ITEM 7-A

COUNCIL MEETING:  September 8, 1992      Santa Monica, California

TO:      Mayor and City Council

FROM:    City Staff

SUBJECT: Appeal of  Landmarks  Commission  Approval  of  Landmark
         Designation   LC-04-045,   822-824   Third   Street,   a
         Streamline Moderne Apartment Building Known Historically
         as the Vanity Fair Apartments.

         Applicant:  City of Santa Monica Landmarks Commission
         Appellant: Enayatollah Golshani

INTRODUCTION

This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeal  and
uphold  the decision of the Landmarks Commission to designate the
Streamline Moderne apartment building located  at  822-824  Third
Street,  known  historically  as the Vanity Fair Apartments, as a
City Landmark.  On May 11, 1992 the  Landmarks  Commission  voted
7-0  to  designate  this building as Santa Monica's twenty-second
landmark.  The appeal filed by the property owner is contained in
Attachment A.

BACKGROUND

Landmarks Commission Action

On March 9, 1992 the Landmarks  Commission,  at  the  request  of
neighborhood  residents, filed a landmark designation application
for this Streamline Moderne  apartment  building.   The  landmark
designation   application  was  subsequently  prepared  with  the
research assistance of neighborhood residents.  At that time, the
Commission's  unanimous  vote  to  file  the landmark designation
application was based on the building's architectural merit as  a
Streamline   Moderne   residential   structure.    However,   the
Commission also requested  that  research  be  conducted  on  the
building's  history to determine if it was also associated with a
notable Santa Monica resident or with a significant architect  or
builder.

The Landmarks Commission conducted a public hearing  to  formally
evaluate  the  landmark  designation application at the April 13,
1992 Commission meeting.  Following consideration of the landmark
application  and the public testimony, the Commission unanimously
voted to set the landmark designation public hearing for the next
regular Commission meeting on May 11, 1992.

At the May Commission meeting, the appellant stated  that,  while
he had no immediate plans to demolish the building, the structure
was in very poor condition and that the  continual  repairs  were
very costly.  In response, Commissioners noted that the Landmarks
Ordinance does provide some  incentives  to  preserve  designated
structures,  such  as  the  elimination  of  building  permit and
administrative planning application fees and the ability  to  use
the State Historic Building Code rather than the Uniform Building
Code.  Prior to the Commission's unanimous decision to  designate
the structure, Commissioners praised the architectural quality of
the Vanity Fair Apartments, stating that the  building  is  among
the  finest  examples  of  Streamline Moderne architecture in the
City.

Landmark Designation Criteria

The Landmarks  Ordinance  requires  that  proposed  landmarks  be
evaluated against 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 values.

     (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 Landmarks  Ordinance  permits  the  approval  of  a  landmark
designation  if  findings  can be made to support at least one of
the six designation criteria.  In the case  of  the  Vanity  Fair
Apartments,   the   Landmarks  Commission  based  the  building's
landmark designation on three of the six criteria.

Criteria 1:  Historical Architectural Significance

Built in 1935, the Vanity Fair Apartments  is  the  oldest  known
example  of  Streamline Moderne residential architecture in Santa
Monica.   The  building  is  representative  of  the   shift   in
architectural  design  from  the  ornate  Art  Deco  style to the
simpler forms and less expensive materials of Streamline  Moderne
architecture.   At  the time of its construction, the Vanity Fair
Apartments were  considered  a  modern,  innovative  approach  to
design.    Today,   the  Vanity  Fair  Apartments  exemplify  the
Streamline Moderne era in Santa Monica's  architectural  history,
marking the beginning of the style's influx into the City.

Criteria 3:  Historical Significance

Carl R. Henderson was a locally prominent businessperson as  well
as  civic  leader  who  was  active  in  Santa  Monica realty and
property owner organizations.  His  service  as  captain  of  the
Santa  Monica  Mounted  Police  in  addition  to his interest and
effort in promoting the City Manager form of government for Santa
Monica  demonstrates  his commitment to the health, vitality, and
future of Santa Monica.  Further, his construction of the  Vanity
Fair Apartments, noted at the time as a distinctive structure, is
evidence of his desire to improve and contribute to the physical,
as well as functional, appearance of the City.

Criteria 4:  Architectural Significance

The Vanity Fair Apartments are a superior example  of  Streamline
Moderne  architecture, a style more typically used for commercial
building   design.    The   building   embodies   many    notable
characteristics  of  the  Streamline Moderne style, including the
stucco clad exterior, the asymmetrical facade, the curved corners
and  overall  horizontal  appearance.  Classic Streamline Moderne
details valuable  to  the  study  of  this  architectural  period
include  the  metal  balustrades  surrounding  the balconies, the
horizontal and vertical banding at the northeast building corner,
the  light  fixtures with curved corners above the front entry of
the apartment units, the curved banding on the front  doors,  and
the metal frame windows.

Landmark Designation Application

The landmark designation application, contained in Attachment  B,
provides  a  detailed  description  of  the property as well as a
discussion of the building's architectural merit  and  historical
significance.   The  building  displays  many  classic Streamline
Moderne design elements, which are  further  illustrated  in  the
building photographs contained in Attachment C.

Streamline Moderne architecture emerged from an economic need for
simpler,  inexpensive  buildings  and  a growing fascination with
transportation design.  The exuberant  design  of  the  Art  Deco
period,  complete  with  delicate metal work, gold leaf tracings,
and colorful mosaic tiles, was replaced  with  materials  such  a
stucco,  concrete,  and  glass.   The  overall  building  profile
shifted from a vertical to a horizontal emphasis  with  a  smooth
"wind  tunnel" appearance inspired by the industrial designs used
for ships, airplanes, and automobiles.

Streamline  Moderne  architecture  was  more  commonly  used  for
commercial  building  design,  however,  residential  examples do
exist.  In  Santa  Monica,  Streamline  Moderne  architecture  is
evident,   although   the   examples  are  not  numerous.   Three
residential Streamline Modern buildings were  identified  in  the
Phase  I  and  Phase  II Historic Resources Inventory.  All three
were constructed between 1937 and 1941.  A review  of  Streamline
Moderne   residential  buildings  identified  in  the  Phase  III
Historic Resources Inventory Preliminary Survey as good  examples
of  the  style  found that all were constructed in 1937 or later.
Therefore, the Vanity Fair Apartments, with a  construction  date
of  1935,  appear to be the oldest example of Santa Monica's best
Streamline Moderne residential buildings.

Carl  R.  Henderson,   a   prominent   Santa   Monica   resident,
businessperson  and  active  civic leader, constructed the Vanity
Fair Apartments.  Mr. Henderson's prominence is  demonstrated  by
his  inclusion in the 1941 edition of the Santa Monica Blue Book,
a  publication  that  a  provided  biographies  of  notable  City
residents.   The  biography  states  that, after owning the Santa
Monica Packard Dealership between 1921  and  1931,  he  became  a
local  real  estate  broker  and  businessperson.   He  served as
president of the Santa Monica  Realty  Board,  the  Santa  Monica
Chapter  of  the  Property Owner's Association of California, and
president  of  the  Santa  Monica  Taxpayer's  Association.    In
addition,  the Blue Book  describes the Vanity Fair Apartments as
one of Mr.  Henderson's  achievements:   "He  has  built  several
distinctive  apartment buildings in Santa Monica, one of the best
being the Vanity Fair Apartments, erected in 1935, of modernistic
architecture,  and one of the first of this type erected in Santa
Monica."

Mr. Henderson's biography was  also  included  in  the  1944-1948
edition  of  the  Santa  Monica  Community  Book.  This biography
states that "...Mr. Henderson has for a number of years used  his
influence  to bring about the City Manager form of Government for
Santa  Monica  which  has  been  so  successful  in  many   other
communities."   At  his  death  in  1971 the Santa Monica Outlook
described Mr. Henderson as an "active civic leader" and that,  in
addition  to  his  real  estate activities, he was captain of the
Santa Monica Mounted Police.

Appeal Statement

The appellant states that, since the building is old and  subject
to  the  City's  rent control regulations, it is not economically
feasible to maintain the building in good  repair.   Due  to  the
cost  of  basic repairs for items such as the roof, plumbing, and
gas lines, the appellant explains  that  he  will  be  unable  to
maintain the apartment building in a safe condition for more than
a few years.  Due to the economic constraints of Rent Control  he
states  that  over  the  next  10  to  20 years the building will
deteriorate and become unsafe to inhabit.  However, no supporting
documentation  other than this brief statement of appeal has been
submitted to support either the safety concerns or  the  economic
hardship  complaint.   Planning  staff  has  contacted  the  Rent
Control Board and the owner has not filed an  application  for  a
Category  C Removal Permit.  Absent this type of information, the
appellant's claim of safety hazards and economic hardship  cannot
be  justified.   The appellant does not challenge the Vanity Fair
Apartments' landmark designation  based  on  the  merits  of  the
application reviewed by the Landmarks Commission.

Pursuant to Section 9612 of the Landmarks Ordinance,  the  public
hearing for an appeal of a landmark designation must be scheduled
and held before the City Council within 45 days after the  notice
of  appeal  has been filed.  However, the appellant of the Vanity
Fair Apartments was out of the country during this 45 day  period
and  waived  his  right  to  an  earlier  hearing.  A copy of the
appellant's statement confirming his agreement to an August  11th
public  hearing is contained in Attachment J.  His agreement to a
September 8, 1992 public hearing is contained in Attachment K.

BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT

The recommendation presented in  this  report  does  not  have  a
budget or fiscal impact.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the  City  Council  deny  the  appeal  and
uphold  the decision of the Landmarks Commission to designate the
building and site at 822-824 Third Street as a City Landmark with
the findings approved by the Landmarks Commission.

Prepared By:  Paul Berlant, Director of LUTM
              Suzanne Frick, Planning Manager
              Amanda Schachter, Associate Planner
              Land Use and Transportation Management Department
              Program and Policy Development Division

Attachments:  A.   Appeal Filed by Enayatollah Golshani
              B.   Landmark Designation Application
              C.   Building Photographs
              D.   Landmarks  Commission  Staff  Report, March 9,
                   1992
              E.   Landmarks  Commission  Staff Report, April 13,
                   1992
              F.   Landmarks  Commission  Staff  Report,  May 11,
                   1992
              G.   Landmarks Commission Determination
              H.   Landmarks Commission Minutes:
                             March 9, 1992
                             April 13, 1992
                             May 11, 1992
              I.   Correspondence
              J.   Appellant's   Agreement  to  the  August  11th
                   Public Hearing Date
              K.   Apellant's  Agreement to the September 8, 1992
                   Public Hearing Date