MINUTES

 

MEETING OF THE

LANDMARKS COMMISSION

Founded 1875

“Populus felix in urbe felici”

 

 

 

 

Monday, January 13, 2003

 

7:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers, Room 213,

1685 Main Street, Santa Monica

 

CALL TO ORDER:                                                  7:05 p.m.

 

1.     ROLL CALL    

Present:

Nina Fresco

Robert Posek

James Rosenfield

Barbara Schnitzler   

Roger Genser

Ruthann Lehrer

                                   

Also Present:

Kimberly Christensen

Elizabeth Bar-El

Barry Rosenbaum

Arlene Johnson

 

Absent:

None

 

2       REPORT FROM STAFF:

 

Ms. Bar-El informed the Commission that the City Council will hold a hearing for the first reading of the revisions to the Landmarks Ordinance on January 28th.  Staff has added some procedural recommendations.  It will be available on the City’s website once the agenda is posted one week before the hearing. 

 

2525 Main Street and 145 –147 Bay Street.  Both of these variances were appealed and will go before the Planning Commission March 19th. 

 

The Neimeyer house, 1911 La Mesa, is in escrow. 

 

City Council will make a decision on January 14th to fill the vacant position for a licensed architect for the Landmarks Commission.

 

The annual Boards and Commissions dinner will be held on May 5th  in the Civic Auditorium.  Invitations will be mailed to all Commissioners.  The City Clerk’s office will be mailing form 700 (Economic Interest Form) to Commissioners the first week of March, and it is due back on April 1st.

 

The APA will be hosting a professional development workshop on historic preservation.  It will be held on February 18, 2003 and is a full day workshop. 

 

3.      COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS:

 

         None

 

4.      APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

         Public Input Permitted

                                     

A.  December 9, 2002

 

Commissioner Posek made a motion to approve the minutes with the following corrections:  Stipulate that Harold Griffen represented the property owner for 918 5th Street, and add that Chair Pro Tem Genser made a substitute motion on this item, which was not seconded.  Chair Pro Tem Genser seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote.

 

   5.   APPROVAL OF STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL ACTION:

 

A.  Statement of Official Action: Certificate of Appropriateness Application No. LC 02CA-019, approving repainting of the structure at 2612 Main Street (the First Roy Jones House, now the California Heritage Museum) resulting in a change of colors.

 

B.  Statement of Official Action: Certificate of Appropriateness Application No. LC 02CA-020, allowing new siding, windows and painting on the two-story rear structure located at 2617 Third Street, a contributing structure to the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District.

 

C.  Statement of Official Action: Designation of 601 Pico Blvd. (Barnum Hall on the Santa Monica High School campus) as a City Landmark (Landmark Designation Application LC-02LM-005), including the following character defining features located in interior public spaces: the Stanton MacDonald-Wright mosaic and fire curtain, the foyer terrazzo floor.

 

D.  Statement of Official Action: Designation of 918 5th Street (Cedar Tree) as a City Landmark (Landmark Designation Application LC-02LM-006).

 

E.  Statement of Official Action: Designation of 954 5th Street (Turn of Century Residence), as a City Landmark (Landmark Designation Application LC-02LM-007).

 

         Chair Pro Tem Genser made a motion to approve Items 5A,C,D&E.  Commissioner  Fresco seconded the motion which passed unanimously by voice vote.

 

         Commissioner Posek made a motion to approve Item 5B.  Commissioner Fresco seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote with Chair Pro Tem Genser abstaining.

 

6.      PUBLIC INPUT: (On items not on agenda and within the jurisdiction of the Commission)

 

7.      CONSENT CALENDAR:

         Public Input Permitted

 

         None.

 

8.      NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC HEARINGS: 

         Public Input Permitted

                   

A.  Landmark Designation Application LC-02LM-008, 317 Georgina Avenue, to determine whether the proposed property is appropriate for formal consideration of the Landmark Designation Application.

 

Staff report presented by Liz Bar-El.

 

The following member of the public addressed the Commission: Jeff Beall, property owner.

 

Commissioner Rosenfield asked the owner why he decided to landmark his home.

 

Mr. Beall stated that he is seeking the designation for aesthetic and architectural reasons.  He is also motivated by the financial incentive of the tax reduction through the Mills Act.

 

Chairperson Lehrer asked how much of the interior of the house remains intact.

 

Mr. Beall stated that he would estimate that approximately over 75% is still intact.  There was a significant addition of the master bedroom in the early 1980s.  Also there may have been wall movement in the upstairs small bedroom. 

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser thanked Mr. Beall for nominating his home.

Commissioner Posek made a motion to schedule a formal hearing. Commissioner Schnitzler seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote:

 

Ayes:           Fresco, Posek, Rosenfield, Schnitzler, Genser, Lehrer

Nayes:         None

Absent:        None

Abstain:       None

 

B.  Landmark Designation Application LC-02LM-009, 507 - 517 Wilshire Boulevard to determine whether the proposed property is appropriate for formal consideration of the Landmark Designation Application.

 

Staff report presented by Liz Bar-El.

 

The following member of the public addressed the Commission:  Eli Alber, in regard to the status of the building.

 

Commissioner Schnitzler asked that the square footage and development potential be included in next month's staff report.

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser stated that he is not really enthusiastic about this building.

 

Commissioner Fresco stated that the strip is interesting and she would like to see it remain. 

 

Commissioner Posek stated that this is a very non-descript building at first glance. However it is has potential.

 

Commissioner Schnitzler stated that it is a very strong candidate and a contributor to the downtown commercial district.

 

Chairperson Lehrer stated that it is an elegant building.  It is architecturally subtle, doesn’t scream at you, and is a strong contributor to downtown.

 

Commissioner Posek made a motion to file an application for landmark designation.  Commissioner Rosenfield seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote:

 

Ayes:                 Fresco, Posek, Rosenfield, Schnitzler, Genser, Lehrer

Nayes:               None

Absent:              None

Abstain:             None

 

 

 

 

9.      OLD BUSINESS:

         Public Input Permitted

 

         None.

 

10.    DISCUSSION ITEMS:

         Public Input Permitted

 

A.  Review of Demolition Permits and Consideration Whether to File an Application For Designation of a Structure as a Landmark or Structure of Merit.

     

         1.      1544 Euclid Street (PC013848)

                  R3/Medium Density Multiple Residential

                  Two Detached Units and Garage

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

2.      1104 Franklin Avenue (PC013883)

R1/Single Family Residential

Single Family Resident w/ 3-Car Attached Garage

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

3.      1231 16th Street (PC013866)

CP3/Commercial Professional District

Single Family Resident

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

                       

4.      1931 Stewart Street (PC013896)

         RMH/Residential Mobile Home Park

         Storage Shed

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

5.      1343 6th Street (PC013897)

         C3/Downtown Commercial

         Santa Monica Public Library Garage

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

6.      2311 Pearl Street (PC013907)

         R1/Single Family Residential

         Detached Garage

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

7.      402 10th Street (PC013912)

         R1/Single Family Residential

         One-Story, Single Family Resident w/Detached Garage

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

 

         8.      25 Gale Place (PC013801)

         R1/Single Family Residential

         Single Family House w/Attached Two-Car Garage

         Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resources Inventory

 

No action was taken on Item 10A(1-8).

 

B.  Discussion of Landmark nominations, Landmark application fees and formation of a Commission policy regarding the Commission filing applications on behalf of owners for Landmark designations. (continued from December 9, 2002)

 

Chairperson Lehrer passed out to the Commission her fee survey on other cities and their fees for landmark designation applications.

 

Ms. Bar-El explained how the landmark fees charged are used in conjunction with the designation process.

 

Commissioner Schnitzler stated that charging this fee is a strong disincentive to the applicant. 

 

Chairperson Lehrer suggested having the applicant hire their own consultants to do their research, which may be more cost effective and allow the City to reduce its fees.

 

Commissioner Fresco stated that it is community minded to designate your property by giving of your property and investment for community enjoyment, and she feels it is wrong for the owner to have to pay for it.   She feels the City should bear the cost.

 

Commissioner Genser stated that this is a proactive action on the property owner’s part.  He feels the fee should perhaps be lowered, but not dismissed completely.  A discussion followed on the need to avoid frivolous applications.

 

            Commissioner Rosenfield suggested a reimbursement to the applicant if       the property is designated. 

 

Ms. Bar-El suggested that the Commission submit a letter to City Council regarding their views on landmark application fees.

 

Schnitzler suggested that staff include the letter with the incentive package to City Council.  Genser made a motion to authorize Chairperson Lehrer to write a letter based on the discussion and staff would forward it to the Council to discuss along with the Landmarks Ordinance revision.  Commissioner Rosenfield seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote.

 

Pam O’Connor suggested that a Commissioner be present to speak at the Council meeting.  Several Commissioners stated that they would attend.

              

C.  Discussion to consider sponsoring the placement of additional plaques on designated City Landmarks. (continued from December 9, 2002)

 

            Ms. Christensen gave the Commission an overview on the plaque        installation process.

 

            A discussion followed regarding the administration of a plaque program.

 

Chairperson Lehrer asked that staff bring back a list of properties that have plaques along with any pertinent information.  The discussion was continued to February 10, 2003.

              

D.  Consideration of whether the Commission should file an application to nominate Palisades Park as a City Landmark. (Requested by Commissioner Rosenfield)

 

      Chair Pro Tem Genser passed around literature on Palisades Park.  He stated that it is a wise decision to work with the Parks and Recreation Commission as much as possible on this idea.

 

            This item was continued to a date uncertain to allow CCS staff to prepare

            information for a discussion on the implications of Landmark status for the

            park.

 

E.  Discussion of whether the Commission should recommend to the City Council that the City prepare a Tree Ordinance and possible preparation of a letter on this topic to the Council. (Requested by Commissioner Schnitzler)

 

Commissioner Schnitzler requested that staff draft a letter to the Council and Recreation and Parks Commission, with a copy to Community and Cultural Services informing them that the Landmarks Commission supports a tree ordinance.  The letter will be brought back to the Commission for approval February 10, 2003.

 

  1. Discussion of Preservation Week 2003, which takes place on May 5-11, 2003, and consideration of whether the Commission would like to co-sponsor an event with the Santa Monica Conservancy. (Requested by Commissioner Schnitzler)

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser made a motion to invite the Santa Monica Conservancy to co-sponsor an event for preservation week. Commissioner Schnitzler seconded the motion which passed unanimously by voice vote.

                                           

  1. Discussion of initiating a courtesy pre-review process for proposed modifications to designated landmark or structure of merit properties and consideration of a process for its implementation. (Requested by Commissioner Fresco)

 

The Commissioners and staff discussed ideas for trying to introduce more certainty for applicants regarding their applications for modifications.  Several commissioners brought up their desire to assist Landmark property owners as much as possible to make the system work more smoothly for them.  Ms. Bar-El and City Attorney Rosenbaum explained the issues surrounding the Commission’s offering their opinions prior to a public hearing, which might jeopardize the fairness of the hearing.  Ms. Bar-El also explained that she often assists the applicants with their plans and that the consultant’s review comments can be incorporated prior to the Commission’s hearing. No action was taken at this time.

 

H.  Discussion of additional ways to inform purchasers of property in Santa Monica that demolitions of structures over 40 years of age require Landmarks Commission review. (Requested by Commissioner Fresco)

 

As with the above item, the Commission and staff discussed ways to improve communication with the public regarding the review process for proposed demolitions over 40 years of age.  Commissioner Fresco stated that she would like some kind of “Landmarks clearance” process that does not involve a demolition permit.  Although no conclusion was reached, staff stated that Planning staff already makes and will continue to make every effort to inform prospective applicants of the City’s policies at the earliest point of contact. 

 

Commissioner Fresco also asked about requiring residential Realtors to disclose information on this topic to prospective buyers.  Commissioner Rosenfield stated that he believed it was possible to do that and that he would look into it and bring information back to the February meeting.  A discussion on that subject will be agendized in February.

 

I.    Planning Commission Case List (Information Only)

 

11.    WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:

         Public Input Permitted

 

A.  Letter received from Gerard & Stephanie Casale requesting that the Commission consider filing a Landmark application on their behalf to designate their property at 710 Adelaide Place as a City Landmark.

        

This item was heard earlier along with Item 10-B. 

 

The following member of the public addressed the Commission: Gerard Casale, property owner.

After a lengthy discussion regarding policy changes, fees and timelines, Commissioner Fresco made a motion to file a landmark designation application for 710 Adelaide Place.   Commissioner Rosenfield seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote:

 

         Ayes:     Fresco, Genser, Posek, Rosenfield

         Nayes:   None

         Abstain: Schnitzler, Lehrer

         Absent:  None  

 

Chair Pro Tem made a motion to re-consider the first motion.  Chairperson Lehrer seconded the motion, which failed by the following vote:

 

   Ayes:     Schnitzler, Genser, Lehrer  

   Nayes:   Fresco, Posek, Rosenfield

   Abstain: None

   Absent:  None

 

12.   FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:  (Requests from Commissioners to add items to              upcoming agendas)

 

Discussion of providing information regarding the City’s Demolition policy on Residential Real Estate contracts (Commissioner Fresco).

 

13.    NEXT MEETING DATE AND COMMISSION AGENDA: Monday, February 10, 2003.

                                                                                                                       

14.    ADJOURNMENT: 10:35 p.m.