MINUTES

 

MEETING OF THE

LANDMARKS COMMISSION

City of Santa Monica Founded 1875

“Populus felix in urbe felici”

 

 

 

 

Monday, June 9, 2003

 

7:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers, Room 213,

1685 Main Street, Santa Monica

 

CALL TO ORDER:       7:09 pm

 

1.     ROLL CALL

 

Present:

Commissioner Fresco

Chair Pro Tem Genser

Chairperson Lehrer

Commissioner Kaplan

Commissioner Posek

Commissioner Schnitzler  

 

Also Present:

Kimberly Christensen

Elizabeth Bar-El

Joseph Lawrence, Assistant City Attorney

Arlene Johnson

Councilman Michael Feinstein

 

Absent:

Commissioner Rosenfield

 

2            REPORT FROM STAFF:

 

Ms. Bar-El stated that the application for changes to the Mariasol Restaurant were withdrawn.  The Bubba Gump final EIR will going to the Planning Commission on June 18th.  Per the Commission’s request, she reported on the construction at 1433 4th Street.  She also introduced the Historic Preservation intern to the Commission. 

 

 

 

 

3.         COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS:

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser acknowledged that May is Historic Preservation month and he accepted on behalf of the Commission a proclamation to that effect.  He also spoke publicly about Landmarks and the interests that have come forth in the community. 

 

4.         APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

         Public Input Permitted

                       

A.  May 12, 2003

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser made a motion to approve the minutes pending correction on the 2nd motion of the minutes for April 14th.  Commissioner Posek seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote, with Chairperson Lehrer abstaining, and the following corrections:  the April 14th minutes were seconded by Commissioner Posek, not Commissioner Kaplan.  Commissioner Fresco’s statement on Item 8A should include, “she felt strongly that this building should be saved, and would like to see at least the front corner façade remain. 

 

   5.            APPROVAL OF STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL ACTION:

 

         None.

 

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

 

The following member of the public addressed the Commission: Bea Nemlaha on 3rd Street Historic District incentives.

 

7.         CONSENT CALENDAR:

         Public Input Permitted

 

         None.

 

8.      OLD BUSINESS:

         Public Input Permitted

 

         None.

 

9.      NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC HEARINGS: 

         Public Input Permitted

              

A.         Certificate of Appropriateness LC-03CA-002, 380 Santa Monica Pier. Sign Program to establish parameters for all signs within the boundaries of Pacific Park. (Continued to July 14, 2003)

 

B.         Landmark Designation Application LC-03LM-002, 128 Hollister Avenue, to determine whether the proposed property should be designated as a City Landmark.

 

      Staff report presented by Ms. Bar-El.

 

      The following members of the public addressed the Commission in favor of the designation:  Marshall Sisken, Hillary Kay, and Danielle Guillou.

 

      The following members of the public addressed the Commission:  Rosario Perry, Attorney for applicant, Stan Shul, Joel Brand, Margaret McLean, William Cleaver.

 

      Chairperson Lehrer was disturbed by inaccuracies in the comparables.  A lot of the pictures were incorrect for the addresses.  Many of the comparables had been altered significantly.   She stated that this property is pristine, and a great candidate for preservation.  Also it meets 3 of the criteria. It does have architectural significance.  She was troubled by the staff report that indicated that, it has to be the best of its kind.  According to the criteria, it doesn't have to be the best of its kind, it has to be a good example of its type or style.  Hollister has very little of historic value that has survived over the years. The building makes a very strong statement and she supports the designation. 

 

      Chair Pro Tem Genser concurs with Chairperson Lehrer.  He stated that he, too, found the comparables to be different from this property.  This house is unique and is one of the last surviving examples on Hollister Avenue adjacent to an area where there are many examples of historic homes. 

 

      Commissioner Posek stated that the location of property is such that it really stands out.  This house is a gateway to that neighborhood and is significant.

 

      Commissioner Fresco concurred with Chairperson Lehrer.  She stated that the consultant report belittles the importance of this house.  She stated that this is an important house with incredible integrity and it is worthy of landmark designation. 

 

      Commissioner Kaplan stated that the building is elegant in simplicity.  She was saddened by the consultant report because it did not recognize its significance.  Also, she felt the engineering report’s description of the conditions were extreme and didn’t agree with many of them.    She stated she would like to save this house because its integrity and style is important for the community and the area.

 

      Chair Pro Tem Genser stated that the house is particularly visible and significant due to the adjacent open lot.  He stated that the house obviously relates to the rest of the neighborhood, which is probably the most intact historic neighborhood in the entire city.  He would like to save the house in a reasonable and justifiable way.

 

      Commissioner Fresco stated that the mission of the Landmarks Commission is not just to preserve the important architectural buildings that were built by people of wealth, but to preserve the City’s history and cultural history as well.  The Commission has to look at Ocean Park’s buildings and decide if they help tell a story about where the neighborhood came from and preserve that thread in some way. 

 

      Commissioner Fresco made a motion to designate the property as a landmark based on criteria 1, 4 and 6, rating characteristics of the  American four-square style, such as the square massing, hip roof with ornately shaped rafter tails, the full span windows across the second floor and the front porch and the wood siding.  Commissioner Posek seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote:

 

      Roll Call Vote:

      Ayes:           Fresco, Genser, Kaplan, Lehrer, Posek

      Nayes:          Schnitzler

      Absent:         Rosenfield

      Abstain:         None

 

C.         Landmark Designation Application LC-03LM-003, 522 24th Street, to determine whether the eucalyptus deanei tree located on the property should be designated as a City Landmark.

 

      Staff report presented by Ms. Bar-El and Walter Warner, Community Forrester.

 

               The following members of the public addressed the Commission:  Harry Rumack, owner, Joseph Argenta, Attorney for 528 24th Street, Lev Ginsburg, and Giles Smith.

 

Commissioner Posek agreed that the tree has good lineage, but the conditions are extremely onerous.  He felt that future owners will be extremely burdened by limiting what they can do.  He feels the tree will do well if it is not landmarked. 

 

The Commissioners discussed the implications of the condition for the building on the adjacent property.  The City Attorney addressed legal issues related to trimming and root pruning of neighbors’ trees.  Commissioners asked for further clarification.

 

After further discussion with the Community Forrester, Chair Pro Tem Genser made a motion to continue to the July 14th meeting.  Commissioner Schnitzler seconded the motion, which passed by voice   vote.  Commissioner Posek opposed.

 

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.         523 25th Street (PC014508)

                  R1-Single Family Residential

                  Single Family Residential

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resource Inventory

 

2. 1311 Centinela Avenue (PC014478)

R2-Low Density Multiple Residential

8 Detached Units and 7 One-Car Garages

                  Structure Not Identified in the Historic Resource Inventory

 

The following member of the public addressed the Commission: Lee Novik.

 

A demolition permit for the property at 1311 Centinela Ave. had previously been approved and had expired.

 

No action was taken on these items.

 

B.   Discussion of 1911 La Mesa Drive (Oscar Neimeyer/ Strick House) and Consideration of Whether to file an Application for Designation of the Property as a City Landmark. (Continued from May 12, 2002)

 

      Commissioner Schnitzler recused herself from this discussion.

 

      The following member of the public addressed the public:  Nigel Briand,       representing the property owner and Bea Nemlaha.

 

Mr. Briand stated that due to financial constraints, the applicant needs to move into the La Mesa property as soon as possible.  He also stated that to move in and wait to do the addition would be a burden to the owner because he had planned to convert the garage into a 2-floor library.  He stated that the owner has one of the world’s largest collections of 20th century design and architecture books.  The garage has to be approved before they can do any other additions or remove the existing garage. 

 

Commissioner Posek stated that the Commission has the burden to protect the property, and would like to have an agreement similar to the one with the previous owner, so the Commission can move forward without impeding the applicant, and without the applicant doing anything to degrade the house. 

 

Ms. Bar-El stated that if a landmark application is filed, the project cannot move forward until the Commission decides whether or not to designate. 

 

Commissioner Kaplan stated that the Commission’s duty is to determine whether the property is worthy of designation, and not how quickly things are done.  She was concerned that the owner is trying to add something to this house that looks like it was done in the 1960s, which is done in 2003. 

 

Chairperson Lehrer stated that she is satisfied that the intention for the remodel is appropriate for the property.

 

Upon further discussion, Commissioner Fresco made a motion to continue this item to the August meeting.  Chairperson Lehrer seconded the motion, which passed by voice vote.  Commissioner Kaplan opposed.

 

C.   Presentation of the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, including explanation of how it has developed and how it is used.  (Continued from May 12, 2002)  [see below]

 

D.   Consideration of adoption of a resolution delegating authority for certain types of modifications to the Landmarks Commission Secretary as permitted by Landmarks Ordinance SMMC Section 9.36.170(l). (Continued from May 12, 2002)  [see below]

 

E.   Discussion on the Consequences for Property Owners that Violate Requirements and Conditions of Landmark designations and Certificates of Appropriateness. (Requested by Commissioner Schnitzler)  [see below]

 

  1. Discussion of Council Budget Priorities related to Landmarks Topics (requested by Commissioner Genser) 

 

The Commission briefly discussed the need to address Landmarks issues.  The newly adopted Council priorities move the Landmarks Ordinance revisions up to begin in February 2004.

 

G.   Discussion of Possibilities for Starting a Commemorative Sign Program for Historic Sites in the City. (Requested by Chair Lehrer)  [see below]

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser made a motion to schedule a special meeting on June 23rd to discuss items 10C, D, E &G.  Commissioner Fresco seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote.

                 

H.            Planning Commission Case List (Information Only)

 

 

11.    WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:

         Public Input Permitted

 

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

 

Commissioner Schnitzler asked to agendize Bea Nemlaha’s request to discuss 3rd Street Neighborhood incentives.  Chairperson Lehrer suggested adding this topic to the June 23rd Special meeting agenda.

 

Chair Pro Tem Genser asked to agendize a survey of the beach tract.

 

Commissioner Kaplan asked to agendize a discussion of surveys of courtyard housing.

           

Commissioner Fresco asked to agendize a discussion of official landmark review of draft EIRs that report impact on historic properties.

 

 

13.    NEXT MEETING DATE AND COMMISSION AGENDA: Monday, June 23, 2003 (Special Meeting)

                       

14.         ADJOURNMENT:  10:50 pm