Designed in the Late Modern/ Mid-Century Modern architectural style, the two-story commercial building is generally rectangular in plan with a floor area of 6,546 square-feet. According to the City’s 2006 survey, the subject building is a rare, extant example of a commercial building designed by renowned Modernist, John Lautner. The subject building embodies character-defining features of the architectural style, including bold geometric volumes, horizontal massing, large expanse of unadorned wall surface along the west elevation, and ribbon windows. Unique design elements like the staircase enclosed by a window-wall provide “in-between” spaces between the interior and the exterior. The building also utilizes sustainable design features such as the internal light court and a bank of louvers, which allows natural light and ventilation into the building.
Based on the City’s permit records, the building has had some changes since its original construction. Permitted exterior alterations to the building were for an exterior stair case at the rear (southern) elevation in 1976 and re-roofing in 1996. All other permits were for interior alterations, which no longer remain in 2021, as non-original structural elements and non-original interior walls and spaces were removed. It appears that the property at 9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard substantially retains its original, exterior appearance.
Landmark Initiation and Potential Nomination
The Cultural Heritage Commission voted to initiate landmark proceedings on the subject property at its meeting on April 13, 2021. Pursuant to Beverly Hills Municipal Code §10-3-3215 A.3, this Preliminary Evaluation has been prepared summarizing the information gathered to this point in assessment of the property’s eligibility under Beverly Hills Landmark criteria contained in BHMC §10-3-3212. A public hearing before the Cultural Heritage Commission is scheduled on April 13, 2022, to undertake a preliminary hearing based on this preliminary evaluation. The Cultural Heritage Commission will determine at that time whether sufficient evidence exists to support a finding that all applicable requirements for designation as a landmark can be met based on the supporting facts provided (pursuant to the requirements in Beverly Hills Municipal Code §10-3- 3215 A.3).
FINDINGS
The facts supporting the Director’s evaluation of eligibility are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Summary of Landmark Designation Criteria (BHMC §10-3-3212) Criterion
No.
Criterion Does the subject property appear to
meet criteria?
A landmark must satisfy all of the requirements in Section A:
A.1 It is at least forty-five (45) years of
age, or is a property of extraordinary
significance;
Yes
The property was constructed in 1946,
making it 76 years of age in 2022.
Preliminary Evaluation
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
April 13, 2022
A.2
It possesses high artistic or aesthetic
value, and embodies the distinctive
characteristics of an architectural
style or architectural type or
architectural period;
Yes
The property is a clear example of the “Late
Modern/Mid-Century Modern”. The subject
building embodies character-defining
features of the architectural style, including
bold geometric volumes, horizontal
massing, large expanse of unadorned wall
surface along the west elevation, and
ribbon windows.
A.3 It retains substantial integrity from its
period of significance; and
Yes
The period of significance for this property
would likely be 1946, the date of the original
construction of the commercial building.
The building has had some, more minor,
changes since its original construction.
Permitted exterior alterations to the building
was for an exterior stair case at the rear
(southern) elevation in 1976, re-roofing in
1996, and interior improvements and
remodeling. It appears that the property at
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
substantially retains its original, exterior
appearance and all character-contributing
features are intact.
A.4 It has continued historic value to the
community such that its designation
as a landmark is reasonable and
necessary to promote and further the
purposes of this article.
Yes
As an example of Late Modern/Mid-Century
Modern architecture directly associated
with Master Architect John Lautner, the
subject property has continued historic
value to the community. Based on the
evidence available at this time, furtherance
of landmark proceedings for the subject
property are considered to be reasonable
and necessary to promote the objectives of
the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
In addition to the requirements set forth in Section A above, a landmark must satisfy at least one of the following requirements in Section B:
Preliminary Evaluation
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
April 13, 2022
B.1 It is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places;
No
The site is not listed on the National
Register of Historic Places.
B.2 It is an exceptional work by a Master
Architect;
Potentially
The building at 9884 Santa Monica
Boulevard is an example of an early
commercial design from noted modernist
architect John Lautner.
While the subject property was designed by
a Master Architect (John Lautner), research
has not uncovered, at this time that the
building is considered an “exceptional
work”, pursuant to the definitions in Section
10-3-3202 the Municipal Code. More in
depth research may uncover publications or
awards.
B.3 It is an exceptional work that was
owned and occupied by a person of
great importance, and was directly
connected to a momentous event in
the person’s endeavors or the history
of the nation. For purposes of this
paragraph, personal events such as
birth, death, marriage, social
interaction, and the like shall not be
deemed to be momentous;
No
Research has not uncovered that the
commercial structure was owned and
occupied by a “person of great importance”
who forged a mark on the history of the
nation, pursuant to the definitions in Section
10-3-3202 the Municipal Code.
B.4 It is an exceptional property that was
owned and occupied by a person of
great local prominence;
No
Research has not uncovered that the
structure is an exceptional property that was
owned and occupied by a person of great
local prominence, pursuant to the
definitions in Section 10-3-3202 the
Municipal Code.
B.5 It is an iconic property;
[From BHMC 10-3-3202: An “iconic
property” is “a property that has been
visited and photographed so often by
residents and visitors to the city that
it has become inextricably
associated with Beverly Hills in the
No
Archival research does not find the Darrow
Office Building to be such a highly
photographed and widely recognizable
place in Beverly Hills that it would qualify as
an “iconic property.”
Preliminary Evaluation
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
April 13, 2022
PRELIMINARY HEARING (BHMC §10-3-3215A)
Pursuant to BHMC §10-3-3215A, the Cultural Heritage Commission is scheduled to conduct a preliminary hearing based on this preliminary evaluation to consider the property’s eligibility under local landmark criteria at its regular meeting on April 13, 2022. The Cultural Heritage Commission shall determine whether sufficient evidence exists to conclude that the subject property satisfies all applicable designation criteria and whether the property merits formal consideration for nomination. Should the Cultural Heritage Commission nominate the subject property as a local landmark at a future public hearing, final approval is required by the City Council in order to formally designate the property and list the subject residence on the Local Register of Historic Properties.
popular culture and forms part of the
city’s identity to the world at large.”]
B.6 Or, the landmark designation
procedure is initiated, or expressly
agreed to, by the owner(s) of the
property.
Yes
The landmark designation procedure has
been initiated by and expressly agreed to by
the owner(s) of the property.
Do all criteria in Section A appear to be met? Yes
Does at least one criterion in Section B
appear to be met? Yes
Does the subject property appear to satisfy all
the requirements in Beverly Hills Municipal
Code §10-3-3212 to be considered an eligible
property for landmark nomination and
designation?
Yes
Preliminary Evaiuation
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
April 13, 2022
Should you have any questions on this process during the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact my staff:
Preservation Program Manager
Mark Odell
Urban Designer
(310) 285-1116
[email protected]
Preservation Program Staff Member
Minjee Hahm
Associate Planner
(310) 285-1136
[email protected]
Sincerely,
Ryafi Gohlich, AlCP
pirector of Community Development
5-9
Planning Commission Staff Report
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
July 13, 2023
ATTACHMENT G
Applicant’s Loading and Deliveries Narrative
OF JULY 13, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Edgar Arroyo
Community Development Department
455 N Rexford Dr
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
04.27.23 Loading and Deliveries Narrative
Loading and non-couriered deliveries made to the Darrow Office Building will utilize the loading/unloading zone provided in the parking lot on the project site. Delivery vehicles will be allowed 10 minutes to load or unload. In some cases, additional time will be allowed for more extensive deliveries or pick-ups. This would require approval from the Darrow Office Building management. Upon egress, the delivery vehicle would exit northbound on Charleville Boulevard.
It is recommended that deliveries to the Darrow Office Building be made during early mornings or evenings (non-peak office hours), if possible. In order to minimize congestion and traffic conflict, deliveries to be made during peak office hours shall be coordinated with building management. It is also recommended that the size of delivery vehicles should be limited to vans or small trucks with a maximum wheelbase of 18 feet.
According to executives at the Darrow Office Building, deliveries made are mostly limited to office supplies and are delivered by FedEx, UPS, and Amazon Prime vans and small trucks during business hours. It is anticipated that there will be roughly 10 deliveries made to the Darrow Office Building each week.
Planning Commission Staff Report
9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard
July 13, 2023
ATTACHMENT H
Project Plans
(Provided as a Separate Attachment)
OF JULY 13, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PROVIDED AS ATTACHMENT 3 OF JANUARY 23, 2024 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
ATTACHMENT 8
Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2029
OF DECEMBER 5, 2023 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
RESOLUTION NO. 2029
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS CONDITIONALLY
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW AND
HISTORIC INCENTIVE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE
REHABILITATION OF AN EXISTING TWO-STORY
COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW THIRD STORY, ALONG WITH WAIVERS AND
DEVIATIONS OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS AT 9884 SOUTH SANTA MONICA
BOULEVARD (PL2200237)
The Planning Commission of the City of Beverly Hills hereby finds, resolves and determines as follows:
Section 1. Yaniv Tepper, on behalf of Impact Real Estate Group, LLC, (DPR)
and Historic Incentive Permit (HIP) to allow for the rehabilitation of an existing two-story commercial building with a new third story addition, along with deviations from certain development standards to allow for reduced minimum dimensions for rubbish storage facilities and alternative loading area requirements
Section 2. The Project consists of the rehabilitation of an existing two-story commercial building and the construction of a new third story at 9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard. The exist
was built in 1946 and was designed by John Lautner and Douglas Honnold, architects listed on the Local Master Architects. The Project includes the construction of a new 1,404 SF third story addition over the existing building to provide additional office space on the property and an outdoor terrace that would face South Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville Boulevard.
The new third floor addition would increase the existing height of the building by approximately 2 - - 8 - addition of required elevators and stair shafts that provide access to all existing and proposed floors of the building and are exempt from counting against the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) for the site. While the proposed third story addition measures 1,404 SF, the overall Project results in a 765 SF net increase in floor area as a result of floor area reductions on the existing first and second floor to provide building-code required elevators and access stairs on each level. This results in a total floor area of 7,053 SF and a proposed FAR of 1.17. The existing structure would maintain its existing setbacks. The new third story addition is proposed within the footprint of the second floor and would not extend beyond the footprint of the existing building. The new third floor addition - onica - - differentiated from the design of the existing building through the use of building materials that clearly distinguish the historical portion of the structure from the proposed new construction, with exposed wood elements and full height storefront glazing on the front, street-side, and rear of the addition. The Project includes the reconfiguration the existing surface parking lot located at the rear of the property to provide a new transformer to provide improved electrical service to the property. The existing surface parking lot currently provides a total of seven (7) parking spaces for the existing building accessed from Charleville Boulevard by - Project would reduce the number of parking spaces on the Project site, from seven (7) to three (3) parking spaces, in order to accommodate the required van-accessible handicap stall, as well as the required transformer for the Project. Additionally, the Project requires modifications from the following BHMC development standards:
3 BHMC §9-3-1: Minimum Dimensions for Rubbish Storage Facilities BHMC §10-3-2741: On-Site Loading Space Requirements
Rubbish Storage Facilities
The existing Project site currently does not have a rubbish/trash storage room or on-site loading areas. The improvements to the site include providing a new rubbish room within the ground floor of the building, accessed directly from the parking lot to the rear, to store refuse bins inside the building and way from view of the street and sidewalk. Pursuant to BHMC §9-3-
1.F, the minimum dimensions for a rubbish room ar es to - - through the requested Historic Incentive Permit.
Loading Area
The applicant is proposing to provide an area for loading within the redesigned parking lot that would be accessible to a van providing scheduled deliveries to the Project site. The loading area would be located immediately behind the existing parking spaces and would measure ed in an
area that would block access to on-site parking areas, the use of this loading area would be managed to prevent from impacting access to available on-site parking. Deliveries would be managed by the property owner and would be limited to occurring during non-peak office hours to minimize congestion and traffic conflict from delivery vehicles and customer vehicles from accessing the parking lot at the same time. The requested deviation would allow for this managed loading area to be provided within the existing parking aisle, rather than as a standalone space, due 4 to the infeasibility of provided a standalone loading space without further eliminating available on-site parking.
Section 3. This Project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.), and the environmental regulations of the City. The Project qualifies for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities) and a Class 31 Categorical Exemption (Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) in accordance with the requirements of Section 15303 and 15331 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Class 3 exemption is applicable to additions to existing structures that do not exceed 10,000 SF. Additionally, the Class 31 Categorical Exemption is applicable to the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the of Historic Properties with Guidelines for
Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (SOI Standards).
Therefore, the Planning Commission finds the Project exempt from further review under CEQA.
Section 4. Notice of the Project and public hearing was mailed on June 23, 2023 to all property owners and residential occupants within a 500-foot radius of the property, extended to the block face. An on-site posted notice was displayed on the property beginning on June 23, 2023. On July 13, 2023, the Planning Commission considered the application at a duly noticed public hearing. Evidence, both oral and written, was presented at said hearing.
Section 5. In considering the request for approval of a Development Plan Review, pursuant to Section 10-3-3104 of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC), the 5 Planning Commission considered whether it could make the following findings in support of the Project:
1. The proposed plan is consistent with the general plan and any specific plans adopted for the area.
2. The proposed plan will not adversely affect existing and anticipated development in the vicinity and will promote harmonious development of the area.
3. The nature, configuration, location, density, height and manner of operation of any commercial development proposed by the plan will not significantly and adversely interfere with the use and enjoyment of residential properties in the vicinity of the subject property.
4. The proposed plan will not create any significantly adverse traffic impacts, traffic safety hazards, pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, or pedestrian safety hazards.
5. The proposed plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.
Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines as follows with respect to the Development Plan Review:
1. The proposed P
Plan Land Use Element, including City Places (Policy LU 2.1) through maintaining and enhancing the character of existing business districts, City History (Policy LU 2.6) through the preservation existing buildings while accommodating renovations of existing buildings to maintain their economic viability, and Revitalization of Vacant and Underutilized Land (LU 15.3) by promoting the revitalization of distressed, underutilized, and vacant buildings to sustain economic viability, activity, and provide income for City services. As such, the 6 proposed project is consistent with the general plan and the project site is not located in a specific plan area.
2. The Project includes the rehabilitation of an existing commercial building and the construction of a 1,400 SF third story addition. The project site is located directly to the east of an active construction project at 9908 South Santa Monica Boulevard (Rosewood Residences). The project site is currently improved with an existing surface parking lot at the rear that would be used to provide construction related parking and staging of building materials and equipment on-site. The small scale of this project is not anticipated to negatively impact existing development in the area, as the project would be required to submit a construction management during plan building plan check to ensure that the proposed work would not adversely affect planned construction in the vicinity of the project site. As such, the proposed project would not adversely affect existing and anticipated development in the vicinity and will promote harmonious development of the area.
3. The Project seeks to rehabilitate an existing two-story commercial building that was designed by John Lautner and Douglas Honnold, notable architects listed on the approximately 1,400 SF. The proposed addition would increase the existing height of the - 8 - would be retained for the existing building facing South Santa Monica Boulevard and - -
in a net floor area increase of 765 SF, for a total building floor area of 7,053 SF and an 7 maximum FAR of 2.0. The project would be constructed in compliance with all applicable density, height, and location requirements established for commercial development within -3 Zone. The closest existing
along Durant Drive, a two-story multi-family residential property located across the street and to the south of the project site. The request includes deviations of the development standard as part of the Historic Inventive Permit request that would facilitate the introduction of services that the existing building does not provide. The project seeks to provide an on-site loading area on a site that currently has no on-site loading areas.
Similarly, the project would provide a dedicated room in the building to house rubbish storage containers where currently none are provided. These features would upgrade the existing condition of the project site while promoting the rehabilitation of an architecturally location, density, height and manner of operation of the project will not significantly and adversely interfere with the use and enjoyment of residential properties in the vicinity of the subject property.
4. The Project is screened
adopted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) thresholds due to the small scale of the project consisting of the rehabilitation of an existing commercial building and the addition of a 1,400 SF third story. The project site is currently improved with an existing surface parking lot at the rear that would be used to provide construction related parking and staging of building materials and equipment on-site.
Additionally, the project would be required to submit a construction management during 8 plan building plan check to ensure that the proposed work would not adversely affect planned construction in the vicinity of the project site. As such, the proposed project would not create any significant adverse traffic impacts, traffic safety hazards, pedestrian vehicle conflicts, or pedestrian safety hazards.
5. The Project site is located within a commercial area and is required to be developed to all applicable development standards, including adherence to maximum height, FAR, and the SOI Standards for rehabilitation of historic structures. The proposed project seeks to rehabilitate an existing commercial building that was built in 1946 and designed by John Lautner, a notable architect in the Southern California region that is also of
the property as a local historic landmark, preserving a building possessing a unique style of architecture in the city. As such, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare.
Section 7. In considering the request for approval of a Historic Incentive Permit, pursuant to Section 10-3-3252 of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code (BHMC), the Planning Commission considered whether it could make the following findings in support of the Project:
1. The proposed project complies with the "Secretary of The Interior's Standards For The Treatment Of Historic Properties With Guidelines For Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, And Reconstructing Historic Buildings."
2. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the scale, massing, or character of the streetscape.
3. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the scale and massing of the property as viewed by neighboring properties. 9 4. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the neighbors' access to light and air.
5. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the neighbors' privacy.
6. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the garden quality of the city.
7. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse impact on the public health, safety, or welfare.
Section 8. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines as follows with respect to the Historic Incentive Permit:
1. The Project complies with Standards of the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation. The project provides for the rehabilitation of the existing structure and the preservation of unique architectural elements that are character-defining features of Late Modern architecture. Deteriorated historic building features would be repaired rather than replaced unless the features are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement feature will be required to match the original element in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. The new third floor addition would allow for the construction of the additional level without necessitating additions or extensions of the existing first and second floor that would cause the removal and destruction of existing architecturally significant building elements. The thoughtful design and placement of the addition keeps the design of the existing Lautner-designed building while facilitating the additional improvements at the project site.
10 2. The Project seeks to rehabilitate an existing two-story commercial building, while providing a new third story addition of approximately 1,400 SF. While the project - is set back further than the existing building line along primary street frontages along South Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville Boulevard - South Santa Monica Boulevard, where the existing structure maintains the - -
-
frontage. The proposed setbacks for the new addition orient the scale and massing of the building toward the center of the existing building and away from view of street.
Additionally, rehabilitation of the existing John Lautner-designed building preserves the existing character of the streetscape by retaining an architecturally significant building along South Santa Monica Boulevard. As such, the project will not have a substantial adverse impact on the scale, massing, or character of the streetscape.
3. The new third-story addition is proposed within the footprint of the second floor and would not extend beyond the footprint of the existing building. The new third - - Boulevard, a zero - South Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville Boulevard, the design of the addition orients the scale and massing of the building away from view of neighboring properties.
To the east, the addition includes the extension of an existing solid building wall that abuts the neighboring three-story building on the Peninsula property that would also screen the 11 proposed outdoor terrace on the third floor. To the south, the project site faces a two-story - use by hotel guests. The floor level of the proposed third-story addition would be built on - the south elevation of the third-story addition primarily consists of stairs, a stair well, and a closet. The stairwell and closet are designed with solid walls and are closest to the east side property line abutting the Peninsula Hotel property. The Project would not have a direct view of the hotel rooftop areas on the Peninsula Hotel, as the floor level of the hotel - - than the floor level of the proposed third-story addition at the project site. As such, the project would not have a substantial adverse impact on the scale and massing of the property as viewed by neighboring properties.
4. The Project site abuts the Peninsula Hotel to the east and south. The existing hotel was developed as a four-includes rooftop uses and pool areas. The project would increase the height of the existing - - proposed height of 38 - for development in commercial zones. In review of the provided shade and shadow study on the set of plans, shadows cast primarily during the winter month generally cast toward the street, while shadows cast from the proposed project would be largely contained on-site, with minimal shadows after 6:00 P.M. As such, the project would not have a substantial adverse impact to
12 5. As noted, the Project site abuts the Peninsula Hotel to the east and south.
Along the east elevation of the building abutting the hotel property, the existing building wall located at the property line would be extended, without openings to the neighboring property. This solid wall on the east elevation is designed to provide privacy to the neighboring property from working and open space areas on the third floor and outdoor terrace areas. No building programming would be visible from the east, and similarly, workers on the third-floor terrace would not be able to have a view into the hotel property.
To the south, the project site faces a two-
-
four stories that includes a rooftop pool and deck for use by hotel guests. The building programing along the south elevation of the third-story addition primarily consists of stairs, a stair well, and a closet. The project would not have a direct view of the hotel rooftop areas on the Peninsula Hotel, as the floor level of the hotel rooftop pool area begins at a - - proposed third-story addition at the project site. As such, the project would not have a
6. The Project includes a new site-wide landscape plans that would improve the quality of landscaping provided facing South Santa Monica Boulevard, Charleville Boulevard, and at the rear of the property in the redesigned surface parking lot. Typically, existing commercial development along Santa Monica Boulevard is built to the property retain existing landscape planters along these street frontages to provide a buffer from pedestrians and the property, while also enhancing the quality of landscaping on-site. As 13 such, the proposed project will not have a substantial adverse impact on the garden quality of the city.
7. The Project site is located within a commercial area and is required to be developed to all applicable development standards, including adherence to maximum height, FAR, and the SOI Standards for rehabilitation of historic structures. The proposed project seeks to rehabilitate an existing commercial building that was built in 1946 and designed by John Lautner, a notable architect in the Southern California region that is also the property as a local historic landmark, preserving a building possessing a unique style of architecture in the city. As such, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare.
Section 9. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the requested Development Plan Review and Historic Incentive Permit associated with the rehabilitation of an existing two-story commercial building with a new third story addition at the property located at 9884 South Santa Monica Boulevard, subject to the following conditions:
Project-Specific Conditions
1. The Planning Commission hereby approves the requested Historic Incentive Request, which included deviations from the applicable dimensions for rubbish storage facilities and standards for on-site loading spaces. The Applicant shall provide a rubbish storage room on the first floor of the building abutting the parking lot with interior dimensions sufficient to accommodate a two (2) cubic yard refuse bin. Additionally, the Applicant shall provide one (1) on-site loading space in the surface parking lot at the rear 14 of the property available during off-peak office to facilitate deliveries to the building. The loading area shall be
2. This approval is for those plans submitted to the Planning Commission on July 13, 2023, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval.
3. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development or her/his designee. A significant change to the approved Project shall be subject to Planning Commission review.
4. Approval of the Development Plan Review and Historic Incentive Permit shall not become effective unless and until the City Council designates the subject property as a Local Historic Landmark.
5. Project Plans are subject to compliance with all applicable zoning regulations, except as may be expressly modified herein. Project plans shall be subject to a complete Code Compliance review when building plans are submitted for plan check.
Compliance with all applicable Municipal Codes is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
6. Landscaping shall be maintained for the life of the Project in substantial compliance with the landscape plan included in the approved plans. Any modification to landscaping shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director or his/her designee for a consistency determination with the original approval.
7. Loading and Deliveries Narrative. To minimize congestion and traffic conflicts, deliveries 15 shall be coordinated so that they occur primarily during morning or evening hours, during non-peak office hours (before 8:00 A.M. and after 5:00 P.M.) however, deliveries shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. the following day. Any deliveries occurring during peak office hours (between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M.) shall be coordinated and approved by building management in order to better manage access to the proposed parking areas. Delivery vehicles shall be allowed to utilize the loading area for a maximum of 10 minutes, unless additional time for a specific delivery is needed and has been authorized and coordinated by building management. The Director of Community Development shall have the authority to provide additional operational conditions on the use of the loading area if impacts result from the proposed operation, and may refer any loading operation issued to the Planning Commission for review, if necessary.
Construction-Related Conditions
8. The Applicant shall submit a Construction Traffic Management Plan to the Community Development Department for review and such Construction Traffic affic Engineer prior to the earlier of
the issuance of a demolition or the issuance of a building permit. The Construction Management Plan shall include, at a minimum the following:
a. Written information about the construction parking arrangements and hauling activities at different stages of demolition and construction to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division of Public Works and the Building & Safety Department.
b. Information regarding the anticipated number of workers, the location of parking with respect to schedules of the demolition and construction 16 period, the arrangements of deliveries, hauling activities, the length of time of operation, designation of construction staging area and other pertaining information regarding construction related traffic.
c. The proposed demolition construction staging for this Project to determine the amount, appropriate routes and time of day of heavy hauling truck traffic necessary for demolition, deliveries, etc., to the subject site.
9. The Applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the Community Development Department for the placement of construction canopies, fences, etc., for the construction of any improvements in the public right-of-way, and for use of the public right-of-way for staging and/or hauling certain equipment and materials related to the Project.
10. The Applicant shall post the names and telephone numbers of two construction representatives for the Project and a City contact on all construction fence signs. The phone numbers shall be manned at all times during construction hours.
11. The Applicant shall remove and replace all public sidewalks adjacent to the Project site that are rendered defective as a result of Project construction, as determined by the City Engineer.
12. The Applicant shall remove and replace all curbs and gutters adjacent to the Project site that are rendered defective as a result of Project construction, as determined by the City Engineer.
13. The Applicant shall protect all existing street trees adjacent to the subject site during construction of the Project. Every effort shall be made to retain mature street trees. No street trees, including those street trees designated on the preliminary plans, shall 17 be removed and/or relocated unless written approval from the Public Works Department and the City Engineer (or his/her designee) is first obtained.
14. Removal and/or replacement of any street trees shall not commence unless and until the Applicant has provided the City with an improvement security to ensure the establishment of any relocated or replaced street trees. The security amount will be determined by the Director of Public Works (or his/her designee), and shall be in a form approved by the Director of Community Development.
15. The Applicant shall remove and reconstruct any existing improvements in the public right-of-way damaged during construction operations performed under any permits issued by the City.
16. Condensation from HVAC and refrigeration equipment shall drain to the sanitary sewer, not curb drains.
17. The Applicant shall provide that all groundwater discharges to a storm drain. All ground water discharges must have a permit (NPDES) from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Connection to a storm drain shall be accomplished in the manner approved by the City Engineer and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.
18. The Applicant shall provide for all utility facilities, including electrical transformers required for service to the proposed structure(s), to be installed on the subject site. No such installations will be allowed in any City right-of-way.
19. The Applicant shall underground, if necessary, the utilities in adjacent streets per requirements of the Utility Company and the City.
20. Any streets surrounding the Project site that are damaged as a result of Project construction shall be repaved and restored to the street centerline. 18 21. All survey monuments, streetlights, and underground utilities, and any existing offsite improvements affected by the construction shall be re-established according to the City standards, and shall be paid for by the applicant. No privately-owned structures or improvements are permitted within the public right-of-way without an encroachment permit.
Standard Conditions
22. APPEAL. Decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council within fourteen (14) days of the Planning Commission action by filing a An appeal fee is required.
23. RECORDATION. This resolution approving this Development Plan Review and Density Bonus Permit shall not become effective until the owner of the Project site records a covenant, satisfactory in form and content to the City Attorney, accepting the conditions of approval set forth in this resolution. The covenant shall include a copy of this resolution as an exhibit. The Applicant shall deliver the executed covenant to the Department of Community Development within 180 days of the Planning Commission decision. At the time that the Applicant delivers the covenant to the City, the Applicant shall also provide the City with all fees necessary to record the document with the County Recorder. If the Applicant fails to deliver the executed covenant within the required 180 days, this resolution approving an amendment to the Planned Development shall be null and void and of no further effect. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Director of Community Development may, upon a written request by the Applicant, submitted prior to the expiration of the 180-day period, grant a written waiver from the 180-day time limit for a period of no more than 180 days if, at the time of the request, the Director determines 19 that there have been no substantial changes to any federal, state or local law that would affect the Project. Regardless of the timelines set forth in this condition, in no event shall a building permit be issued prior to the recordation of the covenant.
24. EXPIRATION. Development Plan Review and Historic Incentive Permit:
The exercise of rights granted in such approvals shall be commenced within three (3) years after the date of approval of this resolution, as provided for in BHMC §10-3-207.A., unless otherwise extended.
25. VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS: A violation of any of these conditions of approval may result in enforcement action by the City until such violation is abated or the entitlement granted herein is revoked pursuant to Section 10-3-258 of the BHMC, or its successor regulation. All costs incurred by the City as a result of abatement of a violation on the property shall be reimbursed by the party in breach of this resolution.
26. APPROVAL RUNS WITH LAND. These conditions shall run with the land and shall remain in full force for the duration of the life of the Project. ///
///
///
///
///
20 Section 10. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall certify to the passage, approval, and adoption of this resolution, and shall cause this resolution and his/her Certification to be entered in the Book of Resolutions of the Planning Commission of the City.
Adopted: July 13, 2023
Theresa M. Kaplan
Vice Chair of the Planning Commission of the
City of Beverly Hills
Attest:
Masa Alkire, AICP
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Approved As To Form:
David M. Snow
Assistant City Attorney
Approved As To Content:
Masa Alkire, AICP
City Planner
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS )
I, KAREN MYRON, Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Beverly Hills, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 2029 duly passed, approved and adopted by the Planning Commission of said City at a meeting of said Commission on July 13, 2023, and thereafter duly signed by the Secretary of the Planning Commission, as indicated; and that the Planning Commission of the City consists of five (5) members and said Resolution was passed by the following vote of said Commission, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Wolfe, Demeter, Ostroff, Vice Chair Kaplan NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Chair Ross
________________________________
KAREN MYRON
Recording Secretary of the
Planning Commission
City of Beverly Hills, California
Certificate Of Completion
Envelope Id: 196601353790429EB702916DDC629D3A Status: Completed Subject: Please DocuSign: PC Reso 2029 - 9884 SSMB.pdf
Source Envelope:
Document Pages: 21 Signatures: 5 Envelope Originator:
Certificate Pages: 2 Initials: 0 Karen Myron
AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
455 N. Rexford Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
[email protected]
IP Address: 198.245.189.166
Record Tracking
Status: Original
7/20/2023 2:23:54 PM
Holder: Karen Myron
[email protected]
Location: DocuSign
Signer Events Signature Timestamp
Theresa M. Kaplan
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Drawn on Device
Using IP Address: 75.85.175.170
Signed using mobile
Sent: 7/20/2023 2:28:51 PM
Viewed: 7/20/2023 6:16:20 PM
Signed: 7/20/2023 6:18:09 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
David M. Snow
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Drawn on Device
Using IP Address: 107.77.229.93
Sent: 7/20/2023 6:18:10 PM
Viewed: 7/21/2023 8:49:18 AM
Signed: 7/21/2023 8:54:27 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Masa Alkire
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 198.245.189.166
Sent: 7/21/2023 8:54:28 AM
Viewed: 7/21/2023 8:55:52 AM
Signed: 7/21/2023 9:02:52 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
Karen Myron
[email protected]
COMM DEV COMMISSION SPECIALIST,
CD-PLANNING
City of Beverly Hills
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 198.245.189.181
Sent: 7/21/2023 9:02:54 AM
Viewed: 7/21/2023 10:47:57 AM
Signed: 7/21/2023 10:50:52 AM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:
Not Offered via DocuSign
In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp
Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp
Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp
Witness Events Signature Timestamp
Notary Events Signature Timestamp
Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps
Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 7/20/2023 2:28:51 PM
Certified Delivered Security Checked 7/21/2023 10:47:57 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 7/21/2023 10:50:52 AM Completed Security Checked 7/21/2023 10:50:52 AM
Payment Events Status Timestamps
ATTACHMENT 9
Updated Historic Evaluation Report
dated November 22, 2023
OF DECEMBER 5, 2023 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
9884 Santa Monica Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California
Historic Resource Evaluation
November 22, 2023
Submitted by:
Kaplan Chen Kaplan
2526 Eighteenth Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
David Kaplan, Principal
Pam O’Connor, Architectural Historian
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
Summary of Research and Field Methodology 1
Regulatory Framework 2
Property Location and Setting 5
Commercial Architecture in Beverly Hills and Development History 9 Architectural Style, Building Description and History 14 John Lautner, Architect 27
Evaluation of Eligibility 34
Conclusions 39
References 40
Attachments
Attachment A: Photographs
Attachment B: Maps
Attachment C: Permits
Attachment D: Historic Aerials and Sanborn Insurance Maps Attachment E: DPR Record
Attachment F: Letter from Judith Lautner, The John Lautner Foundation Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 1 November 22, 2023
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Kaplan Chen Kaplan conducted an Historic Resource Assessment of the property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard in the City of Beverly Hills.
The building, known as the Darrow Office Building, is an excellent example of the design philosophy and design skills of Master Architect, John Lautner. Lautner’s expressionistic architectural designs are unique. SurveyLA observes that “most architects who are associated with the Mid-Century Modern style exercised some creative license, but generally worked within the broad aesthetic parameters that defined the style. Others, however, cast a more personal stamp on the Modern movement, designing buildings that are on the fringes of mainstream Modernism. One such architect is John Lautner.”1 As Lautner was active during the mid-century time period of the 20th Century, the category to fit his work into is “Mid-Century Modern.”
Lautner is recognized as a master architect with many published books by architectural historians and academics as well as articles published in national and international architectural journals and magazines that feature and evaluate Lautner’s body of work.
Lautner has been called a “lyrical technologist” whose designs are “unique entities unlike those of any other architect.”2 In 2016, sixty-four residential properties designed by Lautner were formally designated for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.
The Darrow Office Building is an excellent example of Lautner’s unique architectural design. It is an excellent example of Expressionist architecture as a more organic and expressive iteration of Mid-Century Modernism. It is also an early example of a building incorporating sustainable features. It is also a rare extant example of a commercial office building designed by Lautner early in his career.
The findings of this KCK report are the result of thorough research, field observations and building evaluations using current technical guidance from national, state, and local historic preservation agencies. Based on the data presented in the report below, the property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard meets the criteria to be eligible as a City of Beverly Hills Landmark, It also appears eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources.
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH AND FIELD METHODOLOGY
A comprehensive methodology for researching the development history of the properties at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard and evaluation of the research to determine potential historic eligibility included conducting the following activities:
1 https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/4f67bd39-631a-4f26-9a52-cd5809a66655/LA_Modernism_1919- 1980.pdf, p. 148. 2 https://www.thelautner.com/john-lautner, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-10-27-mn-55244- story.html
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 2 November 22, 2023
• Field review of subject property in December 2021
• Field review of adjacent properties and area
• Photography of subject property and adjacent properties • Review of Beverly Hills Historic Resources Surveys, and related materials • Building Permit Research
• Los Angeles County Assessor data research
• Tract Map research
• Research online databases and sources
• Research Los Angeles and Beverly Hills Public Library online resources • Review of City Directories
• Review of aerial and topographic maps
• Review of Sanborn Insurance Maps
• Research online photographic databases
• Review of John Lautner histories and organizations
• Review of National Register of Historic Places registration documents • Research historic newspaper databases
• Review of publications including professional architectural publications and academic journals
• Analysis of all data and materials
• Evaluation of property in accordance with federal, state, and local eligibility criteria
All the field data and research data were analyzed and evaluated by an architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Historic Preservation and by an architect who meets the Professional Qualification Standards for Historic Architect.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The importance of historic resources has been recognized by federal, state, and local governments through programs and legislation that identify and recognize buildings, structures, object, landscapes, and districts that possess historic significance.
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) considers historical resources part of the environment. A project that may cause a substantial adverse effect on the significance of an historical resource may have a significant effect on the environment. A property that is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, is listed in a local register of historical resources, or has been identified as historically significant in an historic resources survey that meets specific criteria is considered a historical resource under CEQA.
To determine if a property is a potential historical resource, it must be evaluated for its eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources and/or as a local historical resource.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 3 November 22, 2023
National Register of Historic Places
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 established the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) as an authoritative guide “used by Federal, State, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the Nation’s cultural resources and indicate what properties should be afforded protection from destruction or impairment.”3
Buildings, districts, sites and structures may be eligible for listing in the National Register if they possess significance at the national, state or local level in American history, culture, architecture or archeology, and in general, are over 50 years old. Significance is evaluated using established criteria:
A. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
D. Yield, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Significance of Association. National Register Bulletin 32, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Properties Associated with Significant Persons, provides guidance on evaluating potential historic association with people who have “made contributions or played a role that can be justified as significant.” For association with leaders or prominent families it is necessary “to explain their significant accomplishments” and they “must be compared to those of others who were active, successful, prosperous, or influential in the same field.” Most properties nominated for associations with significant persons also are nominated for other reasons and a majority of properties nominated under the association criterion are also significant in the area of architecture or for the area in which the individual(s) achieved recognition.
National Register Bulletin 32 adds that “the fact that we value certain professions, or the contributions of certain groups historically does not mean that every property associated with or used by a member of that group is significant. “Associations with “one or more individuals in a particular profession, economic or social class, or ethnic group will not automatically qualify a property.” The contribution must be distinctive: “it is not enough to show that an individual has acquired wealth, run a successful business, or held public office, unless any of these accomplishments, or their number or combination, is a significant achievement in the community in comparison with the activities and accomplishments of others.”
Integrity. Properties may be eligible for inclusion on the National Register as individual resources and/or as contributors to an historic district. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply National Register Criteria for Evaluation states that in addition to meeting at least one of the four criteria, a resource should be evaluated to assess its integrity. For individual resources to qualify for inclusion they must represent an important aspect of an area’s history and possess integrity. An historic district must retain integrity as a 336 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 4 November 22, 2023
whole, “the majority of the components that make up the district’s historic character must possess integrity even if they are individually undistinguished.” The seven aspects of integrity are location, design, feeling, association, setting, workmanship and materials. To “retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects.” For a resource to be evaluated as significant for its design, a “property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or technique.”
Historic Context. A resource must also be significant within an historic context. National Register Bulletin 15 states that an historic context explains “those patterns, themes, or trends in history by which a specific…property or site is understood and its meaning…is made clear.” To be determined eligible for listing on the National Register a property must possess significance within a historic context and possess integrity.
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register, based on the National Register, is the “authoritative guide to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and indicate which properties are to be protected.” A building, site, structure, object, or historic district may be eligible for inclusion on the California Register if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States
2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values
4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6, California Register and National Register: A Comparison states that in addition to meeting one of the criteria of significance, a resource must “retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance” and “integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.” Historical resources that “have been rehabilitated or restored may be evaluated for listing.” Series 6 guidance also states, “Alterations over time to a resource or historic changes in its use may themselves have historical, cultural, or architectural significance.” Historical resources that do not retain sufficient integrity to qualify for the National Register may still be eligible for listing in the California Register: “a resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the California Register if it Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 5 November 22, 2023
maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data.”4
City of Beverly Hills Landmark Designation Criteria
An eligible property may be nominated and designated as a City of Beverly Hills landmark if it satisfies the following requirements.
A. A landmark must satisfy all of the following requirements:
1. It is at least forty five (45) years of age, or is a property of extraordinary significance;
2. It possesses high artistic or aesthetic value, and embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style or architectural type or architectural period;
3. It retains substantial integrity from its period of significance; and
4. It has continued historic value to the community such that its designation as a landmark is reasonable and necessary to promote and further the purposes of this article.
B. In addition to the requirements set forth in subsection A of this section, a landmark must satisfy at least one of the following requirements:
1. It is listed on the national register of historic places;
2. It is an exceptional work by a master architect;
3. It is an exceptional work that was owned and occupied by a person of great importance and was directly connected to a momentous event in the person's endeavors or the history of the nation. For purposes of this subsection B3, personal events such as birth, death, marriage, social interaction, and the like shall not be deemed to be momentous;
4. It is an exceptional property that was owned and occupied by a person of great local prominence;
5. It is an iconic property; or
6. The landmark designation procedure is initiated, or expressly agreed to, by the owner(s)
of the property
PROPERTY LOCATION AND SETTING
The subject property, 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, is located near the western border of the City of Beverly Hills at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard. The building, sited on the southeast corner of Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville Boulevard, also has the address of 9885 Charleville Boulevard. The following report will use the 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard address to reference the building and site.
The street was originally named Burton Way and has also been known as Santa Monica Boulevard South or colloquially as “Little Santa Monica.” The subject parcel is along a 4 California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6: California Register and National Register: A Comparison, p. 3.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 6 November 22, 2023
segment of the commercial corridor that is just west of the “Golden Triangle” commercial district of Beverly Hills. This segment of Santa Monica Boulevard runs from the western City border and the crossing of Wilshire Boulevard.
Location Map (Google Earth, c2021)
Area Map (Google Earth, c2021)
There are two parallel (at this point) streets named Santa Monica Boulevard. The one to the north is the wider thoroughfare that functions more as a highway. The subject property is on the Santa Monica Boulevard to the south, a narrower street that is lined with commercial buildings as it runs through the City of Beverly Hills. The buildings on the north side of Santa Monia Boulevard (the south street) have a narrow surface parking lot that runs from the City’s west border to Wilshire Boulevard. That parking area provides a buffer from the wider and busier Santa Monica Boulevard to the north.
Wilshire Boulevard angles from the north and crosses both Santa Monica Boulevards about a block from the subject property. The area to the north of the northern Santa Monica Boulevard, a triangular section between the City limit and Wilshire Boulevard, Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 7 November 22, 2023
contains two large hotel properties, the Beverly Hilton, and the Waldorf Astoria Beverly Hills.
The subject parcel is at the west end of the southern Santa Monica Boulevard. There are small commercial buildings on the north of the street between the western City limit and the Wilshire Boulevard crossing. The south side of the 9900 block consists of small commercial buildings on the west end and vacant parcels on the east end.
City of Beverly Hills Zoning Map
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 8 November 22, 2023
City of Beverly Hills Zoning Map excerpt
Portion of 9900 block of Santa Monica Boulevard and 9800 block of Santa Monica Boulevard South showing parking area to north and the northern Santa Monica Boulevard to its north. (Google Earth, c2021) 9800 block of S. Santa Monica Boulevard, bounded by Charleville Boulevard on the west, Durant Drive on the south, and S. Lasky Drive on the east.
The subject parcel is located on the south side of Santa Monica Boulevard on the southeast corner of the intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard and Charleville Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 9 November 22, 2023
Boulevard.
5 The block that contains the subject parcel, 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, is bounded by Charleville Boulevard on the west, Durant Drive on the south, and S. Laskey Drive on the east. The subject parcel is 50-feet wide by 114-feet deep. The 15 other parcels on the block were consolidated and contain the Peninsula Hotel which was initially developed in 1991.
The Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number for the property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is 4328-003-001. The City of Beverly Hills zoning designation for the parcel is C3, Commercial Zone.
BRIEF HISTORY OF COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE IN BEVERLY HILLS AND DEVELOPMENT HISTORY OF 9884 SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD AND ENVIRONS The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is in Tract 7710 which was subdivided and recorded in 1924 for its owners, the Amalgamated Oil Company. Tract 7710 includes a triangular section of what is the west end of the City of Beverly Hills; this section is bounded by Santa Monica Boulevard (then known as Burton Way) on the north, Moreno Drive on the south, and Lasky Drive on the east. The streets are oriented on an angle running from southwest to northeast. Most of the parcels have a 50-foot street frontage and vary in depth from 110-feet to 140-feet.
The larger area of Tract is rectangular shaped, bounded ty Lasky Drive on the west, Olympic Boulevard (originally named Country Club Drive) on the south and Beverly Boulevard on the east. The northern boundary is generally Wilshire Boulevard or mid-block between Wilshire Boulevard and Charleville Boulevard. Intervening streets include Spalding Drive, Linden Drive, McCarty Drive, Roxbury Drive, Bedford Drive, Peck Drive, Camden Drive, Rodeo Drive and El Camino Drive (originally Speedway Drive). The parcels in this section of Tract 7710 are oriented east-west and were generally uniform in size, from 50-feet to 67.5-feet wide and 122.5-feet to 127.5-feet in depth, to accommodate residential development.
The parcels on the north side of the 9800 and 9900 blocks of Santa Monica Boulevard had long widths of 150-feet facing Santa Monica Boulevard but were extremely shallow at 40-feet deep. The original size of the parcels on the south side of the 9800 and 9900 blocks were 50-feet wide facing Santa Monica Boulevard and 120-feet deep.
5 Charleville Boulevard starts at Santa Monica Boulevard and runs south to the end of the subject block where it crosses Durant Drive and then turns east continuing through the city.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 10 November 22, 2023
Tract 7710, recorded 19246
West portion of Tract 7710
6 Larger image of Tract Map in Attachments
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 11 November 22, 2023
To the east of Lasky Drive, Santa Monica Boulevard continues its southwest to northeast trajectory and forms the northern boundary of the commercial center of Beverly Hills, dubbed the “Golden Triangle.” The 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey describes this commercial triangle with boundaries of Santa Monica Boulevard on the north, Rexford Drive on the east and Wilshire Boulevard on the south.
In describing the historic commercial development in Beverly Hills, the 1985-86 report stated that “with the exception of spurs south of Wilshire on Beverly Drive and the eastern portion of Wilshire Boulevard to the city limits [on the east], the majority of commerce took place within the twenty square block area known as the ‘triangle.’” The short section of Santa Monica Boulevard, west of Lasky Drive to the western city boundary, is a commercial corridor that leads into the “Triangle.” The subject parcel is located along that stretch of Santa Monica Boulevard with the 9800 block is bounded by Lasky Drive on the east almost adjacent to where Wilshire Boulevard crosses Santa Monica Boulevard.
Most of the area of Tract 7710 was subdivided to accommodate residential development with commercial development focused on the Triangle to its north. 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey observed that while commercial development began slowly after World War I in the 14-year period between 1920 and 1934 “a marathon construction campaign” resulted “in a fifteen-year buildout of the triangle” with 291 commercial buildings constructed.7
The principal center of commerce initially was Beverly Drive. Over the decades the buildings in this area have undergone “regeneration” which was “constant” with buildings “razed or remodeled every ten years or so to keep abreast of current design trends.” The Survey Report observed that “while many structures have played an important role in the history of commerce for the city, few display their original architectural characteristics.”8
In the mid-1920s “substantial buildings” were developed along Brighton Way near Camden. Many of these buildings were designed in the Spanish Colonial Revival style and had professional office spaces on their upper floor such as the Churrigueresque style Beverly Hills Professional Building (9601 Brighton Way, 1926). This building “became the address of choice for those in the medical profession.”9
In 1924 the Artists and Writers Building was constructed at 9501 Santa Monica Boulevard (a half mile to the east of the subject building). That building “occupies a special place in community history. Like the Beverly Professional Building, the Artists and Writers Building provided space for people of like professions to have offices…[and] thee building has been in continuous use by creative professionals ever since[1986].10 The 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey stated “the development of the commercial triangle by a handful of developers and talented architects gave the district a concentration of quality structures designed in the Spanish Colonial Revival, Art Deco, and Moderne styles which were in keeping with the image the City was trying to create 7 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey, pp. 63-64 8 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey, p. 64 9 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey, p. 66 10 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey, p. 67 Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 12 November 22, 2023
of a sophisticated, urbane suburb. The scale of these buildings remained small.
Continuous remodeling has eradicated any visual continuity, but fine examples” remain.11
The 2004 City of Beverly Hills Commercial Area 5 – Historic Resources Survey Update included context regarding commercial development in the City in the post-World War II period, 1945-1975. The Update observed that “a large number of medium to large-scale office buildings were erected along the commercial corridors of Beverly Hills…these buildings were predominantly architect designed by practitioners offering a wide range of modernistic interpretations. They represent an impressive collection of designs from the period.”12
City of Beverly Hills building permits show that the subject parcel contained a service station constructed in 1928; it was demolished in 1945 to make way for the subject building.
The 1950 Sanborn Map, the earliest for this area of the City, shows the north side of the 9800 and 9900 blocks of Santa Monica Boulevard with about half of the small parcels developed with stores. On the south side, about half of the parcels on the 9900 block were developed with larger commercial buildings. In 1950 the subject building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard was the only parcel developed on that block.
By 1969 the Sanborn Map shows that most of the south side of the 9900 block of Santa Monica Boulevard had been developed and many of the buildings took up most of their lot. The north side of the 9800 and 9900 blocks of Santa Monica Boulevard each had one additional building constructed since 1950. The 1969 Sanborn Map shows that one other building had been constructed on the block containing the subject property between 1950 and 1969. Located facing Durant Drive, the Beverly Hills Office Building has since been demolished.
1950 Sanborn Map excerpt
11 1985-86 Beverly Hills Historic Resources Survey, p. 71 12 2004 City of Beverly Hills Commercial Area 5 – Historic Resources Survey Update, p. 4 Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 13 November 22, 2023
1969 Sanborn Map excerpt
Satellite view, c2021 (Google Earth)
On the north side of the 9800 and 9900 blocks of Santa Monica Boulevard of the extant buildings one was built in 1939, eight in the 1940s, four in the 1960s, two in the 1970s and one in the 1990s. On the south side of the 9900 block of Santa Monica Boulevard of the extant buildings, six were built in the 1950s, one in the 1960s and one in the 1980s.
On the 9800 block of Santa Monica Boulevard, the subject building was built in 1947 and the Peninsula Hotel was constructed in 1991.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 14 November 22, 2023
ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, BUILDING DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY OF 9884
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is an office building constructed in 1946 for owner John Darrow. The 1946 building permit lists the architect of the building as Douglas Honnold. The contractor is Structon General Contractors. The building is two-stories, 24-feet tall with a floor area of 6,546 square-feet. The building is generally rectangular in plan; its rear (south) elevation features a broad angle at the southwest corner of the building. There is a light well on the east side of the building facing the shared party wall of the building to the east.
Current plan view (Google Earth) 1950 Sanborn Map excerpt While the City of Beverly Hills building permit lists licensed architect Douglas Honnold as the architect of the building, the design of the building is attributed to John Lautner, the firm’s design associate. The attribution of the design to Lautner is documented in numerous published sources. Later in this report is a full discussion regarding John Lautner and his role as a master architect and as designer of the subject building.
The building’s architectural style is of the Expressionist style. With the end of World War II, the period of Early Modernism ended and later Modernistic styles, such as Expressionist, evolved, often lumped together under the nomenclature of “Mid-Century Modern”. The National Register of Historic Places Registration form for The Residential Architecture of John Lautner states that “Expressionist architecture is loosely based on the German Expressionist movement of the early twentieth century. Expressionism is a rejection of the modern ideals embodied in Miesian buildings. The architecture is meant to evoke an emotional, rather than intellectual, response. Expressionism repudiated modern rationalism and emphasized abstraction of form to symbolically express subjective interpretation of inner experience.” It adds that forms were used to produce “an architecture of motion and emotion, ambiance, radicalism, and sweeping change.” Innovative building materials such as concrete, plastics, and laminates are often incorporated in the design to achieve the artistic forms.”13 13 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner, p. E-25.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 15 November 22, 2023
Sketch of 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, Douglas Honnold, architect From Getty Research Institute Archives.
Character-defining features of Expressionist architecture include:
• Distortion of form to evoke emotion
• Non-traditional structural elements
• Organic, asymmetrical design
• Use of experimental materials
• Unconventional roof designs
• Roofs as continuation of walls
• Irregularly-shaped windows
• Use of topography as design element
9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, north and west elevations (c. 1950s, undated, from Getty Institute files)
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 16 November 22, 2023
9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, north and west elevations, 2021.
The building is designed to reflect the conditions of the corner site. The west and north elevations, which face streets, are of asymmetrical design. The shorter elevation, the north elevation, faces the more travelled east-west street of Santa Monica Boulevard.
The longer elevation is the west elevation, along Charleville Boulevard. While Charleville Boulevard is a not a major thoroughfare, the corner location of the building and relative width of the street, gives prominence to views of the west elevation.
9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, north and west elevations
from Getty Institute files, undated.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 17 November 22, 2023
9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, north and west elevations, 2021.
Review of City of Beverly Hills building permits for 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard show that the there are no permits for additions to the building. The only permits for exterior alterations to the building was the addition of an exterior staircase on the rear elevation in 1976 and re-roofing in 1996.
All the other permits were for changes to the interior, electrical and plumbing, HVAC and installation of signs. Over the decades numerous interior alterations/tenant improvements (permitted and likely some unpermitted) occurred. In 1976 a permit was taken to remodel the second-floor offices. In 1980 a permit for a “new stairway to the second-floor reverse front door” was applied for. Permits were taken out in 1978, 1985 and 1989 for non-structural interior changes and unspecified tenant improvements.
Permits were taken out for signage in 1989, 2001 and 2009. No interior space configurations or original interior finishes or materials remain and in 2021 those non-original structural elements and non-original interior walls and spaces were removed.
Front, north elevation North elevation, looking west,
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 18 November 22, 2023
North elevation with fins on upper-level Main building entry along north elevation The north elevation is the “front” elevation of the building as it faces Santa Monica Boulevard. This ground level of this elevation is divided into two modules. The eastern half abuts a projecting wing wall that functions as a party wall. The building design anticipated the parcel to the east would be developed with a building without any side setback. The projecting wing wall functions to delimit the building and not allow any adjacent building to interfere with the design of the subject building. A cantilevered, shed roof canopy with boxed eaves runs across the front elevation and is attached to the east wing wall. This overhang provides shading to the first-floor windows.
The east half of the ground level of the north elevation, recessed below the cantilevered canopy, consists of a large plate glass window, and two door assemblies – one with a single door and another with double doors. The doors have large expanses of glass. The west half of the ground level elevation consists of a brick exterior wall with a horizontal band or windows tucked under the canopy.
At the upper level there are a series of nine tall vertical windows. These windows are separated by angled fins that project out to the edge of the canopy. In addition to creating a dynamic rhythm across this elevation, the fins provide shading from the late summer sun on the northerly façade while allowing for natural lighting in other seasons.
Based on the original rendering and observation in the field it appears that four or five of the vertical fins originally extended all the way downward to the sidewalk in the area of the glazed storefronts.
East wing wall Entry doors on north elevation toward east. The vertical fins above the storefronts may have originally extended to the ground.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 19 November 22, 2023
Northwest corner of building West elevation from northwest corner of building The upper windows of the front, north, elevation stop short of the corner where they abut the geometric volume of the rectangular west elevation. The cantilevered canopy returns at the corner and runs along the entire west elevation. The band of horizontal windows under the canopy also returns and runs along the north half of the west elevation, terminating before the entry on the west elevation. The canopy provides shading from the sun. The portion of exterior wall at the ground level along the west elevation is of brick like that of the front elevation.
West elevation Geometric volume of west elevation
The west elevation is defined by a bold geometric volume expressed at the upper level.
The upper level had a major sustainability feature, a bank of louvers which also cover the south (rear) elevation. The metal louvers are angled from the edge of the canopy to the stucco clad exterior of the rectangular geometric volume, to about two-thirds of the height of the elevation. The louvers provide protection from the strong west sun exposure. There are wood frame sliding doors along the interior side of the louvers that allow for natural ventilation and daylight while protecting from direct sun. The louvers are angled to allow for views to the outside.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 20 November 22, 2023
Louvers on west elevation Entry on west elevation
Looking toward entry stairs, west elevation Lovers above canopy at west elevation The ground level of the west elevation has an entry way near the south end of that elevation. This side of the building has the Charleville Boulevard address listed, 9885 Charleville Boulevard. This entry is reached by a series of brick clad steps. The building exterior at this point consists of a window wall with a stepped design leading up to the entry door which is recessed under the cantilevered canopy. To the sidewalk side of the steps is a brick wall that continues southward to encase a portion of the rear surface parking area.
The staircase leads to an entrance on the first floor and then turns inward to reach the second floor. The stairwell to the second floor is located between the louvers and the building, creating an “in-between” or transitional space – connecting the outdoors and the indoors.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 21 November 22, 2023
Stair entry on west elevation, Stair entry on west elevation, current view Undated photo, Getty Institute
Window wall at west entry stairs Transitional space of the stairwell The south elevation of the building has an angled pop out along the west two-thirds of the elevation. The exterior wall at the lower level is recessed under the louvers. The ground level of this rear elevation also contains a band of horizontal windows along the west portion of the elevation. There is an entry door and an exterior staircase up to the second level. At the east end of the building is a secure caged area that provides access to building utilities. The rear of the parcel is paved to accommodate vehicle parking.
There are a few triangular shaped tree wells located in the parking lot which contain trees, the only landscaping features on the property.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 22 November 22, 2023
South elevation South elevation, canopy with lovers
Lower level on south elevation Exterior staircase, south elevation East side of south elevation and party wall Rear surface parking area
As evidenced by the building permits, over the decades tenant improvements and remodeling resulted in the loss of all interior configurations, materials, and finishes.
These non-structural alterations have been removed. There are a few sections of flooring laid in an angled pattern that may be original.
The exterior of the building, the brick wall, has been and remains exposed in areas. The wood-frame glass sliding doors adjacent to the louvers are original and remain. They are slightly canted. On the east side of the building interior is another original feature, an Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 23 November 22, 2023
internal light court. This opening is adjacent to the party wall on the east. This light court provides cross-ventilation for the building and daylight including light that is reflected off the party wall.
View of louvers and stairway from View of louvers and sliding doors Inside along interior corridor
Detail of louvers from inside building View of louvers and wood frame sliding doors Historic image of building interior, Current image of interior with louvers Getty Institute, undated
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 24 November 22, 2023
Internal light court View out of north windows
Interior room, medical, Interior corridor, demolished
(exterior wall/windows extant)
Interior corridor, demolished Interior space, demolished Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 25 November 22, 2023
First floor after non-structural demolition First floor after non-structural demolition Second floor after non-structural demolition Second floor after non-structural demolition Interior looking at light well after non-structural Remaining flooring demolition
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 26 November 22, 2023
City Directories provided information about businesses that occupied the building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, also known as 9885 Charleville Boulevard. 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard
1946-1975 Darrow Agency/Darrow Development Inc.
1950-1954 Irving Berman, Physician
1950 Ralph Bookman, Physician
1950 Benjamin Feingold, Physician
1950 Alfred Goldman, Physician
1950-1954 Melville Jacobs, Physician
1950 George Piness, Physician
1954 Arnold Kadish, MD
1956 John Omar Fareed, MD
1962 Arc Construction Corp, General Contractors
1962 Catermat Corp of America
1962 Federman Stonehill & Co Investments
1962-1967 Chet Heintz Agency, Insurance
1962-1967 Ross Dick & Co, Investments
1962 N.F. Wallach
1962 Party Park
1965 B-K-S Oil Company
1965 Gladys Barnard, Realtor
1965 Gerson Cohen
1965 Nesbit-Barnard Realtors
1970 Beverly Hills Driving School
1970 California Testing Service
1970 Chorpash Lowell Insurance
1970-1975 Charles Morgan Realtor
1970 Harold Rahkis, MD
1970 Will Rosenfeld
1970 John Schumacher
1970 Two Group Mail Order
1971 Beverly Hills Offices
1971 Farmers Insurance Group
1975 Albert Ladies Tailoring
1975 Bedford Productions Inc.
1975 Jack Chazan
1975 Frank Gabriel and Associates
1975 Bob Haskell Enterprises
1975 Gregory Morton
1975 Pacific West Properties
1975 Palomino Production
1976 Marshall Donin
1981 Boardwalk Records
1985-1991 Golden Harvest Films Inc
1991 Day & Night Copy & Printing Center
1991 Flaherty Winters & Partners
1991 The Gabriel Group
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 27 November 22, 2023
9885 Charleville Boulevard
1950 Darrow Agency
1950-1951 Albert Kandelin, Physician
1950 Herbert Kupper, Physician
1950-1951 Trans Pacific Film Corporation
1951-1954 Louis B. Mayer
1951-1954 Oscar Elkins, MD
1954 Joaquin Alvarez
1954 Bobby Shell, Attorney
1954 Gamer Brothers Livestock
1958 Albert Burford, Attorney
1958 W.B. Copes, Attorney
1958-1962 Dempsey Thayer Deibert & Kumler, Attorneys
1958 John Dinkins, Business Consultant
1958 William Kumler, Attorney
1958-1976 Lewislor Enterprises Television Films
1958 Rayner Wellman, Attorney
1958-1970 Robert Shewalter, CPA
1958 William Sreene, Attorney
1958-1970 Toreto Enterprises
1962-1965 Hrant Agbabian, Architect
1965 Paul Cornell
1965 Economics International, Inc.
1965 William Kamler, Attorney
1965 Val Powelson, Designer
1970-1975 LYL Productions
1970 Roe Financial Corp.
1970 Jesse Stool
1975 C.E. Christie Jr, Engineer
1975 Energy Development of California, Inc
1975 Peol-Huber & Associates
1980 American Red Cross
1980 Cavallo Ruffalo Management
1980 American Recording Co.
JOHN LAUTNER, ARCHITECT
John Lautner (1911-1994) is considered a master architect, “one of Southern California’s most significant twentieth century architects” according to the National Register of Historic Places.14 Architectural historian Thomas Hines described Lautner’s designs as “freeform, modernist, expressionism.”15
Architectural historian Alan Hess states that Lautner became “a quintessential Los Angeles architect, defining and expressing an entire spectrum of approaches to the 14 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1990.” https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/65df4e3f-569a-4010- a2e7-93e1bdd0bdda/ResidentialArchitectureofJohnLautnerinSoCalifornia_1940-1994.pdf 15 Hines, p. 609 Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 28 November 22, 2023
Southern California land, the culture, the cars, the city grid” adding that “it is not possible to have a complete picture of Los Angeles’ remarkable development of modern architecture without taking into account the series of houses that John Lautner designed.”16
John Edward Lautner, Jr., FAIA (1911-1994)
Lautner spent his 55-year career working in Southern California. Over his career he designed 188 structures of which 113 were built.17 Sixty-four of the residential buildings he designed are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The “John Lautner:
An Annotated and Illustrated Bio-Bibliography” in addition to providing a timeline of Lautner’s career, lists 1,289 citations regarding Lautner and his work. Lautner and his works have been published in professional architectural publications and popular magazines including Progressive Architecture, Architectural Record, Arts & Architecture, Architecture + Urbanism, Architectural Digest, Modernism, LA Architect, Dwell, Wallpaper, and Interior Design, as well as in international publications. A documentary movie about Lautner and his career, The Spirit in Architecture: John Lautner, tells the story of his career and philosophy of architecture. His buildings have been used as locations in motion pictures such as James Bond movies, Lethal Weapon and Body Double. Several exhibitions focused on Lautner and his work have been shown at museums worldwide. And books studying Lautner and his body of work have been issued by prestigious architectural publishers including Taschen and Rizzoli International.
John Lautner was born in Marquette, Michigan in the state’s Upper Peninsula in 1911 to John and Vida Lautner. His mother was an artist, a painter, and his father was a professor at Northern State Teachers College in Marquette. Lautner’s school years were spent in Marquette and traveling with his parents – for a year in Boston and a year in New York City when he was an adolescent. Lautner attended college at Northern State Teachers College graduating in 1933 at the age of 22 with an A.B. Degree in English.
He initially contemplated taking a year to travel after his graduation but his mother encouraged him to apply to Frank Lloyd Wright’s newly founded Taliesin Fellowship at Wright’s estate in southern Wisconsin. The unorthodox architecture school offered the “experience of hearing and observing Wright in a Dewey-esque [architecture] course of ‘learning by doing.’” The fellows learned about architecture by observing Wright and having him direct them in “adding to and rebuilding Taliesin with their own hands.”18 It 16 Hines, p. 614 17 Hines, p. 614. 18 Hess, p. 13
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 29 November 22, 2023
was an “integrated education” that included students working on the farm, cooking meals, and serving it in the communal dining room. Lautner believed that “such experiences enriched his professional skills.” 19
Lautner embraced Wright’s belief that “every building, and in fact, architecture itself, should revolve around an organic ‘idea,’ from which the structure’s details would follow.” Lautner said that “no other single person would impress and influence him as strongly.”20 Lautner worked with Wright on projects during his fellowship and in 1937 helped to build Wright’s Taliesin West in Scottsdale, Arizona. In 1938 Lautner moved to Los Angeles and worked as superintendent on Wright’s Surges House project. He built his own house in 1940 in Silver Lake for his wife and newly born child. Architectural historian Thomas Hines observed that the house “reflected Wrightian influences while also demonstrating, in certain small ways, Lautner’s increasing independence.” The house was noticed in the profession and “it testified to a talent that would soon inspire others to commission him for similar structures and then for increasingly complex buildings.”21 In the early 1940s Lautner supervised several of Wright’s Los Angeles area commissions including houses for the Bell and Mauer families. When the owners of those projects balked at the budgets, Wright withdrew. With Wright’s approval, Lautner took over the projects and designed smaller versions under his own practice. Lautner noted that he “had about twelve or fifteen clients built up over the first two or three years, and then the war stopped everything.”22
From Wright “Lautner acquired the sense of confidence required to push the boundaries of design and structure. Perhaps the most important quality that Lautner learned from Wright was a sense of independence when it came to architectural design. Lautner was able, unlike many other Wright students, to take what he had learned from the master and reconfigure it into his own unique design esthetic.”23 Architectural Historian Barbara-Ann Campbell-Lange noted that “Lautner’s early projects embodied some influences of the work of Frank Lloyd Wright…however, in time his work evolved a unique conception of architectural space, form and attitude to materials.”24 Architectural Historian Alan Hess agrees stating that “the separation [from Wright] was complex but was best for Lautner’s design ability. Los Angeles gave him the opportunity to grapple with his own sense of design, to apply Wright’s principles to new conditions.”25 At the time the connection to Frank Lloyd Wright was not an advantage. Lautner said that “when I came here [Los Angeles] if I told somebody I had studied with Frank Lloyd Wright, they’d kick me out. I wouldn’t get a job. I couldn’t get a job in any office because that’s too radical”26
19 Hines, p. 611 20 Hines, p. 612 21 Hines, p. 616 22 UCLA Oral History with John Lautner, p. 73. 23 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1990.” https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/65df4e3f-569a-4010- a2e7-93e1bdd0bdda/ResidentialArchitectureofJohnLautnerinSoCalifornia_1940-1994.pdf 24 Campbell-Lange, p. 7. 25 Hess, p. 19 26 UCLA Oral History with John Lautner, p. 60 Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 30 November 22, 2023
With World War II going on, Lautner joined the Structon Company in 1943 to work on wartime military construction and engineering projects. Near the end of the war, in 1944, Lautner joined the architectural firm of Douglas Honnold as a design associate. 27 Honnold (1901-1974) studied at Cornell University and the University of California-Berkeley. He apprenticed with George Washington Smith, known for his Spanish Colonial Revival style buildings. In the 1930s Honnold worked on set designs for MGM.
Around 1938 he used his movie industry connections to start his architectural practice.
At that time, he partnered with George Vernon Russell. They produced examples of period revival styles such as Colonial, as well as Hollywood Regency, Moderne, Mid-Century Modern and late Modern. “At first glance Honnold and Lautner are very different types of architects. Lautner had “no patience for historical styles” and an early Lautner employee referred to Honnold as “an establishment type.”28 Honnold was older and had an established architectural practice. Lautner needed a steadier income so the pair worked together worked with for several years. “Small houses and commercial work, spurred by the restaurants and offices he did with Honnold kept Lautner going between 1946 and 1950. This was the period when Lautner brilliantly redefined the roadside coffee shop at Henry’s and Googie’s.” These flamboyant coffee shop designs were “a genre that both Lautner and Honnold would continue to develop after the partnership ended.” 29 Elizabeth Honnold-Harris stated that her father, Douglas Honnold “was 100 percent convinced of John’s excellence right from the beginning. He used to tell anyone who ever asked him that John was the best designer he ever saw. Doug was a gifted businessman…John loathed that side of the practice and was perhaps happy…to dig in and do what he did best while Doug shoveled the trenches and got signatures.”30 Honnold-Harris observed that “until John came, my father’s clients received a fine bunch of eclectic solutions to their needs. No new ground was broken, no surprises came, and the sedate rich of the movie colony could expect fine Georgian and Beaux Arts details and elegant moldings and finials and sweeping staircases” and then “one day John Lautner joined up. All we knew about him at first was that he had come from Frank Lloyd Wright, identified only as a faraway eminence whose stuff was out there somewhere being admired. Daddy said that everything Mr. Wright had built tended to leak and fall apart, so he hoped that John wouldn’t mind being careful about stuff like that. Little did we know.”31
Honnold-Harris continued to describe Lautner saying:
“My first encounter with John was at his first lunch hour with the draftsmen… I had never seen a grownup man wearing a bright turquoise shirt with a plaid wool tie before…I had never heard an architect laugh so loudly…and certainly none of the draftsmen had ever heard Serious Architecture and Principles of Beauty and Excellence talked about over their noon-time sandwiches. They hung on John’s 27 Crosse, John. John Lautner: An Annotated and Illustrated Bio-Bibliography,” p. 9. 28 Hess, p. 26. 29 Hines, p. 619 30 Hess, pp. 27-28. 31 “The High Impact Arrival and Influence of the Real Thing,” The John Lautner Foundation Newsletter, October 2001, p. 4.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 31 November 22, 2023
every word with their jaws ajar and their eyes very round indeed. Daddy, in his dark gray flannel slacks, white Brooks Bros. shirt and regimental striped tie, stood at one side with a very serious expression on his face. He was seeing the future and, with his keen eclectic sense of what works in everyday life, he wondered if he was really ready for it all. And as the weeks and months rolled by, Daddy found that turning John loose was the way to go, but for heaven’s sake keep him away from the clients…[with] those brilliantly colored shirts, that giant Irish guffaw, those massive hands that carved their jobs out of thin air…a risky flight indeed. And building by building, up one side of Rodeo Drive and down Doheny and around the corner on Sunset, the magical Lautner touch came to pass and when the most maidenly priss of a draftsman turned up at work one morning in a bright yellow shirt, Daddy wasn’t the only one who had seen the future. John had brought it with him to Grace Avenue [Honnold’s office], and the rest (as they say) is Architectural History.”32
Architectural Historian Alan Hess noted that “Honnold admired – was even envious of – Lautner’s work; Lautner’s strong design sense may well have influenced Honnold’s. In their office…Lautner designed houses and commercial buildings.”33 Lautner offered that he and Honnold “did some black-market work in Beverly Hills, because you weren’t allowed to build anything, and you couldn’t get any materials unless you had the priorities.” Lautner went on say that he worked with Honnold for “two or three years. And I designed about one hundred and fifty jobs while I was with him.
And, I don’t know, maybe ten or fifteen were built. But he knew how to – he had all the contacts , you know. Her knew how to get jobs.”34
One of the commercial buildings in Beverly Hills was the Darrow Office Building.
Architectural Historian Hess notes that “the Darrow office building at 9884 Little Santa Monica Boulevard in Beverly Hills began in the Honnold office and [was] completed by Lautner…[and] displays a louvered hood to protect windows and a deck, while distinctive geometric fins face the main street.”35
The professional relationship ended around 1947 when Lautner and Honnold’s wife fell in love, eventually marrying in 1950. With the divorce, Lautner’s wife, Mary, moved back to Marquette, Michigan with their children. 36 Lautner left Honnold’s firm and resumed private practice. Lautner did not discuss the situation in his 1986 UCLA Oral History Interview. He did not make any reference to his second wife, Honnold’s former wife, or to the “Googie” phenomenon that he and Honnold had fostered.
In his own words Lautner said that after separating with Honnold “I went completely on my own again…I’ve been on my own all the time, really.” He added that clients were “just people who came and found out about me. They came, and I did the work. And it’s been that way. I still get jobs the same way.”37 There were also many talented professionals who worked with Lautner. Campbell-Lange states that “Lautner was 32 Ibid. 33 Hess, p. 27 34 UCLA Oral History with John Lautner, p. 74 35 Hess, p. 27. 36 Hess, p. 28 37 UCLA Oral History with John Lautner, p. 76.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 32 November 22, 2023
familiar with the work of contemporary engineers…His architectural vision, combined with his appreciation of fine craftsmanship and daring structures, attracted gifted engineers, contractors and master-builders.”38 In 1952 Lautner acquired his license as an architect.
As Lautner established his own practice in the 1950s he decided to leave “the commercial world largely behind in 1957, devoting his inventiveness to houses.”39 In 1993 Lautner was honored with the first Gold Medal issued by the American Institute of Architects/Los Angeles Chapter. Lautner passed away in 1994.
Architectural Historian Hess observed that “reworking old territory was not Lautner’s desire. Each house remains as a remarkably complex, thoughtful, and inventive architectural idea” adding that Lautner’s commercial designs…had a measurable impact on the direction of commercial design nationally.” 40
Lautner provided some insight on his perspective regarding commercial buildings in his UCLA Oral History. He said that he built “some offices – but not too many because they [developers/owners] really don’t want any architecture.” He added that “office developers “don’t think about anything at all…it’s just enclosed the space fast and cheap.” In describing an office project in San Juan Capistrano, he built, he noted that he “did that with brick and natural light and ventilation” and that the “building didn’t cost any more than the typical concrete block building with air conditioning and fluorescent lights.” Lautner also stated that he had done a few similar commercial buildings – “like some of the jobs I did when I was with Honnold in Beverly Hills.”41 In assessing Lautner’s early career, historian Hess observed: “In the first twenty years of his career, Lautner proved the fertility of his imagination. The designs are remarkably varied, with round houses, angled houses, rectangular houses, wood, steel, and brick structures, prefab systems, and custom crafting. Each house, indeed, has a big idea, a concept which unites the space, structure, and program.”42 The National Register Registration Form observed that “Lautner’s work from this period integrated indoor and outdoor space…[and] Lautner sought to establish his own distinctive approach to connecting his residences with nature. Lautner’s work during this period expanded on Wright’s concept of the connection of a building to its environment…Lautner merged the building with its surrounding.”43 The National Register Registration Form adds that “by the close of the 1940s, Lautner had established hie own identity, and he had become increasingly daring in his spatial concepts and use of materials. His work from this period shows a strong preoccupation 38 Campbell-Lange, p. 10 39 Hess, Alan, “The Legacy of John Lautner, ‘Lyrical Technologist,’ “ Progressive Architecture, December 1994, p. 16.
40 Hines, p. 30 41 UCLA Oral History with John Lautner, p. 82 42 Hess, p. 37 43 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1990.” https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/65df4e3f-569a-4010- a2e7-93e1bdd0bdda/ResidentialArchitectureofJohnLautnerinSoCalifornia_1940-1994.pdf Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 33 November 22, 2023
with essential geometric forms, and it is significant for its radical expansion of both the technical and spatial vocabulary of domestic architecture.”44 In an interview with Historian Campbell-Lange, John Lautner said: “I choose not to be classified and remain instead continuously growing and changing, with basic real ideas contributing to life itself, for timeless enjoyment of spaces – which I call Real Architecture. No beginning, no end – always.”45 His architecture included the “seamless integration of natural elements into architectural design, and the way in which a building should emerge from and be inspired by the site.”46
In 2016, sixty-four of Lautner’s Southern California residential buildings were added to the National Register of Historic Places. The registration form states that “Lautner’s fascination with new shapes and structures came from his determination to humanize spaces and create what he referred to as ‘real’ architecture: ‘architecture that was authentic, creative, new – yet tied to ancient and timeless ways of building; based on the needs – including emotional needs – of his clients, and the demands of the site.’ He brought to architecture an expressive and adventurous use of structure, form, and materials.”47
SurveyLA observes that “most architects who are associated with the Mid-Century Modern style exercised some creative license, but generally worked within the broad aesthetic parameters that defined the style. Others, however, cast a more personal stamp on the Modern movement, designing buildings that are on the fringes of mainstream Modernism. One such architect is John Lautner.”48 The National Register Registration form states that “Lautner’s fascination with new shapes and structures came from his determination to humanize spaces and create what he referred to as ‘real’ architecture: architecture that was authentic, creative, new – yet tied to ancient and timeless ways of building; based on the needs – including emotional needs – of his clients, and the demands of the site. He brought to architecture an expressive and adventurous use of structure, form, and materials.” It added that “the 1940s were a period of experimentation for Lautner. Some projects expressed a strong design concept, while others focused on technological innovations and construction methods. Lautner's use of materials evolved from wood (specifically redwood) in the early years to concrete and steel in his works later in the decade; he also employed various structural systems during this period. 49
In a tribute to Lautner in Progressive Architecture in 1994, architectural historian Alan Hess observed that Lautner “was one of the last living links to the American organic architecture that Frank Lloyd Wright nurtured when the century was young. What made Lautner important, however, was that unlike many of Wright’s early apprentices, he escaped Wright’s spell, set out on his own, and spent 55 years in a highly personal and 44 Ibid. 45 Campbell-Lange 46 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1990.” https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/65df4e3f-569a-4010- a2e7-93e1bdd0bdda/ResidentialArchitectureofJohnLautnerinSoCalifornia_1940-1994.pdf 47 Ibid. 48 https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/4f67bd39-631a-4f26-9a52-cd5809a66655/LA_Modernism_1919- 1980.pdf, p. 148. 49 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, p. E-3.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 34 November 22, 2023
productive exploration of organic architecture’s possibilities. Lautner’s wide-ranging search produced an astonishing variety of designs.”50
In !993 in the introduction to an interview with John Lautner in Progressive Architecture, architectural journalist Ziva Freiman observed that “most critics agree that while Lautner is undoubtedly a disciple of Wright in his mind, his more than 80 built works are hardly derivative; indeed, regarding structural and spatial tours de force such as the Arango, Elrod, and Silvertop houses, many acknowledge that the apprentice transcended the master.
51 In 1965 in Arts & Architecture architectural historian Esther McCoy observed that space, not style, had been Lautner’s concern: Lautner’s “primary interest was in the creation of space; his spaces are strong and democratic, never precious, and there is an idealism at work that conceives of man in a happy relationship with nature. There is a thoughtfulness in his work but no sense of its having been over designed to the point that spontaneity is refined out of it. For all the dramatic elements of structure, he strives more for a relaxed ampleness rather than purely dramatic effects-which is always a surprise, and a pleasant one, when entering one of his houses. There is nothing to suggest the artist isolated from society.”52
Freiman noted that Lautner’s “unselfconscious employment of ‘gadgets’ …[and] his avid use of industrial processes did not arise from mere infatuation with brilliant engineering” but according to McCoy, had come from “a search for certain universal answers.”53 McCoy further observed “if one tried to sum it up [his body of work], is that of the lyrical technologist.”54
Historian Hess observed that “in the end it is extraordinary that John Lautner kept his architecture practice going for 53 years. He lived on a shoestring, his office never made much money, and recognition was intermittent. Yet under these difficult conditions he was able to produce a remarkably varied and creative set of buildings that refused to be conventional” concluding that “Lautner’s buildings are profoundly significant. They confront the great themes of 20th Century architecture: the intersection of technology, the environment, and human habitation.55
EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY
Review of Previous Surveys
The City of Beverly Hills conducted a Historic Resource Surveys in 1985-86. This was a windshield survey conducted by volunteers. The subject building is in Area 5 of the survey. The property was not identified in that survey. In 2004 an historic resources survey was conducted for Area 5, the commercial areas of the City of Beverly Hills. That survey found the property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and given a California Historical Resource Status Code of 50 Hess, Alan, Progressive Architecture, December 1994, p. 16 51 Frieman, Ziva, Progressive Architecture, December 1993, p. 64 52 McCoy, Esther, Arts & Architecture, August 1965. p. 22 53 Frieman, Ziva, p. 64 54 McCoy, Esther, p. 22. 55 Hess, p. 157 Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 35 November 22, 2023
3S, “appears eligible for National Register as an individual property through survey evaluation.” The property was evaluated as eligible under National Register Criterion C as “an important and extremely rare example of a commercial building designed by renowned Modernist architect John Lautner.”
In 2016 the “Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1994,” which includes 64 residential properties, were listed on the National Register of Historic Places.56
Analysis of Eligibility of 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is being evaluated using the City of Beverly Hills criteria for designation of historic resources.
Evaluation of Eligibility as a Beverly Hills Landmark
A property may be nominated and designated as a City of Beverly Hills landmark if it satisfies the following requirements.
Criterion A. To meet Criterion A, a property must satisfy all of the elements of Criterion A.
Criterion A1. It is at least forty-five (45) years of age, or is a property of extraordinary significance.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, was constructed in 1946 and is over 45 years of age. It is also a rare extant commercial building designed by master architect, John Lautner.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion A1.
Criterion A2. It possesses high artistic or aesthetic value and embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style or architectural type or architectural period.
The commercial building, the Darrow Office Building, at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is a rare extant commercial building designed by master architect John Lautner. Lautner’s commercial design work included creation of the iconic Southern California Googie style which was applied to coffee shops and restaurants. Lautner’s design for the Darrow Office Building, reflects his innovative design that incorporated sustainable features and creative interior spaces defined by the exterior walls and the building’s relationship with the outdoors.
56 National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, Residential Architecture of John Lautner in Southern California, 1940-1990.” https://planning.lacity.org/odocument/65df4e3f-569a-4010- a2e7-93e1bdd0bdda/ResidentialArchitectureofJohnLautnerinSoCalifornia_1940-1994.pdf Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 36 November 22, 2023
The office building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is an excellent example of Lautner’s unique design philosophy and is an excellent example of Expressionist architecture as a more organic and expressive iteration of Mid-Century Modernism. It is also an early example of sustainable design applied to a commercial building. The building’s asymmetrical design includes non-traditional elements such as the bold geometric louvered volume expressed at the upper level.
The building design is also representative of Lautner’s creation of unique spaces as evidenced by the canted sliding glass doors adjacent to the louvers. Unique design elements such as the staircase on the west elevation, provide “in-between” spaces – between the interior and exterior. The building is sited and fenestration arranged to adapt to sunlight and other environmental conditions. The building also includes early application of sustainable design including its siting on the parcel and includes sustainable features such as louvers that allow natural light and ventilation into the building while also allowing the outside to be seen through the spacing of the louvers.
These features were integral to the building to define interior spaces. It was expected that as a commercial building interior tenant improvements would be made over time, so elements such as the canted windows, louvers, stairs, were all permanent elements to provide some definition to the interior.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion A2.
Criterion A3. It retains substantial integrity from its period of significance.
The building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard retains a high level of historic architectural integrity from its period of significance, when it was built in the late 1940s. The exterior of the building has had very few alterations and all are reversible. On the front elevation, the continuation of the concrete fins from the second floor to the ground floor were removed; these can be accurately reconstructed. There is a small cut-out on the west elevation that can be re-filled. At the rear an exterior staircase was added but did not remove any original building elements; the staircase can be removed.
Over the decades the interior spaces of the building (excluding the perimeter walls) have undergone alterations to accommodate the needs of the building’s office and medical tenants. There are no original interior spaces extant.
The building’s exterior retains a high level of integrity. The building remains in its original location. The corner setting has not changed – and the building was designed to take advantage of its setting, with its long west elevation having shaded windows on the west and a large metal louver system to mitigate the strong western sun. Also recognizing that the adjacent parcel along Santa Monica Boulevard would be developed, there is a wall that projects out to the lot line so that the front elevation of any adjacent building would not be seen as “connected” to the subject building. The workmanship represents that of the era in which the building was constructed. The building possesses is original materials and there have been no major exterior alterations. The building retains a very high level of integrity.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion A3.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 37 November 22, 2023
Criterion A4. It has continued historic value to the community such that its designation as a landmark is reasonable and necessary to promote and further the purposes of this article.
The commercial building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is a rare extant commercial building designed by master architect John Lautner. Lautner’s body of work, and this specific building, has been recognized as being among the most significant buildings in Southern California in the mid-century period of the 20th Century. This commercial design, which reflects Lautner’s expressionist styling has an emphasis on space as well as on sustainability features and is a significant example of his early design work within the category of Mid-Century Modern architecture. It is a rare extant commercial building designed by Lautner. As such, it is an important historic building that is located in the City of Beverly Hills.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion A4.
Criterion B. In addition to the requirements set forth in subsection A of this section, a landmark must satisfy at least one of the following requirements:
Criterion B1. Is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The building is not listed in the National Register of Historic Places. However, most of the extant buildings that Lautner designed are residential dwellings. Under a multiple property registration, 64 of his buildings are included, and have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, does not meet Criterion B1.
Criterion B2. It is an exceptional work by a master architect The building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is an example of an early commercial design from master architect John Lautner. It is also an exceptional design of a commercial office building incorporating Lautner’s unique design styling representing the Expressionist architectural style within the oeuvre of the Mid-Century Modern period.
The building also employs innovative sustainability features. Lautner’s ability to create spaces in which the indoors and outdoors merge is reflected in the design of this commercial building. The Darrow Office Building is an exceptional work by master architect John Lautner.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion B2.
Criteria B3 and B4 both deal with a property’s association with a person of historic Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 38 November 22, 2023
significance.
Criterion B3: It is an exceptional work that was owned and occupied by a person of great importance and was directly connected to a momentous event in the person's endeavors or the history of the nation. For purposes of this subsection B3, personal events such as birth, death, marriage, social interaction, and the like shall not be deemed to be momentous.
Criterion B4. It is an exceptional property that was owned and occupied by a person of great local prominence.
There is no evidence that any person or business of historic significance operated in the Darrow Office Building. The Darrow Agency was a talent agency active in the 1930s into the 1950s. There is no evidence that the Darrow Agency achieved historic significance in terms of their business operations.
The building is not an early example of a building dedicated to house talent/production agencies; the first building in Beverly Hills dedicated for officers for professionals in the entertainment industry is the Artists and Writers Building (9501 Santa Monica Boulevard) that was constructed in 1924, over 20 years earlier.
Master architect John Lautner did not have any association with the building beyond his design and construction of the building.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, does not meet Criteria B3 and B4.
Criterion 5. It is an iconic property
As a rare example of the early designs of master architect John Lautner, the Expressionist architecture style Darrow Building is a rare example of a commercial building designed by Lautner, and as such is considered an iconic property.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion B5.
Criterion 6. The landmark designation procedure is initiated, or expressly agreed to, by the owner(s) of the property
The owners of the property are initiating a landmark designation procedure. They intend to rehabilitate this historic building.
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the Darrow Office Building, meets Criterion B8.
Historic Resource Evaluation 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard Beverly Hills, California
Kaplan Chen Kaplan 39 November 22, 2023
Summary of Evaluation of Individual Eligibility:
The property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, the commercial building known as the Darrow Office Building, designed by master architect John Lautner, meets all four sub-criteria of Criterion A as well as Criterion B2, B5 and B6. Thus, the building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is eligible for designation as a City of Beverly Hills Historic Landmark under the City of Beverly Hills Historic Preservation Ordinance.
The City of Beverly Hills criterion for designation as a historic landmark are similar to the National Register of Historic Places criteria and the California Register criteria. Based on the analysis and evaluation explained above for City of Hill designation, the subject property at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources.
CONCLUSION
Based on the facts and analyses presented in this report, the office building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard, known as the Darrow Office Building, in the City of Beverly Hills is eligible for designation as a City of Beverly Hills historic landmark as the property:
--is an excellent example the Expressionist style of Mid-Century Modern --is the work of a master architect, John Lautner
--is a rare example from the first decade of John Lautner’s architectural career --is a rare example of a commercial building designed by John Lautner --retains a high level of historic architectural integrity The building at 9884 Santa Monica Boulevard is also eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places and to the California Register of Historical Resources.