pg. 1852 Attachment: 631 Colorado_ Supplement to Appeal Form(15050000.1) [Revision 1] (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Jenna Snow ● Historic Preservation Consulting ● 323/317-3297 ● jenna@preservingbuildings.com
Memorandum
DATE: May 16, 2022
TO: Kenneth L. Kutcher
Harding Larmore Kutcher & Kozel, LLP
41250 Sixth Street, Suite 200
Santa Monica, CA 90401
FROM: Jenna Snow
RE: 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA
Introduction
The Santa Monica Conservancy filed a City Landmark Designation application for the property
located at 631 Colorado Avenue (Assessor Parcel Number 4291-023-009) in Santa Monica,
California (“subject property” or “property”) in May 2021. That nomination was heard by the
Landmarks Commission on January 10, 2022, who voted 4-2 to designate the property, following a
recusal by one of the Commissioners. Despite that the property was designated, arguments offered
in support of the Landmark nomination are incomplete and misleading and do not adequately
support findings of significance.
The hearing record includes detailed reports from two different independent historic preservation
consulting firms that professionally evaluated the nomination and both of those reports concluded
that the subject property does not satisfy any of the criteria for designation as a City Landmark.
Furthermore, the City staff report prepared for the January 2022 Landmarks Commission hearing
recommended that the application for designation should be denied.
I have been asked to render an opinion as well. To that end, I have conducted two site visits,
carefully reviewed the nomination and two independent evaluations and the findings of the
Landmarks Commission. In addition, I have also consulted various brick experts, examined
additional historic photographs and the 2001 architectural plans that guided the extensive
remodeling that occurred in 2002. It is my professional opinion that the subject property does not
meet any of the City Landmark criteria set forth in the Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic
District Ordinance. My resume is attached.
The following memorandum summarizes my research and analysis on which my opinion is based.
City of Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic District Ordinance
The City of Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic District Ordinance was adopted by City Council
in 1974 and allows the Landmarks Commission to designate City Landmarks that meet one or more
of the following criteria:1
1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or
architectural history of the City.
1 City of Santa Monica Municipal Code, Section 9.56.100(A).
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1853 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 2
2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
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.
The Santa Monica Landmarks Commission does not have jurisdiction over the interior spaces of
designated Landmarks, with the exception of interior spaces regularly open to the public.2
Previous Evaluations
Historic resource surveys of the City in 1983 and 20113 did not identify the subject property, which
indicates the property did not appear eligible as a historic resource at the time of those surveys. It
was not until the 2018 Historic Resources Survey update (2018 HRI survey) that the subject property
was eventually identified as a potential Santa Monica Landmark. In doing so, the 2018 HRI survey
identified the architectural style of the subject property as “industrial vernacular” and described its
potential significance as follows:
631 Colorado appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The property
is significant for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown
neighborhood of Santa Monica. Constructed in 1937, it is one of relatively few extant
industrial buildings in the area from the pre-World War II period.4
Subsequently, the subject property has been more thoroughly assessed in the landmark designation
application and the two assessment reports prepared by the two qualified preservation experts. In
January 2022, GPA Consulting prepared a “Landmark Assessment Report” for the City of Santa
Monica to render a professional opinion about whether the property appeared eligible for
designation. Based on research and analysis, the GPA report concluded that the subject property
“does not appear eligible under any of the Santa Monica Landmark Criteria.”5 Preservation experts
at ESA also prepared a “City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report” for the owner of the
subject property, dated December 2021, and came to the same conclusion that the property does not
meet any of the six criteria for designation.
It is important to distinguish between, on the one hand, the HRI Update survey that considered
several thousand properties and on the other hand, a site-specific assessment report focused on a
single property, such as those prepared by GPA and ESA. As explained in National Register Bulletin
#24, “Guidelines for Local Surveys: a basis for preservation planning,” a reconnaissance-level survey
is defined as “a ‘once over lightly’ inspection of an area, most useful for characterizing its resources
2 City of Santa Monica Municipal Code, Section 9.56.110.
3 Additional historic resource survey efforts took place in 1986, 1993, 1994, 1997, 2002, 2004, and 2006.
4 Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group, “Appendix B: 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update –
Individual Resources,” prepared for the City of Santa Monica, January 2017, 46.
5 GPA Consulting, “Landmark Assessment Report: 631 Colorado Avenue,” prepared for the City of Santa Monica, January 3, 2021, 21.
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1854 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 3
in general and for developing a basis for deciding how to organize and orient more detailed survey
efforts.” In contrast, an assessment report is a “close and careful look” at one particular property.6
Landmarks Commission Findings
The Findings and Determination of the Landmarks Commission (or “STOA”) regarding the January
2022 Landmark nomination correctly describes that the subject property consists of two buildings: a
Main Building, constructed in 1937, and an Auxiliary Building, constructed in 1941. The STOA
identify only the Main Building as significant, finding eligibility under two of the six criteria (i.e.,
Criteria 1 and 4).7 Under criterion 1, three factors of significance are relied upon for designation of
the Main Building:
1. “the first light industrial commercial building in the south-east portion of downtown”
2. “representative of the City’s [economic development] evolution from the 1930s to the
present day”
3. “association with Etta Vena Moxley (1870-1950), a dedicated life-long leader in the African
American Women’s Club movement”
Under criterion 4, the Main Building at the subject property was found significant for its use of
groutlock brick and as “the only known example of post-Long Beach Earthquake transitional
engineering techniques for ensuring that brick and mortar structures had seismic integrity.”
Analysis
As previously noted, although lengthy, the Landmark nomination relies upon a flawed analysis, and
got bogged down with many irrelevant details that distract from a true assessment of significance.
The following provides a more direct and clear analysis for each of the above listed areas of potential
significance.
6 Anne Derry, H. Ward Jandl, Carol D. Shull, and Jan Thorman, National Register Bulletin #24, Guidelines for Local Surveys: a
basis for preservation planning, (National Park Service, 1977), revised by Patricia L. Parker in 1985.
7 The STOA are muddled, given their unsupported reference to “two contributing structures (page 1),” while at the same time clearly stating that “The Designation includes the structure at the corner of 7th Street and Colorado Avenue, excluding all other stricture[s] on the parcel” (page 4).
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1855 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 4
The subject property was not the first light industrial commercial building in the south-east
portion of downtown
The terminology “light industrial commercial building” is unclear and vague. It is more accurate to
describe the Main Building typology as a pre-World War II industrial development and eliminate use
of the word “commercial.” While there may have been some commercial function through direct
beer sales at the property, the primary function was as a warehouse, which is generally considered to constitute an industrial use. A visit to the site clearly shows that this warehouse building was
constructed fur use as an industrial building with a simple façade, nearly devoid of decoration, unarticulated side elevations, and a large open floor interior space. The architecture is unremarkable
and relatively nondescript, best described as “industrial vernacular” as it was in the 2018 HRI.
Contrary to the Landmark nomination, the Main Building was not the first industrial property of its kind in the industrial area of Santa Monica. While the Landmark nomination ascribes the property’s
location as the south-east portion of Downtown, it is more accurate to describe this portion of Colorado Avenue as part of an industrial zone adjacent to the former railroad, and now the Santa
Monica Freeway (I-10).
Figure 1 Historic aerial photograph, view east, subject property outlined red, note industrial buildings along Colorado Ave. and south (UCLA Air Photo Archives, 1965)
Figure 2: Detail of historic aerial photograph at left, west elevation of subject property, note two large openings (UCLA Air Photo Archives, 1965)
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1856 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 5
As seen in Sanborn maps, Lincoln Boulevard, contained a mix of commercial and industrial
buildings.8 Also seen in historic aerial photographs, this industrial zone, which came to include
Colorado Avenue, contained many low-scale industrial buildings (see above Figure 3, for example).
These primary sources documenting this industrial zone are further supported by the 2018 HRI
survey, which describes industrial development primarily adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. At the
time, this area provided means of easy transport of raw materials and finished goods in and out of
the city. As described in the historic context of the 2018 HRI survey, “the effects of the early rail line
routing can still be seen on the landscape today through zoning and the continued concentration of
light industry uses in the same locations as they were historically.”9
The Main Building at the subject property was not the earliest example of an industrial development
around Colorado Avenue, nor is it the last remaining example. Developed well before the subject
property, the 1918 Sanborn map shows the Bassett & Nebeker Lumber Yard directly across the
street at the southwest corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street. Among other examples identified
in the 2018 HRI survey are Arden Farms Co / Santa Monica Ice Cream Co. at 1545 12th Street
(1928), Alpha Engineering at 2902 Colorado Avenue (1938), and Crescent Cleaners at 1415
Colorado Avenue (1955).
Both primary and secondary sources place the subject property at the northern edge of industrial
development in Santa Monica. The subject property was not unique but simply one of many such
buildings contributing to the larger trend of industrial development. The subject property has not
been shown to be the first or only industrial building in this area of the city and therefore is not
eligible under criterion 1.
8 Attachment C of the ESA Report includes pertinent Sanborn Fire Insurance maps.
9 Architectural Resources Group and Historic Resources Group, “Historic Resources Inventory Update – Historic Context Statement,” prepared for the City of Santa Monica, January 2017, 236.
Figure 3: Historic aerial photograph, view northwest, subject property outlined red, note industrial buildings along Colorado Ave. and south (UCLA Air Photo Archives, 1966)
Figure 4: Detail of historic aerial photograph at left, south and east elevations of subject property, note original configuration of south elevation (UCLA Air Photo Archives, 1965)
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1857 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 6
The subject property is not representative of the City’s economic development from the
1930s to the present day
As detailed in the Landmark nomination, as well as the two consultant reports, the following outlines
the history of occupants of the subject property:
1937-1953: A.B.C. Distribution Company
1955-1956: Aerophysics Development Corporation
1967-1994: Keystone Autobody Shop
1994-present: various film production offices
None of these occupants appears to have made any significant contributions to their specific
industries while occupying the subject property. As described more fully below, the subject property
was constructed as a beer distribution warehouse for A.B.C. Distribution Company, a function it
retained from 1937 until approximately 1953. Subsequently, the property was occupied by the
Aerophysics Development Corporation for a little less than two years. It was one of three buildings
the company used simultaneously in this period, and it is not known how the subject property was
used by the company. In 1956, Aerophysics Development Corporation became a subsidiary of
Studebaker-Packard and moved its headquarters to Santa Barbara. While the company appears to
have made advances in the aerospace industry, the subject property does not appear to have been the
location of any significant innovation. Between 1967 and 1994, the subject property was occupied by
Keystone Autobody Shop, a full-service automobile repair facility. The Landmark nomination
provides minimal additional information on Keystone Autobody Shop, and it can be inferred that
the company did not innovate anything new in the areas of car repair or service. None of these
businesses is noteworthy. (A.B.C. Distribution Company is discussed in greater detail below.)
A building’s occupancy by various diverse businesses that may be representative of the types of
industries prevalent in Santa Monica over time does not constitute historic significance. Because
there is no written guidance on Santa Monica Landmark eligibility, extensive written guidance
provided by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places is typically relied
upon. National Register guidance states,
“Mere association with historic events…is not enough, in and of itself, to
qualify…The property’s specific association must be considered important as well.
For example, a building historically in commercial use must be shown to have been
significant in commercial history.”10
While the subject property was used by a variety of owners, there is no evidence that any of the
businesses made significant contributions to their specific fields while occupying the subject
property. Therefore, the subject property is not eligible under criterion 1 for its contribution to the
economic development of Santa Monica.
• A.B.C. Brewing Company is not a rare or significant example of industrial
development in Santa Monica
As described in the landmark designation application, 631 Colorado Avenue was constructed as a distribution warehouse for Aztec Brewing Company in 1937, four years after Prohibition was lifted.
Aztec Brewing Company was established in Mexicali, Mexico in 1921, catering to Americans
10 National Register Bulletin #15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National Park Service, 1990, revised 2002), 12.
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1858 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 7
traveling to Baja. After prohibition, the company moved its brewing operations to San Diego11 and
opened a beer hall in the Logan Heights neighborhood. Murals from the beer hall, painted by
Spanish artist, Jose Moya del Pino, depicted traditional Aztec and Mayan imagery.12 By late summer
of 1933, there were six distributors of Aztec Brewing Company beer throughout the greater Los
Angeles area, each of which had their own franchise.13
While Aztec Brewing Company may convey a significant pattern of economic development in San
Diego immediately after prohibition, contrary to the landmark designation application, there is no
clear connection between the subject property and Santa Monica’s economy in the 1930s and 1940s.
Unlike the San Diego brewery, the subject property does not “exemplif[y] economic development
following the end of prohibition.”14 631 Colorado Avenue was a distribution warehouse for a San
Diego-based company; there was never any beer brewed on the premise. There is no information on
who received the beer that was distributed, but it is highly likely it did not stay exclusively in Santa
Monica. An advertisement from August 1933 notes that the Venice location of the A.B.C.
Distribution Co. distributed beer throughout “Santa Monica, Venice, Ocean Park and Beach
Section.”15 It can be assumed that the distribution area remained similar when A.B.C. Distribution
Co. moved to the subject property after it was constructed in 1937.
A.B.C. beer was not the only beer option open to thirsty denizens of Santa Monica. The 1934 Los
Angeles City Directory lists 10 breweries making beer in Los Angeles.16 While Santa Monica may have
taken a “more conservative stance on alcohol consumption at the end of prohibition,”17 there is no
evidence to suggest that beer brewed outside the City, such as in Los Angeles, was not distributed in
Santa Monica.
Finally, the 1936 Santa Monica City Directory lists two other “Brewers’ Agents” and one “Liquors-
Distributors.”18 Of those, Bohemian Distributing Co, located at 2439 Main Street, and Ocean Park
Beverage Co, located at 2719 Main Street, are both extant.19 The same year, the 1936 Los Angeles
City Directory lists 20 “Brewers’ Agents.”20 While A.B.C. Distributing Co. may have been one of the
early beer distributors in Santa Monica, it was by no means the only one, nor is it the last one
remaining.
Furthermore, warehousing and distribution was such a common use, it is typically not considered
significant at all. There was no actual product made at the subject property and A.B.C. Distribution
Company does not appear to have innovated any new techniques of distribution. Therefore, there is
no evidence to suggest that the subject property “reflect[s] the elevated stature of the liquor business
in that [post prohibition] era.”21 The subject property is not significant under criterion 1 for its
association with the A.B.C Distribution Co.
11 Nina Fresco, “City of Santa Monica – City Planning Division: Designation Application,” submitted May 20, 2021.
12 Ian Anderson, “Celebrating 100 years of Aztec Brewing,” San Diego Reader, January 22, 2021, https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2021/jan/22/beer-celebrating-100-years-aztec-brewing/. Many of the murals from the beer hall, also called the Rathskeller, were removed from the brewery before it was demolished in 1990 and reinstalled in the Logan Heights library. (“Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum,
https://chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/.)
13 “Display Ad,” Los Angeles Times, August 30, 1933, 5; Nina Fresco, “City of Santa Monica – City Planning Division: Designation Application,” submitted May 20, 2021.
14 Nina Fresco, “City of Santa Monica – City Planning Division: Designation Application,” submitted May 20, 2021.
15 “Display Ad,” Los Angeles Times, August 30, 1933, 5.
16 “Brewers,” Los Angeles City Directory, (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Directory Co., 1934).
17 Nina Fresco, “City of Santa Monica – City Planning Division: Designation Application,” submitted May 20, 2021.
18 Santa Monica and Venice City Directory, (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Directory Co., 1936).
19 Neither 2439 Main Street nor 2719 Main Street were identified in the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update.
20 Los Angeles City Directory, (Los Angeles: Los Angeles Directory Co., 1936).
21 City of Santa Monica, “Findings and Determination of the Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Monica in the Matter of the Designation of a Landmark.”
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1859 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 8
The subject property is not significant for association with Etta Vena Moxley (1870-1950), a
leader in the African American Women’s Club movement, as there are no extant buildings
associated with Moxley
As explained in great length in the landmark designation application, Etta Moxley, a leader in the
African American Women’s Club movement, lived in a house at the subject property from around
the turn of the twentieth century through circa 1928, although she owned the property until 1937.
During this period, there were four residential cottages on the subject property and a small
commercial building. All but one of these five buildings were demolished in 1937 to allow for
construction of the existing building at 631 Colorado Avenue. The last building was demolished by
1965. There are no buildings left from the period when Etta Moxley lived at the property. The two
buildings at the property date from 1937 and 1941, after Etta Moxley had moved to another location
and sold the property.
As described in the landmark designation application, Etta Moxley was one of the founding
members of the Monday Women’s Club, located at 1209 East 6th Street in the Oakwood
neighborhood of Venice, which was designated a City of Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument
#1203 in 2020. The clubhouse is significant as an important reminder of black women in Venice
who banded together for social interaction and were actively engaged with improving their
community. In addition to her involvement in the Monday Women’s Club, Etta Moxley was also
very active in the state-wide California Association of Colored Women’s Clubs, serving as its fourth
president between 1912 and 1914.22 During her tenure, she supported the establishment of the
Sojourner Truth Home in 1913, located at 1119 East Adams Boulevard (extant), the first collective
effort undertaken by black women’s clubs throughout Southern California that initially provided
living quarters and job training for unmarried women and single mothers.23
Etta Moxley is indeed an important individual whose accomplishments should be brought to wide
public attention. However, the property at 631 Colorado Avenue is not the correct location to
commemorate her life and work as there is nothing tangible left from the period of her residency.
According to Santa Monica Municipal Code, Section 9.56.030, an improvement appropriate for
designation includes “Any building, structure, place, site, work of art, landscape feature, plantlife,
life-form, scenic condition or other object constituting a physical betterment of real property, or any
part of such betterment.” As there is no improvement at the subject property associated with Etta
Moxley, this location is not eligible for designation for this association. Furthermore, there is no
basis in the Santa Monica Landmarks Ordinance to designate this property for its past association
with the resident of a home that itself no longer exists.
The National Register provides additional guidance on eligibility. National Register Bulletin 32:
Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Properties Associated with Significant Persons requires that, “a
property must retain integrity from the period of its significant associations.” As described more
fully below, integrity refers to the ability of a property to convey its significance. In other words, a
property must generally appear as it did when it gained significance. One test is “whether the
significant person(s) associated with the resource would recognize it as it exists today.”24 The subject
property would most certainly not pass this test. Etta Moxley would not recognize the buildings at
the subject property as her former home.
22 California State Association of Colored Women's Clubs, Inc., “California State Association of Colored Women's Clubs,
Inc. booklet,” (African American Museum & Library at Oakland: 1953).
23 Douglas Flamming, Bound for Freedom: Black Los Angeles in Jim Crow America (University of California Press, 2005), 139.
24 Beth Grosvenor Boland, National Register Bulletin 32: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Properties Associated with Significant Persons (U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service), 23.
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1860 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 9
As aptly and succinctly noted in the GPA report:
Because the built environment only reflects certain aspects of the importance a
community, space, or neighborhood may have, place-based historic designation
programs do not fully or accurately capture history that may be intangible or lost.
Historic preservation planning is just one of many tools for recognizing social,
cultural and historical value. Other strategies to employ may include historical
markers, mapping programs, oral history projects, public art, events, walking tours,
and close collaboration with advocacy groups.25
The City of Santa Monica should strive to communicate the significance of Etta Moxley in a wide
variety of meaningful ways. Identifying a site with no physical evidence of Moxley’s life and work
does not convey her important role in local history, while some of the above-listed strategies for
historical interpretation could better represent her accomplishments.
The subject property is not significant for its use of groutlock brick, which was never an
important building material
Groutlock brick was a brand of reinforced brick masonry produced by the Simons Brick Company
for a relatively short period of time between 1932 until approximately 1942. Reinforced brick
masonry is a type of building material that incorporates steel reinforcement embedded in mortar or
grout that increases “resistance to forces that produce tensile and shear stresses.”26 Reinforced brick
masonry was first used in the beginning of the nineteenth century in England. One of the earliest
uses of reinforced brick masonry was at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco in 1887 that, due to the
steel reinforcing, survived the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake. An article published in 1933
estimated about 40 “individual jobs” utilized reinforced brick masonry and “approximately 50
additional jobs are either under construction or under consideration in various parts of the
country.”27 The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake initiated substantial changes in the building code,
requiring additional reinforcement. These changes to the building code took nearly a decade to put
into practice.28 After World War II, use of reinforced brick masonry became common, typically
utilizing a hollow within the brick to vertically install reinforcing steel.29
Simons Brick Company heavily advertised their product in local newspapers, highlighting a variety of
buildings that used groutlock brick, including residential, industrial, and commercial properties.
Simons groutlock brick retains typical dimensions along the visible elevations with a void at the rear
that allows for a horizontal reinforcing rebar. Although Simons produced 150,000 bricks a day in
1933,30 groutlock bricks were only a small fraction of their total product line. Ultimately, groutlock
brick did not take hold and they have come to be regarded as “gimmicky.”31
25 GPA Consulting, 5-6.
26 The Brick Industry Association, “Technical Notes on Brick Construction: Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction,” Reissued October 1996, https://www.gobrick.com/read-research/technical-notes.
27 The Brick Industry Association, “Technical Notes on Brick Construction: Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction,” Reissued October 1996, https://www.gobrick.com/read-research/technical-notes.
28 Richard Rydel, Executive Director, Masonry Institute of America, phone conversation with Jenna Snow, March 23, 2022.
29 Michael Schuler, P.E., President Atkinson-Noland & Associates, phone conversation with Jenna Snow, March 23, 2022.
30 “Factories Throughout City Increasing Production,” Los Angeles Times, May 21, 1933, 16.
31 Josh Higgins, phone conversation with Jenna Snow, March 30, 2022. Josh Higgins is a seventh-generation brick manufacturer. His grandfather, Robert Higgins, founded Higgins Brick & Tile Co. in 1927, which later bought out Simons Brick Co. in Santa Monica.
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1861 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 10
With regards to evaluating the significance of a property for its method of construction, National
Register guidance states:
A structure is eligible as a specimen of its type of period of construction if it is an
important example (within its context) of building practices of a particular time in
history. For properties that represent the variation, evolution, or transition of
construction types, it must be demonstrated that the variation, etc., was an important
phase of the architectural development of the area of community in that it had an
impact as evidenced by later buildings. A property is not eligible, however, simply
because it has been identified as the only such property ever fabricated; it must be
demonstrated to be significant as well.32
Although the Main Building at the subject property may have used a reinforced groutlock brick, this
method of construction does not appear to be historically significant. Like many brick buildings in
the 1930s, the method of construction appears to be somewhat experimental, before the new
building code was established. Its use at the subject property does not appear to have influenced any
other nearby building, nor did it change the code. Finally, groutlock brick had a relatively short life
and did not become the dominant type of reinforced brick masonry in the post-World War II era.
Given all these considerations, it cannot be said that the building material or method of construction
is significant.
The Main Building does not retain integrity from its date of construction, 1937, as the
appearance of 631 Colorado Blvd has changed considerably over time.
631 Colorado Boulevard has undergone substantial changes since it was constructed in 1937 and
does not retain integrity. Typically, for a property to be eligible for designation, it must meet at least
one eligibility criterion listed above and retain sufficient integrity to convey that historic significance.
Integrity is defined as physical and visual characteristics necessary to convey significance. Evaluation
of integrity is founded on “an understanding of a property’s physical features and how they relate to
32 National Register Bulletin #15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National Park Service, 1990, revised 2002), 18.
Figure 3: South elevation, view northwest (Santa Monica History Museum, 1945) Figure 4: South elevation, view northwest, red highlights show areas of alteration (Snow, 2022)
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1862 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, CA 11
its significance.”33 The seven aspects of integrity are Location, Design, Setting, Materials,
Workmanship, Feeling, and Association. To satisfy the integrity requirement, a property must retain at least a majority of seven aspects.
While the Main Building at the subject property retains integrity of location (as it has not been
moved), it lacks integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. Primary alterations include: replacement of all window and door openings, including replacement of window sash and relocating
the primary entrance from the south elevation to the west elevation; an addition to the north elevation; and sandblasting of all visible elevations at least twice, changing the appearance of the
brick.34 Because of these alterations diminishing integrity, the Main Building cannot convey its feeling and association as an industrial building. The subject property does not resemble its historic
appearance, neither from 1937 nor from the 1960s. Even if the property were to be found to have significance, it does not retain sufficient integrity to convey that significance.
Conclusion
This memorandum confirms the findings in two prior assessment reports prepared by GPA Consulting and ESA, respectively, as well as the City staff report prepared in preparation of the
Landmarks Commission hearing in January 2022. As demonstrated in the earlier reports, as well as this memorandum, the Main Building at the subject property is not significant under criterion 1. As
an industrial building, it contributed to the evolution of industrial development in Santa Monica along the early rail line, a zone which included Colorado Boulevard by the 1910s. It was not the
earliest industrial building in the area, nor is it the last. None of the business that occupied the building were shown to have made significant contributions to their specific fields while occupying
the subject property. Finally, there are no extant buildings at the subject property associated with Etta Moxley. Under criterion 4, while the building may have used groutlock brick construction, this
is not a historically significant method of construction. Further, there is no evidence that its use in the Main Building influenced its use in any other building activities in the area. The Main Building at
631 Colorado Boulevard does not rise to the level of significance to warrant designation as a City of Santa Monica Landmark.
33 Rebecca H. Shrimpton, editor, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington, DC: National Park Service, Department of the Interior, 1998) 44, <http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/>.
34 The north elevation is not accessible due to the closeness of the adjacent building to the north.
Figure 6: Historic aerial photograph, west elevation, note two
large openings (UCLA Air Photo Archives, 1965)
Figure 7: West elevation, view east, red highlights show areas of alteration (Snow, 2022)
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1863 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
QUALIFICATIONS
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1864 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
JENNA SNOW
In January 2015, Jenna Snow launched an independent historic preservation consulting practice with
offices in Los Angeles. With twenty years of professional experience, Ms. Snow has a strong and broad
understanding of best historic preservation practice, including federal, state, and local regulations.
Throughout her career, Ms. Snow has authored, co-authored, and/or served as project manager for over
100 historic preservation projects, including a wide variety of historic resource assessments, National
Register, California Register, and local nominations, as well as historic resources surveys. She regularly
contributes to environmental impact reports, historic preservation certification applications, Section 106
reviews and other work associated with historic building rehabilitation and preservation planning. For five
years, she served on the board of the South Carthay Historic Preservation Overlay Zone in mid-city Los
Angeles.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Jenna Snow, Historic Preservation Consulting, January 2015-present
Chattel, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, July 2002 – December 2014
International Council on Monuments and Sites, Transylvania Trust Foundation,
Cluj-Napoca, Romania, Fall 2004
Neighborhood Preservation Center, New York, NY, Spring 2002
New York City Department of Design and Construction, Historic Preservation
Office, New York, NY, Summer 2001
The Freedom Trail Foundation, Boston, MA, January 1999 - October 1999
SELECTED PROJECTS
Temple Ohave Israel (Brownsville, PA) – Prepared a National Register nomination
for a 1919 synagogue located in a small, economically depressed town of western
Pennsylvania. The synagogue, significant as an anchor for the small, but influential
Jewish community of Brownsville, PA, was listed in the National Register in
February 2016. Listing in the National Register makes the property eligible for state
grants to maintain the building, including replacement of a much needed roof.
Hawk House (Los Angeles, CA) – Prepared a successful Historic Cultural
Monument nomination for a 1939 single family residential house designed by
renown Los Angeles architect Harwell Hamilton Harris for Stan and Ethyl Hawk.
The house severed as the headquarters for the furnishing company “Hawk House.”
Chuey House (Los Angeles, CA) - Prepared a Historic-Cultural Monument
nomination for a single family residence designed by one of the most influential
Los Angeles architects, Richard Neutra, in 1956. As the property was for sale, the
house was threatened with demolition. While the nomination was ultimately
withdrawn, it served as a negotiation tool for the Los Angeles Conservancy.
Frank’s Camera (Los Angeles, CA) – Completed a Historic Structures Report in
support of a Mills Act Contract for a former S.H. Kress & Co., a five-and-dime-
store. A contributor to the Highland Park-Garvanza Historic Preservation Overlay
Zone, the building was constructed in 1928 and is undergoing a rehabilitation to
convert the building to smaller retail spaces. The building serves as a visual and
economic anchor to the revitalizing commercial strip along North Figueroa.
Monday Women’s Club (Los Angeles, CA) - Prepared a historic resource
assessment for a black women’s club in the Venice neighborhood. Moved to the
site in 1926, the building on the property was proposed for demolition. Worked
with the project team on a focused EIR that studied alternatives.
EDUCATION
Columbia University in the City of
New York, Master of Science in
Historic Preservation, 2002
Brandeis University, Bachelor of
Arts in Fine Arts, 1998
QUALIFICATIONS
Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications
Standards in Architectural History
LEED GA
AWARDS
Rosalind W. Levine Prize for
excellence in Fine Arts, June 1998
COMMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT
Secretary, South Carthay Historic
Preservation Overlay Zone Board,
2011-2016
Pick Leader, Food Forward, 2011-
present
Los Angeles Conservancy
ModCom Working Group, 2013-
2014
Guest Editor, The Next American
City, Fall 2006, Issue 12
New Orleans recovery team from
Western Regional Office of the
National Trust for Historic
Preservation, February 2006
Jenna Snow ● Historic Preservation Consulting ● 323/317-3297 ● jenna@preservingbuildings.com
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1865 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
Additional Projects:
Commodore Apartments (Los Angeles, CA) - Process Investment Tax Credit application for a 1926 Hollywood
apartment building that completed a major rehabilitation project. The rehabilitation carefully restored the primary
façade, which had experienced multiple alterations over the years.
West Los Angeles Veteran’s Affairs (Los Angeles, CA) – Between 2010 and 2014, prepared Section 106 review
and consultation for the first of 11 buildings that are undergoing seismic retrofit and limited rehabilitation. The
buildings will be reused to house veterans who are homeless. The rehabilitation won a Los Angeles Conservancy
award. Also prepared a successful National Register nomination for the whole campus, which was listed in No-
vember 2014. Work was done at Chattel, Inc. as a subconsultant to Leo A. Daly.
West Los Angeles Veteran’s Affairs Building 205 and Building 208 (Los Angeles, CA) - Process Investment Tax
Credit application and Section 106 review for two buildings out-leased to a nonprofit developer. The two build-
ings will be rehabilitated to house homeless veterans. Work is estimated to be complete in 2021.
Boyle Hotel/Cummings Block (Los Angeles, CA) – Completed Investment Tax Credit Application and National
Register nomination for 1898 hotel in Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles. The building has been reused
to house low-income residents of Boyle Heights and has been a catalyst for economic rehabilitation in the neigh-
borhood. The rehabilitation won a Los Angeles Conservancy award, as well as a National Preservation Honor
Award. Work was done at Chattel, Inc. for the East Los Angeles Community Corporation.
Breed Street Shul Project, Inc. – Project Manager for Phase 1 seismic stabilization and stained glass window res-
toration. Provided design review and construction monitoring and prepared historic review documentation for
local environmental review. Consulted with federal agencies on Section 106 compliance for a FEMA grant and a
federal appropriation. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.
Historic Resources Survey Update (Los Angeles, CA) - Served as the project manager for preparation of historic
context statements and intensive-level historic resource survey. The survey were prepared in close coordination
with the Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources to dovetail into SurveyLA. Surveyed approximately 3,000
properties, including property-specific research on approximately 400 of these properties. Attended several public
hearings at both the beginning and end of the process, as well as presented at nearly a dozen neighborhood coun-
cil meetings. Work was done with Chattel, Inc.
Judson Rives Building (Los Angeles, CA)– Completed Investment Tax Credit Application for a 1908 office build-
ing in downtown Los Angeles, a contributing resource to the Broadway Historic District that was converted to
residential use. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.
Hollywood Profession Building (Los Angeles, CA) - Completed Investment Tax Credit Application for a 1926
office building on Hollywood Boulevard. The building is significant not only for its distinctive Neo-Gothic style,
but also with for its association with former United States President Ronald Reagan. The office building was con-
verted to residential use. Work was done for Chattel, Inc. for CIM Group.
Residential Survey (Whittier, CA) - Prepared a historic context statement focusing on architectural contexts and
themes connected with residential development in Whittier. Feld surveyed approximately 1,540 properties gener-
ally constructed prior to 1941 using an Access database incorporating GIS mapping to collect survey data in the
field. The survey was prepared in close coordination with the City of Whittier staff and Historic Resources Com-
mission and was adopted by the City of Whitter in 2015. Work was done with Chattel, Inc.
SurveyLA City of Los Angeles (Office of Historic Resources) – Participated in completing a historic resource
survey of over 97,000 properties in South and Southeast Los Angeles. Co-authored historic context statement of
Los Angeles’ industrial history. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.
6.B.j
Packet Pg. 1866 Attachment: Appeal Supplemental Part 2-Snow Memo and qualifications(15049663.1) (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado
1
FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION
OF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN THE MATTER OF
THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK
DESIGNATION OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING 21ENT-0125
LOCATED\AT 631 COLORADO AVENUE
AS A CITY LANDMARK
SECTION I. The property owner filed a demolition permit application with the City of
Santa Monica (City) on March 19, 2021. On May 20, 2021, Nina Fresco, on behalf of the
Santa Monica Conservancy, submitted designation application 21ENT-0125 to nominate
the property at 631 Colorado Avenue. The Landmarks Commission, having held a Public
Hearing on January 10, 2022 hereby finds that the subject residence located at 631
Colorado Avenue meets one or more of the criteria for designation as a City Landmark as
enumerated in SMMC 9.56.100 and designates the subject commercial buidling as a City
Landmark and the property commonly known as 631 Colorado Avenue as a Landmark
Parcel, based on the following findings:
(1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic,
political or architectural history of the City.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion. When the A.B.C. Distributing Company
building was constructed in 1937, it was the first light industrial commercial building in the south-
east portion of Santa Monica’s downtown, which had been a working-class neighborhood
occupied by people of color since the founding of the Town of Santa Monica in 1875. The two
contributing structures book-ending the property were built during the economic recovery from
the Great Depression and the Art Deco/Streamline Moderne period. The primary structure on
the parcel reflects classic architectural characteristics of that style. The A.B.C. Distributing
Company building was a pioneer of the industrial commercial phase of development in
downtown, and the only built in downtown with characteristics of the Art Deco/Streamline
Moderne style. Furthermore, since the 1990s the neighborhood has been almost completely
redeveloped with a third phase of development, leaving the subject property as a rare and
significant example of the industrial commercial phase it pioneered.
The succession of uses of the A.B.C. Distributing Company property conveys a significant
pattern of economic development in Santa Monica, representative of the City’s evolution from
the 1930s to the present day. It was built as a beer outlet in the city after the repeal of prohibition.
The post-prohibition era in Santa Monica was characterized by the tourism industry, which relied
heavily of alcohol sales for its appeal. Gambling ships were moored off the coast the city, and
illegal slot machine rings and hotel room bookies added to the new economy. The brick A.B.C.
Distributing Company warehouse with attractive art deco styling reflected the elevated stature of
the liquor business in that era. With the success of Douglas Aircraft and the coming of WWII, the
aviation and aerospace industry took hold in Santa Monica next, soon occupying space
everywhere it could be found, including at the subject property. Aerospace industry demands led
to a proliferation of new one-story, brick, commercial industrial buildings in various parts of the
6.B.k
Packet Pg. 1867 Attachment: STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
2
city including downtown to house a variety of related industries. The site’s next use as an
autobody repair shop beginning in the late 1950s when post-war car culture was peaking,
represents another industry that exemplifies Santa Monica and California culture. That use was
followed in the 1990s by film industry use, which also has a strong connection to the history and
culture of the United States, California, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica.
The subject parcel is also significant for its association with Etta Vena Moxley (1870-1950), a
dedicated life-long leader in the African American Women’s Club movement in the State of
California, Los Angeles and in Santa Monica. She lived at 631 Colorado Avenue from 1898 –
1927 and continued to own it until 1937. Etta Moxley was a member of a leading group of Los
Angeles and Santa Monica African American activists striving for social justice and equal rights
for people of all races. Etta Moxley was associated with a number of significant groups often in
leadership roles.
Therefore, 631 Colorado Avenue appears to satisfy Landmark Criterion 1.
(2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
Both buildings located at 631 Colorado Avenue were constructed for industrial, utilitarian
purposes. Thousands of industrial buildings were constructed throughout Southern California
during pre- and post-World War II building booms. As such, the buildings do not possess special
aesthetic or artistic interest or value, and do not appear to be significant under Criterion 2.
Therefore, 631 Colorado Avenue does not satisfy Landmark Criterion 2.
(3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national
history.
The existing buildings were constructed in what was once an African American neighborhood,
replacing four residential cottages and two outbuildings. The City of Santa Monica Landmark
Designation Application for the subject property notes that Etta Moxley, a prominent figure in
the African American community, lived in one of the four residential cottages. Since the
residential and outbuildings related to this cultural and social history are no longer extant, the
existing buildings on the property do not share the same association.
The Aztec Brewing Company obtained the permits for both buildings currently on site.
Following the end of Prohibition, the Aztec Brewing Company had various distribution
warehouses throughout the Southwest. Research did not reveal any evidence to suggest that
the Aztec Brewing Company was owned or operated by any historic personages. Research
did not reveal any evidence to suggest that the remaining businesses associated with the
site were owned or operated by historically significant individuals. Research also did not
reveal any evidence of association with an important historic event.
Therefore, the subject property does not satisfy Landmark Criterion 3.
(4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a
period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or
6.B.k
Packet Pg. 1868 Attachment: STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
3
craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or
historical type valuable to such a study.
The subject property qualifies under this criterion because the A.B.C. Distributing
Company building is the only known example of post-Long Beach Earthquake transitional
engineering techniques for ensuring that brick and mortar structures had seismic integrity.
By 1929, brick buildings in Santa Monica were primarily clustered in the city’s retail
districts. Brick structures serving as schools, churches or homes were thinly scattered
across other areas. Brickmaking in the city’s five brickyards, the first established in 1904,
was dramatically curtailed in 1929, when the stock market crash disabled new building
starts. The industry was further impeded by the perception of brick as unsafe after the
1933 Long Beach Earthquake. It was in this context that the Simons Brick Company
began an aggressive campaign to promote Groutlock bricks to rebuild the market for clay
products. Right before the crash Simons’ plants had been producing almost a million
bricks per day and were considered the top producer in the world. The promotions
restored production to 150,000 Groutlock bricks per day. During that period, brick was
primarily used for small scale industrial buildings such as the subject property. The subject
property is an excellent example of the use of Groutlock brick within reinforced concrete
structural frames as seismically safe construction methods developed in the mid-1930s
as a response to the Long Beach Earthquake. No other Groutlock brick structures are
known in Santa Monica, making the A.B.C. Distributing Company buildings a unique and
rare example of a post-Long Beach Earthquake reinforced brick construction technique.
The subject property exhibits characteristics of the Art Deco style that is rare in
commercial industrial buildings in the city. The attractive street presence of the A.B.C.
Distributing Company building evidences the successful manifestation of a subtle
application of classic elements of the Art Deco style resulting in an industrial building with
recognizable street appeal. Its primary façade facing Colorado is divided into three bays
separated by protruding piers embossed with four vertical grooved lines, and with stepped
tapered caps that rise above the roofline. The area above the windows is stuccoed and
embossed with two horizontal sets of grooved lines, three in each set, appearing
continuous behind the piers. The stepped caps over the piers reflect the step-backs found
in Art Deco architecture. The utilitarian secondary elevation facing east abuts the sidewalk
on Seventh Street. It is divided into six bays by a reinforced cement support structure of
vertical and horizontal beams that are flush with the surface of the brick. The bay closest
to Colorado Avenue is punctuated by a large window opening. Each of the remaining bays
has a small window opening in the center, flush with the ceiling height as marked by a
horizontal reinforced concrete beam.
Therefore, the subject property appears to satisfy Landmark Criterion 4.
(5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder,
designer, or architect.
Research into the construction history of 631 Colorado Avenue did not reveal the name of
the architect or the builder for the Main Building. The architect for the Auxiliary Building was
6.B.k
Packet Pg. 1869 Attachment: STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
4
identified on the 1941 building permit as Frederic Barienbrock. Frederick Barienbrock was a
local architect that worked in Santa Monica for 50 years. Barienbrock was responsible for the
designs of 1725 Main Street, 827 6th Street, 829 6th Street, and the 1951 addition to the Santa
Monica Courthouse and County Building wing of the Santa Monica Civic Center. While
Barienbrock appears to have been a successful local architect, his work is not particularly
noteworthy and he is not an important architectural figure in the history of the city or the
region. Additionally, the utilitarian canopy would not be a notable example of his work, and
it no longer conveys its original design intent due to modifications on all elevations.
Therefore, the subject property does not satisfy Landmark Criterion 5.
(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.
The property located at 631 Colorado Avenue is located in a portion of Santa Monica’s
original township that is now referred to as the Downtown neighborhood. The property is
surrounded by residential, commercial, and industrial properties ranging from one to four
stories in height. The subject property is an unremarkable infill site that, although part of the
original township, does not appear to be an established and familiar visual feature of the
neighborhood or City.
Therefore, the subject property does not satisfy Criterion 6.
SECTION II. The character-defining features of the property include the following:
• Rectilinear massing.
• Front façade with fluted pilasters.
• Brick and stucco materials.
NOTE: The Designation includes the structure at the corner of 7th Street and Colorado
Avenue, excluding all other structure on the parcel.
SECTION III. The property commonly known as 631 Colorado Avenue is designated as
a Landmark Parcel in order to preserve, maintain, protect and safeguard the Landmark
building.
SECTION IV. 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 January 10, 2022 as determined by the following vote:
AYES: Garvin, Sloan, Summers, Chair Genser
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Brand
NAYES: Green, Chair Pro Tem Breisch
6.B.k
Packet Pg. 1870 Attachment: STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
5
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
decision. 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.
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the Landmark and Historic
District Ordinance of the City of Santa Monica, Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter
9.56, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by
Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City
pursuant to Municipal Code Section 1.16.010.
Respectfully Submitted
January 10, 2022
Roger Genser, Chairperson
Attest:
Stephanie Reich, AIA, LEED AP
Landmarks Commission Secretary
6.B.k
Packet Pg. 1871 Attachment: STOA 21ENT-0125 (631 Colorado Ave) LM Designation (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
(310) 451-3669
June 10, 2022
VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica City Council 1685 Main Street, Room 102 Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Agenda Item 6-B (landmark appeal of brick building) Appellant/Property Owner: 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. (Michael Bay) Address: 631 Colorado Avenue Appeal 21ENT-0253/Designation Application 21ENT-0067
Our File No. 22688.001
Dear Councilmembers:
This letter is written on behalf of Michael Bay, the owner of the property at 631 Colorado Avenue. For the past 20 years, he has operated his feature film business
(Bay Films) at this location. He has recently relocated out of State and wishes to sell
this property. In connection with listing the property for sale, Mr. Bay filed a demolition permit application, which triggered its 75-day review because the building is more than 40 years old. At that time, the property was under contract for sale to a mixed-use residential developer. (The property has been listed in the last two Housing Elements as
a site suitable for residential development.)
Upon learning of the demolition permit application, the Santa Monica Conservancy filed an application to nominate the property as a City Landmark (which they have a right to do and which is the only process for initiating review of demolition permits). Planning Commissioner (and former Landmarks Commissioner) Nina Fresco
filed her own research in support of the nomination.
The Landmarks Commission, in a divided 4-2 decision, voted to designate the Main Building as a City Landmark and the property as a Landmark Parcel. Following that vote, the property fell out of contract for sale to the residential developer.
The Landmarks Commission’s Architectural Historian (Dr. Ken Breisch) voted
against the designation and was an outspoken critic of the designation, as was the Art Conservator on the Commission (Amy Green). The Commission’s licensed architect (Richard Brand) was unable to participate in the vote due to the proximity of his residence to the site. Mr. Bay appealed the 4-2 decision to the City Council.
kutcher@hlkklaw.com
Item 6.B 06/14/22
1 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1872 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Santa Monica City Council
June 10, 2022
Page 2 We are writing in support of: the Staff Recommendation, the City’s independent
expert (GPA Consulting), Landmarks Commissioner Dr. Breisch, another historic
preservation consultant whom the City often hires (ESA/Dr. Jerabek-Bray), and a historic preservation consultant I hired to peer review the reports and perform her own supplemental research (Jenna Snow).
All of the experts conclude that the property does not merit designation.
Consistent with the expert reports, the City Council should grant the appeal, and
overturn the designation. This is a de novo hearing and a quasi-judicial proceeding, and there is abundant evidence in the record in support of the appeal.
Please keep in mind that the designation of City Landmarks should be reserved for special buildings. This building (constructed in 1937) is not a special building.
Declaring marginal buildings to be City Landmarks waters down the importance of the
City’s truly historic properties. The third party independent experts all agree that this building is not any more notable than many industrial brick buildings found in Santa Monica and throughout Southern California.
Moreover, this building has been substantially altered (and degraded by
sandblasting at least twice and the grout has been poorly repointed) over the years.
For the reasons stated in the Staff Report, the property owner (or a future purchaser) should be allowed to demolish the building.
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that none of the buildings currently found at 631 Colorado existed when prominent African American Etta Moxley owned and lived
on the property. There is no disputing that the Landmarks Ordinance simply does not allow for designation of a property based on a past house that no longer exists. As the Staff Report thoughtfully explains, there are many other civic ways that Ms. Moxley’s notable accomplishments and leadership can be commemorated:
Historic preservation planning is just one of many tools for
recognizing social, cultural, and historical value. Other strategies to employ may include historical markers, mapping programs, oral history projects, public art, events, walking tours, and close collaboration with advocacy groups. (Staff Report, p. 8.)
I will conclude by quoting extensively from Professor Breisch, who summed things up quite powerfully at the Landmarks Commission hearing:
Yes, I would say I’m not very happy with this, the way it’s moving forward, for a number of reasons. I think there is a
Item 6.B 06/14/22
2 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1873 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Santa Monica City Council
June 10, 2022
Page 3 major question on integrity that’s lacking here. And that I
don’t think the building really reflects--I don’t know what it
reflects . . .
I’m a little confused by the statement of significance in terms of the reinforced masonry construction, which I don’t think has been proven one way or another. And I went and looked
very closely at it, and I couldn’t figure out exactly what was
going on, I have to say. And that was in no small part because the building’s been sandblasted twice. And in terms of the significance of materials and workmanship, for example, it’s not there.
So, if we’re looking at this building as an example of a
particular type of masonry construction, it doesn’t exist anymore. Sandblasting is really a major problem in terms of not just designation, but of course, the way you treat buildings after they’ve been designated. And this thing has
just been decimated. And it’s been repointed to the point
where it’s just pretty disgusting workmanship.
So, if we’re sort of mixing these things together, there are new windows, the entry’s been moved and really there’s no integrity whatsoever to this structure in terms of the
masonry, and whether it’s groutlock or not, which I really am doubtful about. So, the thing we’re designating should really reflect something of the history of the place. And if it’s been so altered with sandblasting in the ‘50s and changing windows and moving entryways, then I just don’t see that
working for me.
I am absolutely sympathetic to recognizing the earlier African-American neighborhood and community that was
there, but I don’t think this is really the place to do it . . .
There’s a wonderful memorial to Biddy Mason in Downtown LA, but that’s not a historic landmark. It commemorates what
was there and is no longer there, that’s been erased, and
that’s what we’ve got here. So, that bothers me too, I think, to be recognizing that.
Item 6.B 06/14/22
3 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1874 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
Santa Monica City Council
June 10, 2022
Page 4 With all due respect Commissioner Sloan, I think that there
were previous occupants before the African-Americans were
there. And I think we have a park just down the street [i.e., Tongva Park] that recognizes that as well.
It’s just bothersome to me that we keep layering on these things that don’t really reflect the nature of the Landmark
Ordinance and what it’s intended to do. So, that’s my
problem.
To use a real important architectural technical term, it’s cute. But I don’t think it rises to the level of being a landmark. I don’t think it rises to that level.
Conclusion
We urge the City Council to agree with the Staff Recommendation and grant the appeal and overturn the designation of this property.
Very truly yours,
Kenneth L. Kutcher KLK:sna
cc: Stephanie Reich David Martin David White Heidi von Tongeln Douglas Sloan
Michael Bay
F:\WPDATA\22688\001 (631 Colorado)\Cor\CC 2022.06.10.docx
Item 6.B 06/14/22
4 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1875 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Ruthann Lehrer <ruthannpreserves@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, June 13, 2022 11:45 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Oscar de
la Torre; Christine Parra
Subject:Item 6B: Landmark designation appeal on 631Colorado
EXTERNAL
June 13, 2022
Item 6B: Appeal of Landmark Designation for 631 Colorado Avenue
Honorable Councilmembers,
This letter supports the Landmark designation of the Main Building at 631 Colorado Avenue, and requests that
you deny the appeal.
The property owner who has requested demolition has commissioned additional reports from historic
preservation consultants to undermine the findings of the STOA that was approved by the Landmarks
Commission. The findings of those reports are designed to satisfy the client and can be understood in that
light. The GPA report, which the City commissioned, was refuted during the public hearing on the landmark
application, and the STOA convincingly explains the reasons why this building is significant under the Santa
Monica criteria for designation. I note that we use the local Santa Monica criteria for assessing significance,
and not the National Register criteria.
Our landmarks are selected because they tell the stories that are important to understand Santa Monica’s
history and our development. We don’t require such buildings to be the first, the only or the most important
conveyance of such history, but – as Criteria 1 states:
It exemplifies, symbolized or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or
architectural history of the City.
The stories that 631 Colorado manifests are:
The expansion of commercial uses southward in our downtown, replacing former residential
buildings, exemplifying the growth of our business economy in Depression‐era economic recovery;
A new beer distribution business locating downtown that symbolized the end of prohibition;
A succession of uses that exemplifies our economic development, from beer distribution to aviation
to automotive to films. The sequence itself tells a story.
Criteria 4 can be confusing as it combines a cluster of different concepts for assessing architectural and
material characteristics. This building is significant under the first phrase:
It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of
construction…
The masonry construction is valuable to a study of post‐Long Beach Earthquake response to vernacular
building construction addressing seismic stabilization. That 1933 earthquake was a major regional geological
event which had enormous consequences to urban development. Groutlock bricks were an innovative
Item 6.B 06/14/22
5 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1876 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
2
technology which exemplify one response, even if that innovation did not become popular or enduring. The
concrete bond beams are another visible response to seismic issues.
The fact that the bricks have been sandblasted is unfortunate but is never considered sufficient to disqualify a
property from meeting criteria for designation. Such afflictions are found on many landmarked buildings (i.e.
Palisades Building at the Miramar; the Keller Block downtown). This argument to disqualify landmark status is
way overblown.
Additionally, the Streamline Moderne façade is a classic embodiment of that style, with the grooved pilasters,
the repeat of three horizontal lines (known as “speed lines” in architectural terminology), and the three‐
stepped pilaster caps. Its use on the façade of this vernacular building is valuable to a study of the architecture
of this period. While the façade windows are not original, they are entirely consistent and compatible with the
character of the building.
Finally, I would like to remind you of other developments in Santa Monica that have combined preservation of
a small landmarked building into a larger project:
Rapp Saloon with Hostelling International
Pono Burgers in a housing development
Nikkei Hall in a housing development
Palisades Building and Moreton Bay Ficus in the Miramar development
Two small landmarked structures on Ocean Avenue into the Frank Gehry project.
The corner location of the landmarked building facilitates its incorporation into a new project, and there are
incentives for doing so (i.e. Mills Act Historic Property Contract).
Finally, a word about professional qualifications. I am certified as a historic preservation professional,
validated by the State Office of Historic Preservation during my tenure as historic preservation planner with
the City of Long Beach. While Nina Fresco lacks an advanced degree in this field, she utilizes professional
methodology of historical research, using a wide number of primary sources and investigating historical
context as reflected in newspaper articles, journals and diaries, and deriving a narrative from these materials.
She has been researching a book on Santa Monica history for a number of years and can draw upon a vast
trove of information.
Please deny the appeal, support the Landmark Commission findings, and preserve an important piece of the
Santa Monica story.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Ruthann Lehrer
Former Landmarks Commissioner, architectural historian
Item 6.B 06/14/22
6 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1877 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Karen Wise <kwise2@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, June 14, 2022 11:06 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:City Council Agenda Items 6A. and 6B
EXTERNAL
Dear Members of the City Council:
I write regarding Agenda Items 6A. and 6B, I urge you to please follow staff recommendations to repealing two recent
landmark designations. Specifically
Agenda Item 6A. Follow staff recommendations to:
1. Approve Appeal 21ENT‐0253, appeal of the Landmarks Commission’s decision to designate the property
located at 1665 Appian Way as a City Landmark; and
2. Deny Designation Application 21ENT‐0067 to designate the property located at 1665 Appian Way as a
Landmark or Structure of Merit.
Agenda Item 6B. Follow staff recommendations to:
1. Approve Appeal 22ENT‐0015, appeal of the Landmarks Commission’s decision to designate the property
located at 631 Colorado Avenue as a City Landmark; and
2. Deny Designation Application 21ENT‐0125 to designate the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue as a
Landmark or Structure of Merit.
It is not clear that either of these buildings fits national standard criteria for landmark status.
As we work towards the Santa Monica of the future, I believe that we should build wider and more inclusive
conversations about the criteria for what gets preserved and why, as well as how limiting that should be for what can be
done. Preservation of some buildings is critical, and it is not the only way to commemorate or to learn from history.
Documentation, mitigation and interpretation are more effective and appropriate in some cases, and we need to build a
more coherent and transparent set of criteria and process for decision making.
Thank you very much. Sincerely
Karen Wise, Ph.D.
Santa Monica
Item 6.B 06/14/22
7 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1878 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
P.O. BOX 653
SANTA MONICA, CA 90406
310-496-3146
www.smconservancy.org
631 Colorado Avenue
Appeal of Rebuttal from Applicant for Designation
631 Colorado Avenue clearly qualifies as a Santa Monica Landmark based on the findings
adopted by the Landmarks Commission at the January 10, 2022 designation hearing. The appeal
should be denied.
631 Colorado Was the First Commercial Structure in a Historic Residential Neighborhood
631 Colorado Avenue is significant to Santa Monica history under two Landmarks Designation
criteria, 1 & 4. It is significant to Santa Monica history as the first, and also the last example of a
single-story industrial-style commercial building that began the transformation of one of the
earliest residential sections of the city, home to working class whites, and people of color since
the first lots were sold here. The significance of this resource is enhanced by the range of uses it
saw, which were emblematic of trends in the city during their periods of occupancy. The
structure’s construction was influenced by major historic events of its time reflected in its style
and method of construction, and reflects city planning and zoning history.1 This is clearly laid
out and explained in the findings for designation adopted by the Landmarks Commission in the
January 10, 2022 STOA (Attachment K). It provides a snapshot of Santa Monica in 1937. To see
this, we have to consider the historical context of the immediate vicinity.
Our Local Ordinance is not the Same Thing as the National Register
The appellant’s analysis of the subject property promises to streamline details in the original
application, which it considers “irrelevant” allowing the appellant to find significance only in the
biggest and brightest flashes of success, wealth, innovation, and progress. The appellant’s
analysis repeatedly falls back on National Register bulletins to justify a glossing over and
distancing from local narratives. If we were proposing a parcel in Santa Monica for National
Register listing, we would follow the direction in the bulletins to the letter. We aren’t.
As our city attorneys will remind you, Santa Monica’s historic preservation program is ruled by
our local Landmarks Ordinance that includes codified criteria and employs a locally tailored
application form. We do not use the National Register criteria or application. Our Santa Monica
criteria are in some ways similar to national criteria, but purposefully modified in language and
interpretation to capture the kinds of resources that are important for narration of Santa
Monica history. In fact, that is how the National Register guidance instructs us to proceed on
1 Note: the subject structure is a commercial building where liquor sales took place, and also included a warehouse, which gives it an industrial
aspect. Since industrial uses have never been permitted on this site, it would be incorrect to call it an industrial building, and since it includes a
warehouse space, it is clearly also not strictly commercial.
Item 6.B 06/14/22
8 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1879 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
the local level. The National Register reminds us that all places are part of their local
community, which best understands the importance of those places, and how to protect them
from change or loss likely to impact them. For example, a National Parks Service website
encouraging the establishment local historic districts includes the following to introduce the
topic (emphasis added):
Local legislation is one of the best ways to protect the historic character of buildings,
streetscapes, neighborhoods, and special landmarks ….2
In Santa Monica, Landmarks and Historic Districts include places that represent the range of
lifestyles, property types, and cultural influences that make up the city’s history. They convey a
spectrum of local narratives, not only the stories of rich white men who attract our attention
with dazzling accomplishments and glamourous architecture. Nonetheless, literature guiding
interpretation of national criteria for designation is often, as in this case, weaponized against
our local preservation program by property owners and their attorneys seeking to avoid
designation.
Accuracy Counts: It was a Residential Neighborhood of Color
The subject property was not ever located in an industrial zone of the city. That is a factually
incorrect assumption made by the appellant in the following claim on page 4 of the Snow
report (Attachment J):
While the Landmark nomination ascribes the property’s location as the south-east portion of
Downtown, it is more accurate to describe this portion of Colorado Avenue as part of an
industrial zone adjacent to the former railroad, and now the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10).
Images used by the appellant in figures 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the report submitted by Ms. Snow to
support this completely conjectural claim are all from the 1960s, which was after the entire
area had been transformed with redevelopment that followed the pioneering construction of
the subject property by almost 3 decades. A complete set of maps and images in the original
application (Attachment D) ranging from 1895 – 1960 shows the actual historic character of the
subject district as residential until sometime after 1950. Furthermore, though there was not a
zoning ordinance as we think of it today in Santa Monica until 1922, the city did have laws on
the books directing where certain uses could or could not be, beginning in the 1890s. In June
1912, Ordinance No. 159 defined limited locations where industrial manufacturing uses would
be allowed. The industrial zone was generally between the centerlines of Olympic and Colorado
Boulevards with some variation on the east and west ends. West of Lincoln Boulevard adjacent
to downtown, the boundaries jogged around two lumberyards that predated the ordinance
(and were developed with wooden sheds very different from the subject property type). The
rest of the 1912 boundary west of Lincoln Boulevard was set back away from the residential
district that would someday host the present structure by a full block. The industrial area did
2 https://www.nps.gov/tps/education/workingonthepast/index.htm
Item 6.B 06/14/22
9 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1880 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
not begin in the area of the subject property and “come to include Colorado Avenue,” as the
appellant falsely claims, again referring to the four irrelevant 1960s images as evidence. Next,
the applicant blithely lists sites in other parts of the city that developed under completely
different contexts as alleged comparables. Buildings are not isolated events. Context is
everything. Beginning in the 1940s, the part of the actual industrial zone that is west of Lincoln
did not come to accommodate more industry as the appellants report assumes, but in fact was
overtaken by a large residential trailer park that accommodated a huge influx of wartime
aircraft workers (see images in Attachment D for evidence).
The residentially zoned neighborhood of which the subject property was a part was home to
working class whites, African Americans, Mexicans and other people of color since the first lots
were sold in the city. In 1922, new zoning classified the area a commercial or “C” Zone. “C”
Zones allowed residential uses but prohibited industrial manufacturing. With “C” zoning in
place, the residential areas on 5th, 6th, and 7th Streets, including the subject property, were
poised for commercial redevelopment, but change did come not right away.
631 Colorado’s Style and Method of Construction Tell Us About its Era
In the late 1930s, recovery from the Great Depression began to impact the already established
commercial district of downtown on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Streets. There was plenty to do on those
blocks, so growth didn’t extend east of there for the first time until 1937 when the subject
property was constructed by the ABC Distributing Company. The ABC Distributing Company
adorned its new warehouse and sales office structure with art deco/streamline modern
characteristics. The look was consistent with the architectural moves in the rest of downtown,
and provided a respectable street presence for the liquor business. It was not the only liquor
outlet in the city for long, and obviously a business big enough to occupy a property this size
would sell its wares beyond the borders of Santa Monica, but it was the first of note in Santa
Monica, and the only liquor business to invest in a new brick building using the latest trends in
brick technology along with some popular architectural detailing, however slight. Because of
the use of period-specific materials and an uncommon application of detailing for its building
type in Santa Monica, the property also qualifies under Santa Monica Landmark Designation
Criterion 4 as a rare example of a historic method of construction and use of detail valuable for
study.
As for the bricks, neither Groutlock nor Porta Costa bricks changed the world in the long term
and were not described in that way in the findings. The bricks convey a historical narrative that
took place when the Great Depression collided with 1933 Long Beach Earthquake, two disasters
of epic proportions. Once again, the appellant loses track of the fact that we are preserving
buildings that are records of particular moments in time that show how we lived, worked, and
in the case of these bricks, solved problems. The appeal statement dismisses Groutlock and
Porta Costa bricks because “they have come to be regarded as gimmicky.” Historians are
supposed to record history, not judge it. Regardless of how they “have come to be regarded,”
the bricks represent a specialized construction solution particular to their time and are worthy
of study. Note that the Smithsonian Museum has an 8-track tape player in its collection. Also
Item 6.B 06/14/22
10 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1881 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
considered gimmicky, 8-track players nonetheless represent a moment in history worth
knowing about.
631 Colorado is the Last of its Kind in Downtown
In the 1950s, just as with the well-documented story of the Belmar area, this section of
downtown was marked as blighted and slum clearance activities took place. It was not taken
over by eminent domain, but the city ordered a number of the old homes, still occupied by
people of color, to be demolished. Because segregation made it more difficult for people of
color to find places to live in the city, they typically helped their fellows by passing homes they
occupied to other people of color by sale or rental, a fact documented on the real estate pages
of the Santa Monica Outlook, and also apparent through detailed study of Santa Monica census
records. So, it took the aggressive, national slum clearance movement of the 1950s to open up
the commercially zoned lots immediately adjacent to the center of downtown for
redevelopment. By the 1960s, when the aerials in Figures 1, 2, 3, & 4 of the appellant’s report
were taken, the residential neighborhood visible in more germane earlier aerials provided by
the applicant (see original application, Attachment D) was gone without a trace. It had been
replaced with one- and two-story commercial buildings, and a handful of apartments. In recent
decades, all of the second phase structures except for the subject property, have been
redeveloped, or have already approved plans. The subject property is not only the first of its
kind, it is also the last of its kind in the downtown.
Erased Stories of People of Color are Critical to the Context of Santa Monica History
The improvements on this parcel meet two of Santa Monica’s Criteria for Landmark
Designation, and a narrative related to the city’s community of color is part of its pre-
development context. A racial justice framework, an analytical tool we hope to develop to take
advantage of our historic preservation program’s potential to further racial justice education in
the city, comes into play. Etta Vena Moxley, a historic figure even the appellant acknowledges is
highly significant, spent her entire adult life living and working in Santa Monica. Her home of 30
years has been redeveloped, but her story still has a place in the context of the qualified
landmark that replaced it at 631 Colorado Avenue. Staff determined the negative race story at
Appian Way, not in their view associated with extant improvements on the site, should not be
considered in making a landmark designation determination. Likewise, recognition of this
inspiring and uplifting narrative was also dismissed for a lack of association with extant
improvements. This approach may seem even-handed or fair, but from a racial justice
perspective, we may not wish to treat both those stories the same way. By not referring to Etta
Moxley in the contextual background of the site, which Criteria 1 allows us to do when
describing the cultural significance of this landmark, we are re-burying an inspiring narrative as
quickly as we uncovered it. In Santa Monica, most physical evidence of the lives of people of
color from the early days of the city has been erased. Entire neighborhoods were razed,
disrupted, and redeveloped. We have an opportunity to leverage the natural nexus between
racial justice education and historic preservation goals to make Santa Monica better. Not all
stories that lurk in the shadows of our history should have a place in our narratives. Analytical
Item 6.B 06/14/22
11 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1882 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
discussion that seeks a balance of key factors would ensure our findings include the right
contextual stories for the right reasons. But this one is pretty easy to decide, it’s all upside. We
should not rely only on rare philanthropically funded interpretive displays to tell this part of our
history and allow our city’s historic preservation program to remain silent. Since 631 Colorado
Avenue meets certain landmark designation criteria in its own right, it is appropriate and fair to
include as part of the context for the site, the story of Etta Moxley, an inspiring and important
African American woman who lived here in Santa Monica for her entire productive life, though
not a single physical artifact associated with her remains extant.
Integrity is to Ensure it Can Tell its Story
The condition of a building proposed for designation, called its integrity, is defined by the
National Park Service as a building’s ability to convey its significance. Integrity is evaluated by
examining seven characteristics of a property that may have changed over time. Standards for
integrity for listing on the National Register are very high because that honorary designation
makes properties eligible for significant federal grants and tax breaks. In Santa Monica where
we allow a wide range of rehabilitation, remodeling, and additions to our historic resources, the
key approach for evaluating integrity is on the view from the public right of way because we
preserve buildings to benefit the public and allow historic landmarks to adapt and change to
meet the evolving needs even after designation. In the case of the subject property, the most
significant alteration is to the window systems, which have been replaced with compatible
windows in the original openings. This is a typical change made to commercial buildings. While
not ideal, it does not constitute a substantial change to the overall appearance of the
landmarked structure from the street. Of the seven aspects of integrity, four of them are apply
to the overall resource: location, feeling, association, and setting. These are all intact because
the building has not moved from its corner location, still appears as an industrial-style
commercial building, and retains its relationship to its surroundings. The other three aspects of
integrity are specific to features of the resource: design, workmanship, and materials. These are
affected by the changes to the window systems and less so by a rear addition. Defining
characteristics of 631 Colorado are still highly apparent and remain valuable for conveying the
aspects of Santa Monica history the building represents as described in the Landmarks
Commission’s excellent findings for designation.
Landmarks are Frequently Part of New Development in Santa Monica
In an “Appeal Supplement” included in your packet as (Attachment I), the appellant brings up a
non-sequitur issue relative to a Landmark Designation application regarding the future
disposition of the site for development. Through my 20 years of involvement in the city’s
historic preservation program, one city attorney after another has consistently urged the
Commission to remember that an evaluation for Landmark Designation should avoid any
consideration of future change to a resource. It is beside the point. The appellant, though fully
aware of this, notes that this parcel has been listed on the Suitable Sites Inventory that
supports our yet-to-be-certified 6th Cycle Housing Element. The appellant takes advantage of
common misconceptions that historic preservation and landmarks designation stop all future
Item 6.B 06/14/22
12 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1883 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))
change to imply that this parcel would not be able to achieve its development potential for
housing were its designation as a landmark upheld. As the appellant points out, abandonment
of existing uses on SSI sites is indeed critical to their redevelopment, but the leap the appellant
makes that redevelopment depends upon the demolition of all existing improvements is
incorrect and misleading.
Historic Resources have been successfully incorporated into new development many times in
Santa Monica, and our LUCE speaks at great length about the importance of considering
adaptive reuse in new development. When the nomination was filed, a representative of the
property owner was contacted to provide information on historic preservation and adaptive
reuse. We had a lengthy discussion of how this historic resource, were it to be designated could
indeed still fulfill its housing potential, how the new development could even be enhanced by
the incorporation of the landmark, and how significant property tax incentives help pay for the
addition costs associated with historic preservation. This has been demonstrated in the city
many times over, beginning decades ago with the incorporation of the 1875 Rapp Saloon on
Second Street (the city’s first-ever landmark) into the American Youth Hostel, and more
recently with the WWII Quonset Hut that serves as a restaurant that is part of a substantial
housing development at the corner of Lincoln and Broadway. Our landmark City Hall has been
incorporated into a brand-new city services building, and the Santa Monica Professional
Building has become part of the Proper Hotel. Additionally, there are a number of landmark
cottages in multi-unit residential zones of the city that have been able to accommodate several
additional units on site.
This landmark would be particularly accommodating to new development because of its siting
along property lines at a visible corner, and because the Landmarks Commission did not include
any of the altered accessory buildings on the site in the designation. As the appellant’s attorney
well knows, FARs permitted in our downtown are designed to ensure sufficient building
articulation, setbacks, open space, and fresh air circulation in new construction. To meet city
code, most new residential developments include lower level open spaces open to the sky, and
are not solid masses. A simple willingness could easily design housing on this site that
incorporates this landmark structure without giving up any by right development potential.
Furthermore, the appellant’s attorney worked closely with the Santa Monica Conservancy to
propose a host of special code provisions that city council included in the 2015 Zoning
Ordinance Update to further accommodate preservation needs in the course of new
construction. Landmarking would not be a constraint on housing capacity.
The Landmarks Commission accurately determined that 631 Colorado meets Santa Monica
Landmarks Designation Criteria 1 & 4 based on the findings in the January 2022 STOA, which
should be upheld.
Nina Fresco
Santa Monica Conservancy
June 14, 2022
Item 6.B 06/14/22
13 of 13 Item 6.B 06/14/22
6.B.l
Packet Pg. 1884 Attachment: Written Comments (4957 : Appeal of Landmarks Designation of 631 Colorado Avenue (60 min))