Santa Monica City Council
June 14, 2022

www.coxcastle.com Los Angeles | Orange County | San Francisco Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067-3284
P: 310.284.2200 F: 310.284.2100
Alexander M. DeGood
310.284.2205
[email protected]
December 29, 2021
VIA E-MAIL TO [email protected]
Landmarks Commission
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street, Suite 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
c/o Ms. Stephanie Reich
Design and Historic Preservation Planner
Re: Landmark Designation Application for 631 Colorado Avenue (Application No. 21ENT-0125)
Honorable Chair Genser and Members of the Landmarks Commission:

This office represents 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc., the owner (“Owner”) of the property located at 621-631 Colorado Avenue (the “Property”) in the City of Santa Monica (the “City”).

The Property is currently improved with two buildings separated by a surface parking lot—with the eastern building (“Building A”)1 constructed in 1937 and expanded between 1998 and 2002 and the western building (“Building B”) constructed in 1941 and expanded in 1958. Building A and Building B are collectively referred to herein as the “Improvements.” On May 20, 2021, the City received a Landmark Designation Application (the “Application”) from the Santa Monica Conservancy (the “Applicant”) requesting the City’s Landmarks Commission (the “Commission”) designate the Improvements as a City Landmark.

Environmental Science Associates’ (“ESA”) Cultural Resources Director Margarita Jerabek, PhD, prepared a comprehensive City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report for the Property (the “Landmark Report”), which is attached hereto for your review as Exhibit A. The Landmark Report concludes that the Property does not meet the City’s criteria for designation, is not of a level of particular historical significance, and lacks integrity to be eligible for listing as a City Landmark. This letter details the Landmark Report’s conclusions to facilitate the Commission’s review of the Landmark Report.
1 The defined terms “Building A” and “Building B” mirror those used in the Landmark Report (as defined further herein).

Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021

A. The Landmark Report Concludes that the Improvements Do Not Meet Any of the Factors Required for Landmark Designation as Set Forth in SMMC §

9.56.100.A
The factors for a City Landmark designation are set forth in Santa Monica Municipal Code (“SMMC”) § 9.56.100.A and are as follows:

1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.

2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.

3. It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history.

4. It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study.

5. It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.

6. It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City.

The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements meet none of the six SMMC enumerated factors, as summarized below.

1. The Improvements do not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.

The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements do not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.

See Landmark Report, pp. 81-82. The Landmark Report establishes the Improvements are not nearly the first of a commercial or industrial nature within the area of the Property (contrary to the Application’s assertions) and in turn are not representative of pioneering a significant pattern of development in the City’s history. Id. Furthermore, the Landmark Report establishes the Improvements when built were not industrial in nature, as the Improvements were used as a distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages and not for an industrial use—such as the manufacturing or bottling of alcoholic beverages. See Landmark Report, p. 3.

Rather, the Improvements operated as a distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages for a non-local corporation (which distribution lasted for less than one-fourth of the Improvements’ existence2), did not materially contribute to the history of the City as the Improvements 2 The Improvements operated as a distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages for approximately 18 years, as a defense research office for approximately four years, as an auto body shop for approximately 36 years, and as film production office(s) for approximately 24 years. See Landmark Report, pp. 51-53.

Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021

supported alcohol distribution to the larger Los Angeles region, and did not in any material way contribute to the reemergence of alcohol in the City following the end of prohibition3. See Landmark Report, pp. 81-82.

In sum, the Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application) concludes that the Improvements do not meet this factor, as the Improvements’ use as an alcohol distribution warehouse are not unique or notable.

2. The Improvements do not have aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.

The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements do not have aesthetic or artistic interest or value or other noteworthy interest or value. See Landmark Report, p. 82; Application, pp. 23-24. The Landmark Report states “the [Improvements] are considered modest in comparison to other buildings in the [Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture] style [as t]hey have limited decorative features [and have] been substantially altered from [their] original appearance.” See Landmark Report, p. 82. As such, the Improvements do not meet this factor.

3. The Improvements are not identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history.

The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements are not identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history. See Landmark Report, p

82. The Application focuses on Ms. Etta Moxley’s4 ownership of the Property. However, the Landmark Report establishes the Improvements were constructed after Ms. Moxley (or her husband) sold the Property5 for use as an alcohol distribution warehouse. “There is no remaining historic significance for the former structures that were once occupied and owned by [] Etta Moxley, as all previous improvements associated with [Ms. Moxley’s] life and [the Property] were demolished prior to the construction of the [Improvements].” See Landmark Report, p. 87 (emphasis added).
3 The Application admits that not only were the Improvements not the first distribution warehouse of alcoholic beverages in the City (see Application, p. 18 [documenting M&B Distributing’s existence in the City prior to the development of the Improvements]) but, the Improvements were also not the A.B.C. Distributing Company’s first buildings in and/or near the City (see Application, pp. 18, 22 [documenting other A.B.C. Distributing Company locations in and/or near the City prior to re-location to the Improvements].) 4 While Ms. Moxley, based on the information provided in the Application, lived an admirable life, there is no evidence to support consideration of her as a historic personage. 5 According to the Application, it was Ms. Moxley’s husband John Walter Moxley who sold the Property in 1937.

See Application, p. 16.

Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021

In sum, the Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application) concludes that the Improvements do not meet this factor, as the Application’s assertions relate to structures long demolished and to a person who is not of historical significance.

4. The Improvements do not embody distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are not a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study.

The Landmark Report concludes that the Improvements do not embody distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are not a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. See Landmark Report, pp. 82-84. The Landmark Report sets forth that both expansions and modifications of Building A and Building B have materially altered their original construction, design, workmanship, and materials. Id. Further, the improvements are not rare, but rather modest and altered examples of the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture style. Id.; see also p. 80 and Table 4 of the Landmark Report (documenting several better examples of the architecture style within the City and identifying a potential Main Street Commercial District for this style).

As for construction methods, the Landmark Report establishes that groutlock brick (a type of reinforced brick masonry) neither became a highly utilized, important construction method6 in the City or elsewhere as a result of its application on the Property (as it was already a ubiquitous construction method in southern California and the United States), nor was it a novel construction method, as the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its history. See Landmark Report, pp. 82-84.

In addition, other examples of reinforced brick masonry exist throughout the City and the Improvements’ original brick masonry has been sandblasted at least twice (according to City building permits), which has destroyed the original finishing and mortar pointing. Id. In sum, the Landmark Report (accounting for the facts disclosed in the Application) concludes that the Improvements do not meet this factor.
6 The Landmark Report provides “[t]he [construction of Building A] was not published in any architectural or engineering journals, nor was its construction method mentioned in any local or regional newspapers.” See Landmark Report, pp. 83-84.

Landmarks Commission
December 29, 2021

5. The Improvements are not a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.

The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements are not a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer, or architect. See Landmark Report, p. 84; Application, p. 26. The Landmark Report provides that while established architect Fredric C. Barienbrock is listed as the architect for Building B (which as originally constructed was a commercial loading canopy), this commercial building is neither significant nor representative of Mr. Barienbrock’s larger, notable body of work of residential and large-scale civic and institutional buildings (e.g., the Modern style Santa Monica Courthouse) and has been significantly modified and expanded over time to further establish a lack of integrity necessary to meet this factor. See Landmark Report, p. 84. As such, the Improvements do not meet this factor.

6. The Improvements do not have a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City.

The Landmark Report, as well as the Application, conclude that the Improvements do not have a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City. See Landmark Report, p. 84; Application, p.

26. As such, the Improvements do not meet this factor.
* * *
In short, as detailed above, the Landmark Report establishes that the Property and Improvements do not meet any of the factors for designation as defined in SMMC § 9.56.100.A.

Should you have questions regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. In the meantime, we look forward to the Commission’s review and thank you for your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Alexander M. DeGood
AMD:ejc
cc: Amanda Duane, GPA Consulting
Heidi von Tongeln, Deputy City Attorney
086482\14234771v5

EXHIBIT A
Final
631 COLORADO AVENUE

SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
Prepared for December 2021
Mr. Michael Bay
500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA

Final
631 COLORADO AVENUE

SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
Prepared for December 2021
Mr. Michael Bay
500 Pounds of Dog, Inc.
9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA

233 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 150
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310.451.4488
esassoc.com
Bend
Camarillo
Delray Beach
Destin
Irvine
Los Angeles
Oakland
Orlando
Pasadena
Petaluma
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
Santa Monica
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper. 631 Colorado Avenue i ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS
631 Colorado Avenue Santa Monica, California
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation
Report
Page
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 Environmental Setting .......................................................................................................... 3 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................ 3 Architectural Description ..................................................................................................... 6 Site 6
Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue .................................................................................. 6 Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue ................................................................................ 18 Research Results ................................................................................................................ 25 Settlement and Development of Santa Monica ............................................................ 25 Subject Tract and Neighborhood Development ........................................................... 27 Subject Parcel Development ........................................................................................ 34 Construction History ..................................................................................................... 38 Ownership/Occupancy History ..................................................................................... 52 Historic Contexts ................................................................................................................ 60 Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977) ................................................ 60 Theme: Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-1944) ............................... 60 Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950) ............................................. 66 Evaluation of Significance ................................................................................................. 81 Landmark Criteria ........................................................................................................ 82 Structure of Merit ......................................................................................................... 86 Historic Integrity ........................................................................................................... 86 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 88 References ........................................................................................................................... 89 Attachments
A. Professional Qualifications
B. Building Permits
C. Sanborn Maps
D. Table 5. Summary of Research on Reinforced Brick Buildings in Santa Monica E. DPR Forms
Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue ii ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 List of Figures
Figure 1 Regional and Property Vicinity .............................................................................. 4 Figure 2 Aerial Photograph and Project Site ....................................................................... 5 Figure 3 Building A east facade along Colorado Avenue, view to west .............................. 9 Figure 4 Building A south facade, view north ...................................................................... 9 Figure 5 Building A south facade with scored parapet and pylons .................................... 10 Figure 6 Building A south facade with detail of brick bulkhead (altered) and scored pylons and parapet, and new industrial type windows in the former storefront opening, view west ............................................................................. 10 Figure 7 Building A east elevation along 7th Street, view west .......................................... 11 Figure 8 Building A east elevation, with non-original window in original opening, view north ........................................................................................................... 11 Figure 9 Building A east elevation with second-story addition, view north ........................ 12 Figure 10 Building A north elevation with second-story addition, view south ...................... 12 Figure 11 Building A west corner with original brick wall (sandblasted) and concrete pylon, and non-original metal gate, view north ................................................... 13 Figure 12 Building A west elevation with contemporary building entrance at center and ground-floor projecting wing addition at left, view east ................................ 13 Figure 13 Detail of Building A contemporary recessed entrance, within altered former garage door opening, view east. Evidence of parapet repairs is visible above the concrete horizontal beam, where the brick changes color from above the fifth course to the top of the parapet. Seismic tie bars are also evident on the concrete horizontal beams and on the east and west parapets. ............................................................................................. 14 Figure 14 Detail of ground-floor addition at Building A north corner of west elevation, at left, with contemporary non-original window assembly at right in location of former garage door (lower portion of door under window has been bricked in), view east .............................................................. 14 Figure 15 Interior view with open arched ceiling, and exposed wood trusses and rafters at Building A, view to west. Altered garage bays have been altered and reused for main entrance (left) and large window (right). ................. 15 Figure 16 Detail of original brickwork (sandblasted) and concrete beams (altered for seismic improvements) with contemporary infill window assemblies in original storefront openings at Building A, south corner facing east. .................. 15 Figure 17 Detail of water damage and efflorescence to brick at Building A interior wall ..................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 18 Incompatible and irregular mortar patching at infill area at Building A interior wall ......................................................................................................... 16 Figure 19 Building A interior with contemporary second story staircase ............................. 17 Figure 20 Second-floor addition at Building A facing rooftop patio over ground floor wing addition ....................................................................................................... 17 Figure 21 Detail of contemporary partition walls at juncture with historic brick and concrete column and beam ................................................................................ 18 Figure 22 Building B south facade along Colorado Avenue, view north ............................. 20 Figure 23 Detail of brick parapet and pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals at Building B south facade ...................................................................................... 20 Figure 24 Building B west elevation along 6th Court alleyway, view east. Evidence of graffiti removal on wall. ................................................................................... 21 Figure 25 Building B, perspective view of west and north elevations with corner pylon, smooth stucco cladding, and mechanized gate, view south ..................... 21 Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue iii ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Figure 26 Building B north elevation with smooth stucco cladding and flanking corner pylons, and contemporary signage, view west ........................................ 22 Figure 27 Building B contemporary recessed entrance along eastern elevation, facing west .......................................................................................................... 22 Figure 28 Building B eastern elevation (altered) which has been infilled since original construction and clad in stucco siding with new windows, view north ................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 29 Detail of Building B contemporary steel 4:3 lite windows with non-original smooth stucco siding, view west ......................................................................... 23 Figure 30 Interior view of original brickwork (sandblasted) at southern outer wall .............. 24 Figure 31 View of Building B interior brickwork of original wall that was formerly at the exterior northern extent of the building, prior to new north addition, view to east ......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 32 Detail of Town of Santa Monica Tract with subject property outlined in red, 1875 ............................................................................................................ 29 Figure 33 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1895 ................................... 30 Figure 34 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1902 ................................... 30 Figure 35 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1909 ................................... 31 Figure 36 Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1918 ................................... 31 Figure 37 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1950 ......................................................... 32 Figure 38 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A (green arrow) and B (Blue arrow) and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1965 ............... 32 Figure 39 Aerial photograph depicting subject property and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1994 ................................... 33 Figure 40 Aerial photograph depicting subject property and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 2021 ................................... 33 Figure 41 Detail of aerial photograph depicting future site of Buildings A and B with property outlined in red, 1928 ............................................................................. 35 Figure 42 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Building A with subject property outlined in red, 1938 ........................................................................................... 35 Figure 43 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1950 ......................................................................................................... 36 Figure 44 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1952 ............................................................................. 36 Figure 45 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1964 ............................................................................. 37 Figure 46 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1965 ......................................................................................................... 37 Figure 47 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 2002 ............................................................................. 38 Figure 48 Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 2005 ............................................................................. 38 Figure 49 Building A with original storefront configuration along Colorado Avenue, 1945 .................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 50 Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1986 ......................................................... 43 Table of Contents
Page
631 Colorado Avenue iv ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Figure 51 Site plan for property including Buildings A, B, and parking lot as included on building permit, 1995 ..................................................................................... 44 Figure 52 Building B when used as a loading canopy for truck storage, 1945 .................... 46 Figure 53 Sketch plan as included with building permit to modify Building B with doors, 1947 ......................................................................................................... 47 Figure 54 Sketch plan as included with building to construct addition to Building B, 1958 .................................................................................................................... 47 Figure 55 Advertisement promoting the “earthquake proof” reinforced groutlock brick masonry as used on a residence ........................................................................ 51 Figure 56 Newspaper article discussing new groutlock method of construction, 1933.......... 51 Figure 57 Aztec Brewing Company in San Diego, c. 1933 showing the state-of-theart production capability of the newly renovated brewery in the early postProhibition period. ............................................................................................... 56 Figure 58 Aztec Brewing Company, c. 1933, advertised its Famous A. B. C. Beer as “Class in a Glass.” .............................................................................................. 57 Figure 59 Aztec Brewing Company, 1933, listing A. B. C. Distributing Co. franchises in the Los Angeles area. The Santa Monica location was not listed, as it was not yet constructed by this time. .................................................................. 57 Figure 60 Corner brick commercial building in Winters, California, built circa 1906 ............ 67 Figure 61 1631 10th Street, a light manufacturing building constructed in 1947 ................. 80 Figure 62 2920 Nebraska Avenue, a utilitarian industrial building constructed in 1946 .................................................................................................................... 80 List of Tables
Table 1 631 Colorado Avenue, Building A City of Santa Monica Building Permits .......... 41 Table 2 621 Colorado Avenue, Building B City of Santa Monica Building Permits .......... 46 Table 3 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue Ownership and Occupancy ............................... 53 Table 4 Other Commercial Vernacular buildings identified in Santa Monica ................... 68 631 Colorado Avenue 1 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 COLORADO AVENUE

SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation
Report
Executive Summary
Environmental Science Associates (ESA) was retained by Michael Bay (Client) to prepare this Santa Monica Landmark Assessment Report (Report) to identify and evaluate the two buildings located at 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue (subject property). The properties are located in the downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica (City), California, on one assessor parcel (APN) 4291- 023-009. This Report was prepared to assess the property for potential eligibility as a Santa Monica Landmark or as a Structure of Merit. This Report includes a discussion of the survey methods used, a brief historic context of the Project site and surrounding area, and the identification and evaluation of the existing improvements on the subject property.

The subject property is developed with a one-story brick building with a rear second story addition at the east extent constructed in 1937 (Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue), and a onestory stucco-clad brick building at the western extent constructed in 1941 (Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue). Both buildings were designed in the Commercial Vernacular style.

ESA conducted research on the construction and occupancy history of each of the buildings within the Project site and reviewed the history of the project site within the development of the Town of Santa Monica Tract. For the current evaluation, each building at the Project site was evaluated by ESA under the following architectural and historical contexts and sub-themes: Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977); Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-1944), Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s-1960s); and Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950). As discussed in greater detail below, the subject property was assessed during the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update in 2018, at which time classified as an “Industrial Vernacular” in style building and it was given a National Register Status Code of 5S3 that identified the subject property as “appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation.” 1 The subject property is a small, commercial improvement that is not representative of a significant pattern of commercial or industrial development in the City. The subject property, an 1 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory Update- Individual Resources, 2018, https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Programs/HistoricPreservation/Appendix%20B_Individual%20Resources%20090418_rt.pdf, accessed 10/14/2021.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 2 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 altered, adaptively reused Commercial/Industrial Vernacular building, does not retain integrity to manifest the cultural and economic history of Santa Monica, nor is it exemplary of a type, style or method of construction in the architectural history of the City.

The subject property appears to have been substantially altered since its original construction and ESA found that it does not retain sufficient integrity to convey significance as a representative example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building in the architectural history of the City. Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture is modest and utilitarian in character in comparison to other building types. Substantial alterations of the warehouse door openings, reconfiguration and replacement of the original storefronts, reconfiguration of the site plan, and sandblasting of the brick all materially detract from the integrity of the property as an example of commercial/industrial vernacular architecture or as an example of a pattern of commercial development. Consequently, the subject property lacks sufficient aesthetic or architectural value and historic integrity necessary for designation under any of the applicable Landmark or Structure of Merit criteria. Research findings do not indicate that the existing improvements are identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. Both Buildings A and B are substantially altered examples of buildings originally designed in the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style, and therefore, the subject buildings are not eligible as a rare, extant example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular historical property type. Buildings A and B also do not appear to be eligible as examples of a method of construction. Building A was constructed with groutlock brick, a form of reinforced brick masonry, as indicated on the original building permit. However, the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for nearly two centuries and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its history, and as such groutlock brick was just one reinforced brick masonry system of many that have been implemented over time. While ESA did not identify other examples of the same exact type of groutlock brick found in Building A elsewhere in Santa Monica, we discovered that there are other examples of reinforced brick masonry as this was a ubiquitous construction method in southern California during the early 20th century period due to the prevalence of earthquakes in the region. Furthermore, our research data indicates that the specific form of groutlock brick utilized in Building A never became a common method of construction and that other methods of reinforced brick masonry construction were more widely utilized in the City. Even if we would assume it was a rare significant construction method, the building has been extensively sandblasted throughout the exterior and interior and no longer has integrity to convey significance as a representative example of a method of construction. ESA found no evidence that the subject property is a significant or representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect, as discussed in detail in this report. Finally, the subject property does not appear to have a unique location, singular physical characteristic, nor is an established visual feature of a neighborhood or of the City. Therefore, the subject property appears ineligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark.

While the subject property has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, and the building is more than 50 years of age, the property is not a unique, rare, or representative example of an architectural design, detail or historic type. Additionally, the subject property does not contribute to a potential Historic District. Therefore, the subject property appears ineligible for listing as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 3 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 In conclusion, ESA finds the existing improvements on the subject property to lack integrity to be eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark or as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.

Environmental Setting
The subject property, located at 621-631 Colorado Avenue (APN 4291-023-009), is situated on the north corner of Colorado Avenue, between 7th Street to the north, Broadway to the east, 6th Street on the south, and Colorado Avenue to the west (Figures 1 and 2). Located at the edge of the Santa Monica Downtown Neighborhood, lots K and L of Block 193 includes two brick vernacular multi-purpose commercial/industrial buildings, identified for the purposes of this study as Buildings A and B. This evaluation will assess the converted wholesale liquor and beer warehouse “A. B. C. Distributing Co.” and store “Wine Beer Liquors” (Building A), constructed in 1937, and converted truck storage garage (Building B), constructed in 1941 for historical significance under the City of Santa Monica Landmark Designation Criteria (SMMC 9.56.100) and Structure of Merit Designation Criteria (SMMC 9.56.080). The subject property is bordered by mixed development: multi-family housing to the north and east, and both large- and small-scale commercial developments and some multi-family housing to the south, and west. A low-rise brick commercial building is located on the lot immediately to the east of the subject property on the east corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street. To the west of the subject property, across the alley, is a block of low-rise commercial buildings on Colorado Avenue that extends to the corner of Colorado Avenue and 6th Street.

Regulatory Setting
The subject property has been identified and assessed under the City of Santa Monica’s ongoing survey process. The subject property was assessed during the 2018 Historic Resources Inventory Update in 2018.2 It was given a National Register Status Code of 5S3 that identified the subject property as “appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation.” The property was classified as “Industrial Vernacular” in style with a construction date of 1937. The statement of potential significance for the property included in the inventory was as follows: “631 Broadway appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The property is significant for conveying patterns of industrial development in the Downtown neighborhood of Santa Monica. Constructed in 1937, it is one of relatively few extant industrial buildings in the area from the pre‐World War II period.”3 However, as demonstrated in this report, the subject property was not used for manufacturing and did not have an industrial use. It was built as a multi-purpose commercial/industrial wholesale warehouse for the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages, and originally had two commercial storefronts facing south toward Colorado Avenue, one for a liquor store “Wine Beer Liquors”, and the other for a wholesale warehouse distributing office “A. B. C. Distributing Co.” 2 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory Update- Individual Resources, 2018, https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Programs/HistoricPreservation/Appendix%20B_Individual%20Resources%20090418_rt.pdf, accessed 10/14/2021. 3 Ibid., p. 46.

To p a n g a
S t a t e P a r k
Ø
Project Site
San Fernando
Valley
§¨¦405
UV1
UV91
§¨¦710
§¨¦110
Long Beach
Rancho
Palos Verdes
Upper Van
Norman Lake
Middle
Lake
Chatsworth
Reservoir
Devils
Gate Res.

Flood
Control
Basin
Encino
Reservoir
Hollywood
Reservoir
Upper Stone
Canyon Res.

Silver
Lake Res.

Manhattan
Beach
Gardena
Downey
Inglewood
Bell
Pico
Rivera
Monterey
Park
West
Hollywood Alhambra
Beverly Hills
San Gabriel
Pasadena
Glendale
Los Angeles
Burbank
Santa Monica
Simi
Valley
§¨¦710
§¨¦210
§¨¦110
§¨¦105
§¨¦5
§¨¦10
§¨¦405
£¤101
UV1
UV42
UV110
UV60
UV170
UV118
UV134
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\2021xxx\D202100734_00_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment\03_MXDs_Projects\D202100734_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment.aprx, CKeen 10/12/2021 SOURCE: Los Angeles County, 2021; ESA, 2021
Figure 1
Regional and Property Vicinity
631 Colorado Ave Landmark Assessment
N
0 4
Miles
KERN

SAN BERNARDINO

SAN DIEGO

RIVERSIDE

LOS ANGELES

VENTURA
SANTA

BARBARA
ORANGE Area of
Interest
6th St
7th St
6th St
7th St
Colorado Ave
Colorado Ave
Colorado Ave
6th St
Building A, 631
Colorado Avenue
Building B, 621
Colorado Avenue
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\2021xxx\D202100734_00_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment\03_MXDs_Projects\D202100734_631_Colorado_Landmark_Assessment.aprx, CKeen 10/12/2021 SOURCE: Los Angeles County, 2021; Nearmap, 2021; ESA, 2021 Figure 2
Aerial Photograph and Project Site
631 Colorado Ave Landmark Assessment
N
0 80
Feet
Project Parcel
Buildings
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 6 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 No alcoholic beverages were manufactured at the subject property. As such, the subject property had a primarily commercial rather than industrial function, and therefore it can be properly classified primarily as a Commercial Vernacular Style property. The warehouse attached to the commercial storefronts was used for the distribution of alcoholic beverages and had large garage bays, on-site parking, and a truck storage building, and can be properly classified secondarily as a Vernacular Industrial Style property. The stylistic classification of the building as commercial and/or industrial vernacular is explored and documented in this report.

Architectural Description
Site
The subject property is located on a rectilinear lot on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the Downtown area of Santa Monica. The property contains two brick, single-story, Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style buildings: Building A constructed in 1937 and Building B constructed in 1941. Building A faces south toward Colorado Boulevard and encompasses the full south-to-north depth of the lot; its east side elevation sits on the east property line, and its west side elevation faces an on-site parking lot; the rear north elevation sits on the north property line. Building B is located at the west corner of the lot and is oriented to the east toward the parking area and Building A; its south side elevation sits on the south property line and its west rear elevation sits on the west property line. There is an alley named 6th Court that runs north to south along the west side of the subject property. A driveway from 6th Court provides access to the subject property at its north corner. Building B is located adjacent to the driveway on the south. The subject property is enclosed by a metal security fence with concrete pylons that runs along Colorado Avenue between Building A and Building B. To the north side of Building B, an automated gate allows access to the site off 6th Court. There is additional access to the site through a pedestrian gate immediately to the west of Building A facing Colorado Avenue.

Originally, site access was directly off Colorado Avenue and not off of 6th Court. There is mature landscaping including bushes and trees within the property line at the parking lot, with bushes lining Colorado Avenue, and palm trees lining 7th Street.

Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue
Building A is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building that was constructed in 1937 with later additions including a second-story addition at its rear north end and a one-story addition that projects westward at its north corner. Located on the western corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street, Building A is oriented facing Colorado Avenue and extends northward along 7th Street (Figure 3). Building A is largely rectangular in plan and includes a second-story addition at its north end and a small one-story projection at the north corner elevation. Building A is constructed of brick with a reinforced concrete frame and sits on a concrete slab foundation. Building permits and physical evidence indicate that the original brick finish has been removed by two sandblasting campaigns that have damaged the original brick and mortar joints and pointing. The original one-story rectangular portion of the building has an arched wood truss roof and a horizontal brick parapet. There are skylights and mechanical equipment on the roof. Originally constructed as a one-story building, a second-story addition at the north end, and a ground floor wing addition at the north corner were completed between 1998 City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 7 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 and 2002. The second-story addition has a flat roof and is accessed via an interior staircase from the main ground floor space. The second-story addition has an exterior door opening at its west end that opens onto a rooftop patio above the ground floor one-story wing addition. All windows in the original section of Building A have been replaced with new metal industrial-style multi-lite windows (fixed and hopper assemblies), and there is evidence of brick infill at the location of former window and door openings that have been closed.

Building A’s south elevation facing Colorado Avenue is comprised of three structural bays (original) which are divided by vertical fluted concrete pylons incised with vertical groove lines (Figure 4). The pylons each terminate in a stepped pyramidal capital that rises just above the fascia and parapet (Figure 5). There is an attached sign on the center bay of the parapet comprised of individual metal channel letters that reads “Bay Films”. Three large non-original multi-lite industrial type metal window assemblies sit within each bay, atop a brick bulkhead.

Concrete fascia and a parapet span between the three structural bays and includes horizontal score lines above and below which correspond with the vertically fluted pylons (Figure 6).

Originally, Building A’s primary facade was located along Colorado Avenue at the south elevation and included two storefronts within the two outer structural bays that each had a singleleaf wood and glass entrance door and paired fixed wood windows adjacent to the door. There was a row of four rectangular transom windows above the doors and windows. The transoms over the doors were openable hopper windows. There were similar paired fixed wood windows surmounted by four transoms within the center structural bay. Originally, attached wall signs were located on the parapet that read from left-to-right, “ABC”, “ABC Distributing Co.” and “Wine Beer Liquors”. The bulkhead walls below the windows appear to have been stuccoed. A comparison of a historic photo of the building from 1945 with existing conditions indicates that the original storefronts have been removed and openings altered. The current windows along Colorado Avenue sit within original storefront openings, and the lower portion of the two door openings have been filled in (previously referenced Figure 6). There is evidence of water damage and graffiti removal on the bulkhead walls on this elevation.

The eastern elevation along 7th Street extends the depth of the lot and includes a non-original metal-frame 5:4 multi-lite industrial-type window assembly at the south corner of the elevation (Figures 7 and 8). This elevation is comprised of six regularly spaced structural bays delineated by its reinforced concrete frame, with brick walls (sandblast damage evident) and a brick parapet (sandblasted) at the roofline. There is evidence of parapet repair at this elevation, along with seismic structural reinforcement. Evidence of graffiti removal is apparent. All of the original windows have been replaced with metal industrial type multi-lite new windows within the original window openings. A contemporary second-floor addition rises from the final bay at the northern extent of the elevation, which was constructed with similar red brick and reinforced concrete framing and has similar multi-lite industrial type metal windows. The northernmost portion (rear wall) of Building A’s addition consists of a horizontally scored concrete wall at the second floor, which surmounts a blank brick wall with concrete framing (Figures 9 and 10).

Accessible through a pedestrian gate in the metal fence along Colorado Avenue (Figure 11), or through a vehicular gate along 6th Court, the asphalt surface parking area for the subject property City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 8 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 occupies the majority of the lot. There is a paved walkway from the pedestrian gate on the south side of the lot to the current building entrance on the west elevation of Building A. Building A’s west elevation (Figure 12) faces the parking lot and has a similar in organization to the east elevation along 7th Street. The west elevation includes six regularly spaced structural bays delineated by a reinforced-concrete frame, with brick walls and a horizontal brick parapet. The entire west elevation has been sandblasted as has the exterior and interior of the whole building.

Smaller 4:2 and 3:2 multi-lite metal frame industrial type windows punctuate three of the bays, while a contemporary recessed entrance sits roughly centered in the elevation. The main entrance includes a contemporary glass door with sidelites and transom windows (Figure 13).

Comparison of existing conditions with Sanborn maps and aerial photos indicates that the existing building entrance is in the location of a former garage bay, and that the large fixed multilite industrial window to the north is situated within a second former garage bay. There is also evidence of an enclosed (bricked) former single door opening that has been converted to a 3:2 window, at the south end of this elevation. Projecting from the final northern bay along the west elevation sits a new “sunroom” addition constructed of reinforced concrete that features large multi-lite floor-to-ceiling window assemblies at its visible south and west elevations (Figure 14).

Atop this “sunroom” addition sits a rooftop patio. This addition forms an L-shape at the rear north corner of the building. The area along the addition and west side of the building is planted with grass and other decorative landscaping.

The interior includes main floor area with an arched wood ceiling with exposed wood trusses and rafters (Figure 15). Original brickwork and concrete framing (sandblasted) are exposed throughout the interior (Figure 16). Some damage/deterioration is evident on the interior including water intrusion/leaks, efflorescence, sandblasting, and disintegration of the brick and mortar, and spalling of the concrete (Figure 17). Incompatible mortar patching is also visible at areas with later brick infill/alteration (Figure 18). The interior includes concrete slab flooring, contemporary partitions, and a contemporary second story mezzanine addition at the northern part of the building (Figure 19). The addition includes a metal staircase that leads from the main floor to a second story mezzanine and offices (Figure 20). The mezzanine level opens to a rooftop patio above the concrete ground-floor addition. Contemporary drywall and wood framing s abuts the historic brick and concrete walls, and metal seismic armature tying the structural system can be seen at the interior (Figure 21).

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 9 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 3
Building A east facade along Colorado Avenue, view to
west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 4
Building A south facade, view north
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 10 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 5
Building A south facade with scored parapet and pylons
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 6
Building A south facade with detail of brick bulkhead
(altered) and scored pylons and parapet, and new industrial type windows in the former storefront opening, view west City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 11 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 7
Building A east elevation along 7th Street, view west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 8
Building A east elevation, with non-original window in
original opening, view north
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 12 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 9
Building A east elevation with second-story addition, view north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 10
Building A north elevation with second-story addition, view south
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 13 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 11
Building A west corner with original brick wall (sandblasted) and concrete pylon, and non-original metal gate, view north 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 12
Building A west elevation with contemporary building
entrance at center and ground-floor projecting wing addition at left, view east
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 14 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 13
Detail of Building A contemporary recessed entrance, within altered former garage door opening, view east. Evidence of parapet repairs is visible above the concrete horizontal beam, where the brick changes color from above the fifth course to the top of the parapet. Seismic tie bars are also evident on the concrete horizontal beams and on the east and west parapets. 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 14
Detail of ground-floor addition at Building A north corner of west elevation, at left, with contemporary non-original window assembly at right in location of former garage door (lower portion of door under window has been bricked in), view east City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 15 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 15
Interior view with open arched ceiling, and exposed wood trusses and rafters at Building A, view to west. Altered garage bays have been altered and reused for main
entrance (left) and large window (right).
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 16
Detail of original brickwork (sandblasted) and concrete beams (altered for seismic improvements) with
contemporary infill window assemblies in original storefront openings at Building A, south corner facing east.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 16 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 17
Detail of water damage and efflorescence to brick at
Building A interior wall
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 18
Incompatible and irregular mortar patching at infill area at Building A interior wall
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 17 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 19
Building A interior with contemporary second story
staircase
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 20
Second-floor addition at Building A facing rooftop patio over ground floor wing addition
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 18 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 21
Detail of contemporary partition walls at juncture with historic brick and concrete column and beam
Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue
Building B is a brick one-story Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style building clad in smoothly finished stucco that was originally constructed in 1941. Located on the western extent of the subject property, the building extends along 6th Court south to the property line at Colorado Avenue (Figure 22). A driveway from 6th Court runs along the north end of Building B to the parking area on the subject property. Building B faces east toward the parking area. The brick masonry building has a rectangular footprint and a flat roof with a built up exposed brick parapet (Figure 23). The building’s southern elevation is comprised of a single bay with a concrete horizontal beam, flanked by concrete pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals.

Building B was originally used for truck storage and loading, and its north elevation formerly included open bays for truck parking; the openings have been filled in and new windows installed for offices. A present-day comparison with a historic photo from 1945 indicates that the east elevation along Colorado Avenue originally included painted advertisements on the east brick wall for “A. B. C. Beer” and “Budweiser”, and a painted sign on the parapet for “A. B. C.

Distributing Co.”, showing that this south elevation never included openings; it is still a blank brick wall today and has been sandblasted.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 19 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 The building’s west elevation abuts 6th Court, an alley way that runs between Colorado Avenue and Broadway (Figure 24). This elevation has been covered with smooth stucco and has a single scored line toward the parapet, and no fenestration. A metal automated vehicular gate abuts the building’s north corner and extents north to the north property line (Figure 25). The north elevation similarly has no fenestration and is covered with smooth stucco with a single scored line at the parapet (Figure 26). Metal signage toward the parapet reads: “BAY FILMS PLATINUM DUNES,” which sits to the right of a short metal ladder that provides access to the roof.

The eastern elevation facing the parking area, which formerly included multiple open bays for trucks, was enclosed in the late 1990s or early 2000s. The elevation is clad in smooth stucco and includes a score line toward the parapet. A centralized contemporary recessed entrance includes a single lite door with sidelites and transom windows (Figure 27). This configuration mirrors the contemporary entrance at Building A (Figure 28). A series of three 4:3 multi-lite steel window assemblies flank either side of the recessed entrance (Figure 29).

A metal security fence extends from the eastern corner of Building B and continues along Colorado Avenue to the western corner of Building A. The metal security fence is attached to the pylon and sits above a new concrete wall. New matching pylons similar to the pylons on Buildings A and B serve as fence posts for the security fence.

At the interior of Building B, original brickwork is visible in several of the studio offices located in the southern extent and along the western wall of the building (Figure 30). The brick appears to have once been painted, and has since been sandblasted. The original brick building received an addition to its north end in 1958, and the original exterior brick wall at the former north elevation is still present within the building near the building entrance lobby (Figure 31). The brick here appears to be deteriorating due to water damage. The entire interior has been remodeled with contemporary materials including drywall at the walls and ceilings (except at the areas with exposed original brick), cement and rolled carpet flooring, and contemporary doors.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 20 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 22
Building B south facade along Colorado Avenue, view north 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 23
Detail of brick parapet and pylons with stepped pyramidal capitals at Building B south facade
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 21 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 24
Building B west elevation along 6th Court alleyway, view east. Evidence of graffiti removal on wall.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 25
Building B, perspective view of west and north elevations with corner pylon, smooth stucco cladding, and mechanized gate, view south
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 22 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 26
Building B north elevation with smooth stucco cladding and flanking corner pylons, and contemporary signage, view
west
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 27
Building B contemporary recessed entrance along eastern elevation, facing west
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 23 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 28
Building B eastern elevation (altered) which has been
infilled since original construction and clad in stucco siding with new windows, view north
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 29
Detail of Building B contemporary steel 4:3 lite windows with non-original smooth stucco siding, view west
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 24 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 30
Interior view of original brickwork (sandblasted) at southern outer wall
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: ESA, 2021 Figure 31
View of Building B interior brickwork of original wall that was formerly at the exterior northern extent of the building, prior to new north addition, view to east

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 25 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Research Results
Settlement and Development of Santa Monica4
The original Santa Monica township was bordered by the Pacific Ocean on the west, present-day Montana Avenue on the north, present-day Colorado Avenue on the south, and 17th Street on the east. Over time, the City annexed additional acreage to extend its borders beyond the original plat map. The result was the creation of a series of distinct neighborhoods around the city. During the city’s early development, land sales and building construction did not go hand in hand. As a result, most Santa Monica neighborhoods were constructed in a patchwork manner, using a variety of era-appropriate styles, up through World War II. This was followed by an intense period of infill development and re-subdivision after the war.

Colonel Robert S. Baker, a cattleman from Rhode Island via San Francisco, established a sheep ranch on the bluffs at the northern end of present-day Santa Monica. He subsequently purchased the land that would comprise Santa Monica’s original townsite. In 1874, Colonel Baker formed a partnership with Senator John Percival Jones to develop the land that would later become Santa Monica.5 Jones and Baker organized the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad to link the mines of Colorado and Nevada to the ocean. They secured rights-of-way and commenced the construction of a 4,700-footlong wharf (the Long Wharf).6 In 1875, the original townsite of Santa Monica was surveyed. North-south streets were numbered; east-west streets were named for states in the Union.

Santa Monica’s promoters encouraged the development of parks, a plaza, and a university as well as providing ample home sites. The first sale of lots took place on July 15, 1875. Several of Los Angeles’ prominent citizens built places of business in the town. One brick commercial building, erected by William Rapp on 2nd Street, is still extant (Rapp Saloon, 1438 2nd Street, 1875; City of Santa Monica Landmark #1). By November 1875, the railroad had been completed to Santa Monica, two hotels were attracting patrons, a variety of businesses had opened, and 615 lots had been sold.

However, the auspicious beginning began to crumble as rival rail lines resolved to destroy the viability of the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad as a shipping and transportation line. By the late 1870s, Santa Monica the boomtown became a bust. In 1877, Jones sold his Los Angeles and Independence Railroad, and in 1878 the last ship departed Jones’s Long Wharf, and it was dismantled. This ushered in a collapse of land values in Santa Monica. By the mid-1880s, tents that had dotted the beach had given way to makeshift shanties in what became known as “the beach shack era.”7
4 Historic Resources Group, and Architectural Resources Group, “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department, March 2018.
5 Discussion of Santa Monica’s early settlement largely adapted from PCR Services and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation Element, September 2002, 7-11; and Paula A. Scott, Santa Monica: A History on the Edge (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2004), 9-35. 6 When it opened in 1894, the Long Wharf was the longest wharf in the world. 7 Fred E. Basten, Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: A Pictorial History of Santa Monica, Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga (Santa Monica, California: Hennessey + Ingalls, 2001),19.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 26 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Real estate entrepreneur Abbott Kinney and business partner Francis Ryan owned a large stretch of coastline – some of which would become present-day Venice. In 1892, they acquired a large piece of waterfront property for development as a seaside resort, which became known as Ocean Park. One of Kinney's first improvements to the site was the construction of a large bathhouse.

The bathhouse remained a popular local attraction throughout the first quarter of the 20th century, drawing thousands of vacationers “to what had been sand dunes and marshland.”8 In 1898, Kinney constructed the 1,250-foot-long Ocean Park Pier. Other attractions soon followed, including a racetrack, auditorium, and casino. The amusement industry drove both the local economy and the area’s physical development.

Similarly, the bath houses, and later, the Santa Monica Pier provided a hub for Santa Monica’s early development. It was originally constructed as two adjacent, separately owned piers known as the Municipal Pier and the Pleasure Pier. The first Municipal Pier was constructed in 1908- 1909 of an experimental concrete and steel construction process. It was advertised as the “largest concrete pier in the world.”9 In 1921, the pier was reconstructed using a traditional timber structure, widened, and extended to nearly 1,600 feet.10 Looff’s Pleasure Pier was added in 1916 by Charles and Arthur Looff, a father and son team specializing in the building and operation of carousels, roller coasters, and amusement parks. The Pier extended over the Santa Monica Bay, immediately adjacent to the Municipal Pier. The Looffs also constructed the Hippodrome, the Carousel, and the pier’s first roller coaster.

Despite Santa Monica’s significance as an early recreational destination, residential development was essentially dormant until the arrival of the Santa Fe Railroad in 1887, which spurred the initial residential building in “South Santa Monica” (a.k.a. Ocean Park). Although 1887 represented a building boom, by 1892, the full-time population of Santa Monica was only 2,000 people.11
The arrival of the first electric streetcar on April 1, 1896, and the later establishment of the “Balloon Route” from downtown Los Angeles, spurred further investment in Santa Monica real estate. A number of new subdivisions were opened during the first five years of the 20th century, and between 1900 and 1903 the resident population jumped from 3,057 to 7,208. By 1911, five electrical railway lines served Santa Monica with travel times of 30 to 50 minutes from downtown Los Angeles.12 The completion of major roadways to the area only increased its popularity as the automobile became a factor in Southern California growth.

During the 1920s, Santa Monica witnessed a substantial population and building boom. By 1923, it was estimated that 1,500 people per month were moving to Santa Monica.13 Between 1921 and 8 Leonard Pitt and Dale Pitt, Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County (Berkeley, California:

University of California Press, 1997), 363.
9 James H. Charleston, “Looff’s Hippodrome,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, November 1984.
10 Charleston, “Looff’s Hippodrome.”
11 According to newspaper accounts in the Santa Monica Daily Outlook of 1910, Ingersoll’s “great boom” did not extend to South Santa Monica, where land in the subdivisions of the late 1880s did not sell, and often the property returned to its original ownership.
12 “Santa Monica Bay New Scene of Great Activity,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1911, IV11. 13 “Beach City Growing at Rapid Rate,” Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1923, V7.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 27 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1925, over 40,000 people moved to the city. Although previously known as a recreational destination, the subdivision of tracts away from the amusement zones were changing the city from a “summer cottage” environment to one where” homes of foreign and domestic architecture give the community a decidedly residential atmosphere.”14 Boulevard and infrastructure improvements along Wilshire, Santa Monica, Pico, and Beverly (Sunset) supported these changes.

Even after the stock market crash of 1929, residential construction in Santa Monica continued, and in 1931 a shortage of homes was reported. One of the key drivers of this shortage was growing enrollment at the nearby University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). The shortage continued well into the late 1930s, this time driven by the expansion and influx of workers for the Douglas Aircraft plant. However, during World War II the cessation of building and shortage of building materials experienced around the country was felt in Santa Monica as well.15 Since much of Santa Monica had been built out prior to the war, single-family residential development during the post-World War II period was largely confined to some unimproved parcels in the Sunset Park area, along with infill development throughout the city, which often replaced existing buildings. However, since the period after the war also brought a new steady demand for housing, multi-family housing became the popular choice. Between 1967 and 1968, only ten out of 1,414 residential building permits were single-family homes. The completion of the Santa Monica Freeway in 1966 additionally cemented the city’s new role as a commuter suburb for other parts of Los Angeles.16
Subject Tract and Neighborhood Development
The subject property is located in the downtown area of the original township, which was subdivided in 1875 and initially contained 150 blocks. The downtown area is predominantly flat and is bounded by Wilshire Boulevard on the north, Lincoln Boulevard on the east, the Santa Monica Freeway on the south and Ocean Avenue on the west and contains approximately 512 parcels of mixed-use commercial properties. Colorado Avenue is a primary west-east commercial corridor along with Wilshire Boulevard, Arizona Avenue, Santa Monica Boulevard, and Broadway, and Olympic Boulevard. Lincoln Boulevard and Ocean Avenue are the primary south-north commercial corridors along with 2nd, 4th and 5th Streets, and the 3rd Street Promenade.

As the area grew, residential development clustered within the blocks north of Wilshire Boulevard, which now lay outside of the Downtown neighborhood boundaries. The area south of Santa Monica Boulevard assumed a commercial character, while a small “downtown” developed along 3rd Street. Today, Downtown is predominantly commercial in nature, and its boundaries exclude areas of the original township where substantial residential development occurred. Only a few residential properties remain, and of those, many have been rezoned for commercial uses.

Commercial, institutional, and mixed-use buildings comprise the majority of the neighborhood.17 14 “Beautiful Bay District Grows,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1925, F10. 15 Scott, A History on the Edge, 122.
16 Ibid., 131.
17 Architectural Resources Group, “Historic Resources Inventory Update Historic Context Statement,” prepared for the City of Santa Monica, March 2018, 15-16.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 28 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 The 1875 map of the City of Santa Monica shows the original city layout and lot division in the Downtown neighborhood (Figure 32). The land was surveyed and divided into home sites with additional blocks dedicated to commercial purposes such as hotels to the north, a university to the east, and a lumber and coal yard along Railroad Avenue to the south. The map shows the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad route running east-west to the south of the neighborhood.

Once known as Railroad Avenue, present-day Colorado Avenue formed the southernmost extent of the original tract and which sits as the edge of the industrial area adjacent to the railroad. The earliest available Sanborn map from 1895 that includes subject parcel depicts the earliest development on the subject property (which has since been demolished). The map illustrates that Block 193 was beginning to become developed, with only a few constructed residences (Figure 33). In comparison, Block 192 to the west appears to be about 50% developed. To the east along Railroad Avenue at 8th Street, the lot on the north corner contained the Santa Monica Electric Light and Power Company and another commercial-industrial operation occupied the lot to the east. Adjacent and to the north, the lots were being developed with residences.

By 1902, two more residences had been added on the east side of Block 193 (Figure 34).

Commercial-industrial businesses were beginning to appear with more frequency. Across the street and to the south, the Bassett and Nebeker Lumber Yard occupied an entire city block fronting Railroad Avenue and extending into the block on consecutive lots. On the east corner of Railroad Avenue and 7th Street was the Santa Monica Steam Laundry, with an electric gas and power plant located on the north side of Railroad Avenue and 8th Street. The 1909 Sanborn illustrates more residences north of Colorado Avenue (formerly Railroad Avenue), with the lumberyard still to the south, having expanded its land holdings significantly (Figure 35). The slightly expanded Santa Monica Steam Laundry remained, and the gas and power plant had become the Edison Electric Company. By the 1919 Sanborn map, residential development patterns north of Colorado continued, as did commercial-industrial development along and to the south of Colorado Avenue (Figure 36). The evident change is the construction of multiple structures on single lots. The laundry, and various other commercial-industrial businesses, including the Union Oil Company of California, a feed and fuel yard, and a business with “distillate tanks,” and a Southern California Edison Company warehouse were located near the subject property.

According to building permits, the existing improvements on the subject property at 631 Colorado Avenue were developed by A. B. C. Distribution Company beginning in 1937 with the construction of Building A as a warehouse and offices located on the eastern extent of the property. Building B was later constructed in 1941 in the southwestern portion of the property as a truck storage canopy and used for the loading and unloading of inventory. The subject property was constructed by A. B. C. Distribution Company. The rear of the property, along the northern and western lot lines, were smaller auxiliary structures likely used for storage. The next Sanborn map dates from 1950 and documents further changes in the pattern of residential development to the north of the project site and the commercial-industrial development along Colorado Avenue (Figure 37). By this time, multi-family residences instead of single-family residences were becoming more prominent. A printing business, Patten-Blinn Lumber Company, dry cleaners, a storage business, wood yard, coal and hay storage, tires and battery business, the Southern California Edison Company warehouse, and an electrical substation remained present still City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 29 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 remained present in the neighborhood. Newer commercial-industrial businesses included a blacksmith, machine shop, and an auto and electrical repair, with several surrounding parking lots, indicating the shift from rail to automobile transportation.

On the 1965 Sanborn map, the neighborhood appears consistent with the previous development of commercial-industrial businesses to the east along Colorado Avenue and to the south of the thoroughfare (Figure 38). One block to the north of the project site, many of the lots previously developed with residences had become redeveloped with offices, parking lots, and apartment buildings. Along Colorado Avenue, the map shows an increasingly industrial development reinforced by the nearly completed Santa Monica Freeway – Interstate Highway 10 – just to the south. Union Oil Company was still in operation at the same location, and new nearby operations included a telephone company warehouse, bus yard, Santa Monica Schools Maintenance Department, dog kennels, storage, and auto repair. The lumber yard became Lane Industries Corporation/metal fabricators, and Santa Monica Transportation System Offices and Service Departments occupied nearby lots. Just to the east are two trailer park developments that border the Santa Monica Freeway at Olympic Boulevard. Notably, there are many parking lots to accommodate the daily influx of customers and workers by car.

A 1994 aerial photograph indicates that a few of the smaller buildings in the neighborhood had been replaced with larger structures by this time (Figure 39). By the 2021 aerial photograph, the surrounding neighborhood included several large-scale apartment buildings, which had replaced smaller apartment buildings and commercial structures, indicating a pattern of redevelopment in the area (Figure 40)
SOURCE: Santa Monica Conservancy
smconservancy.org/historic-places/history-of-santamonica/ 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 32
Detail of Town of Santa Monica Tract with subject
property outlined in red, 1875
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 30 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 33
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1895
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 34
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1902
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 31 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 35
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1909
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 36
Sanborn Map depicting future site of Buildings A and B
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 1918
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 32 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 37
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1950
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 38
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A (green arrow) and B
(Blue arrow) and surrounding neighborhood with subject
property outlined in red, 1965
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 33 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 39
Aerial photograph depicting subject property and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1994
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 40
Aerial photograph depicting subject property
and surrounding neighborhood with subject property
outlined in red, 2021
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 34 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Subject Parcel Development
The first available aerial photo is from 1928 and confirms the subject property was located at the edge of a residential neighborhood on an established east-west thoroughfare (Figure 41). The visible structures on the lot were nearly obscured by the trees.

The original residential improvements were replaced with the existing commercial/industrial improvements in 1937 when Building A was constructed in the eastern extent of the subject property, along the length of 7th Street, fronting Colorado Avenue (Figure 42). Constructed by the A. B. C. Distributing Company, Building A appears on a 1938 aerial photograph with several adjacent auxiliary canopy-type structures along the northern extent of the property, which may have been used for loading merchandise onto trucks. Building B at 621 Colorado Avenue was constructed in 1941 at the southern extent of the property, also along Colorado Avenue, and first appears on the 1950 Sanborn Map (Figure 43) and 1952 aerial photograph (Figure 44).

Constructed to serve the A. B. C. Distributing Company as truck storage, Building B anchored the parcel, completing an L-shape of ancillary canopy-type structures which extended south and west from Building A, enclosing a surface parking lot directly accessible off of Colorado Avenue.

Photographs taken in 1945 indicate that a chain link fence delineated the parking lot from Colorado Avenue.

The 1950 Sanborn map depicted the auxiliary canopy-type structures, which included areas for wine storage, general storage, and other covered areas which are illegible on the map. The 1952 aerial photograph depicted Building A, Building B, and the series of auxiliary canopy-type structures interspersed between the two (previously referenced Figures 43 and 44). Several parked trucks appear in the photograph.

A. B. C. Distribution Company closed in 1953, and likely ceased operation at the subject property shortly thereafter. By 1955, Aerophysics Development Corporation occupied the subject property for roughly two years as offices, during which time no visible or documented changes were made to the site or buildings.

In 1958, the canopy structure to the immediate north of brick Building B was enlarged to accommodate a space to polish cars, indicating a change in the subject property’s use from an aerospace office building into an automobile body and paint shop, Keystone Body Shop. The next aerial photo in 1964 depicted the permitted enlarged canopy structure north of Building B, and the removal of the auxiliary canopy-type structures along the northern extent of the property (Figure 45). A Sanborn map published in 1965 further illustrates the removal of the auxiliary canopy-type structures at the north property line, in addition to the permitted enlarged canopy structure attached to Building B, which was then being used as a metal spray booth (Figure 46).

Building A was then used as an auto body repair shop, as indicated on the Sanborn map of 1965, a use which continued at the subject property until the mid-1990s, when both Buildings A and B were converted into commercial office use after a change in ownership following the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

The remaining auxiliary-canopy type structures along 6th Court were demolished shortly after the change in ownership, and a 2nd story addition was constructed at the northern extent of Building City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 35 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 A, all of which is visible in a 2002 aerial photograph (Figure 47). The subject property began its new use as creative offices for movie production companies, a use which continues today. A new metal fence with concrete walls and pylons was erected along Colorado Avenue during this period. In the absence of the auxiliary-canopy type structures in the western extent of the property, a new gated driveway along 6th Court was established, also visible in the 2002 aerial photograph. By the 2005 aerial photograph, planted trees appear to be growing in the parking lot between Buildings A and B, and an additional 1-story addition constructed on to Building A extended from the west elevation (Figure 48).

SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 41
Detail of aerial photograph depicting future site of
Buildings A and B with property outlined in red, 1928
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 42
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Building A with
subject property outlined in red, 1938
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 36 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 43
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1950
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 44
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1952
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 37 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 45
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 1964
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 46
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B with subject
property outlined in red, 1965
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 38 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 47
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 2002
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 48
Detail of aerial photograph depicting Buildings A and B with subject property outlined in red, 2005
Construction History
Located at 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property is located on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the Downtown Neighborhood in the City of Santa Monica.18 The property is bound by 7th Street to the east, Colorado Avenue to the south, and 6th Court, an alleyway, to the west. Situated on Block 193, on Lots K and L, the property contains two 18 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 39 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 buildings: a one-story brick building with a rear second story addition at the east extent (Building A), and a one-story stucco-clad brick building at the western extent (Building B). A surface parking lot separates the two buildings from one another and is accessed from along Colorado Avenue at the southern extent of the site and from 7th Street at the northern extent of the site. The property is oriented along Colorado Avenue. A metal security fence with cement walls and pylons extends along Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B. The fence includes a metal pedestrian gate located immediately west of Building A. A vehicular gated entrance to the property is accessed from 6th Court alleyway.

Building A
According to Los Angeles County Assessor’s records and the original City of Santa Monica building permit, the existing Building A was constructed in 1937.19 All building permits for Building A are included in Table 1, below. The original building permit was issued to A. B. C.

Distributing Company for a single-story brick building for office and warehouse purposes. The address on this permit was listed as 625 Colorado for Block 193 and Lots K and L. The building was to measure 50’ x 100’ and was constructed on a 100’ x 150’ lot which indicates that Building A was constructed to the extent of the lot line along 7th Street. The property then included a garage or cottage according to the building permit, which was demolished for redevelopment of the lot. According to the building permit, the specified building material to be used was “groutlock brick” and the structure would be finished with a composition roof. The building would be a single story and reach a maximum height of 20 feet. There was no architect or contractor listed on the permit. One year after construction, an aerial photograph taken in 1938 depicts Building A on the subject parcel (previously referenced Figure 42). The lot at the time appeared to include several auxiliary buildings and a fence surrounding the perimeter. A photograph taken in 1945 illustrates Building A roughly 8 years after construction (Figure 49).

Originally, there were two storefront entrances to Building A along the Colorado Avenue elevation. The south elevation included three bays delineated by fluted concrete pylons. Each bay included wood frame fixed windows with transom windows above, and bulkheads below. Two single lite doors sat recessed within the first and third structural bays. The horizontal parapet between the structural bays was scored along the lower and upper fascia and the rectangular panels on the parapet spanning the structural bays had painted signage on each of the three panels that read, right to left, “A. B. C.;” “A. B. C. DISTRIBUTING CO.;” AND “WINE BEER LIQUORS.” The east elevation, which fronts 7th Street included one wood fixed window with transom window assembly, and at least two other windows that are difficult to discern due to the low quality of the image. The east elevation appeared to have exposed brick, with adjacent mature palm trees lining the sidewalk.

A Sanborn map created in 1950 depicts the building’s continued use for wholesale liquor and beer, shows that the building construction included reinforced concrete pylons, concrete floors and beams and a wood truss roof (previously referenced Figure 43). There were two adjacent 1- story canopy structures located along the western elevation of Building A by 1950. By this time, Building B was constructed and was used for truck storage for the A. B. C. Distributing 19 Building Permit, 1937— City of Santa Monica, City Clerk.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 40 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Company. An aerial photograph taken in 1952 depicts these 1-story canopy structures, which included parked trucks adjacent to Building A (previously referenced Figure 44).

At some point the building must have been painted. Roughly 18 years after original construction, in 1955, a building permit was issued to sandblast the brick building when Aerophysics Development Corporation occupied the building. Additional electrical and gas improvements were made in 1955 according to building permits.

Building A appeared to have been used as a body shop from about 1957 to about 1994. In 1957, a permit for electrical work was issued to new building owner Jack Hammer when the property was converted into an auto body shop. It does not appear that any structural changes were made at this time. A subsequent 1958 building permit indicates that a large, projecting metal sign reading “Keystone Auto Body” was installed to advertise the business to passers-by along Colorado Avenue. The sign permit indicates that Building B was then used as a paint shop for the auto body business. Subsequent building permits show electrical and plumbing improvements were completed for the property between 1958 and 1993. A 1964 aerial indicates that the adjacent 1- story canopy structures along the northern property extent had been demolished (previously referenced Figure 45). The 1965 Sanborn map (previously referenced Figure 46) indicates Building A’s continued usage as an auto body repair shop, which is also illustrated in the 1986 Sanborn map (Figure 50). The Northridge earthquake in 1994 caused damage to the building, as indicated by the building safety assessment which indicated “fallen bricks and a rear wall down,” yet no structural damage was sustained.20 This indicates some unspecified loss of brick from the building.

With a change in ownership the in following year, 1995, a permit was issued to include 17 parking stalls on the site at the central parking lot between Buildings A and B. Subsequent permits issued between 1995 and 1996 included extensive tenant improvements to both buildings and the site. Modifications to Building A indicated a new office use, which was illustrated in a sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit (Figure 51). The plan included new interior walls throughout, delineating office spaces, conference areas, storage, and restrooms, in addition to a new main entrance along the west elevation, where there were formerly 1-story canopies. In addition, the plan detailed landscaping along the west elevation and the parking lot. Extensive permits were issued in 1997, including: electrical work; sandblasting at both the exterior and interior; the raising of a section of 33’ x 50’ of floor; and the reconstruction of 49 linear feet of parapet wall, which may have been to repair damage from the 1994 Northridge earthquake.

In 1998, a new building permit application was submitted for a second-floor addition and renovation work, with total valuation of improvements estimated at $100,000. A subsequent 1998 permit was issued to construct a metal fence with concrete pylons. In 2002, an application to reinstate the previous expired permit to complete the second-floor addition was submitted. The permit was for a second story addition (50’ x 100’, located at the north extent of the building) and a one-story addition at the ground floor (25’ x 42’, located to the south of the second story 20 Rapid Evaluation Safety Assessment, Keystone Body Shop, January 17, 1994 [Handwritten ref, no.: DA0239].

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 41 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 addition) for office production use. By the 2005 aerial photograph, it appears that both the oneand two-story additions had been constructed (previously referenced Figure 48).

TABLE 1
631 COLORADO AVENUE, BUILDING A
CITY OF SANTA MONICA BUILDING PERMITS21
Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner/ Occupant
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
5/8/1937 B9772 A. B. C.

Distributing Co.

N/A $7,000 One-story groutlock brick
building for office and
warehouse use. 50x100
building on a 100x150 lot
6/29/1937 3127 A. B. C.

Distributing Co.

Smith Brothers (c) Electricity
6/7/1955 B17842 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Permit for sandblasting a onestory brick warehouse building 30’ x 60’
8/15/1955 E23172 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Gas Piping
9/16/1955 D15369 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Electrical
11/18/1955 D15686 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Electrical
11/25/1955 D15714 Aerophysics
Development
Corporation
N/A Electrical
9/19/1957 E33179 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Plumbing
9/30/1957 D19882 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Electrical
3/24/1958 B23440 Keystone Body
Shop
Owner (C) Metal Projecting Sign, total sign
area 18 sq. ft. Note: two
buildings listed on the site 1.

Paint shop 2. Body shop
3/25/1958 E35922 Keystone Body
Shop
N/A Plumbing
3/31/1958 D20702 Jack Hammer
(Keystone Body
Shop)
N/A Electrical
6/27/1961 D27575 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Electrical
8/23/1989 P14508 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Plumbing
9/6/1989 E18105 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Electrical
21 Documentation exists for all permits and certificates of occupancy listed in this table.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 42 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner/ Occupant
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
9/6/1989 P14542 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Plumbing
10/28/1993 E22138 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Electrical
1/17/1994 DA0239 Keystone Auto
Body
N/A Rapid Evaluation Safety
Assessment Form – Structural
“Fallen bricks, rear wall down”
12/18/1995 B63795 Hershey
Associates
SBLM Architects (A) Permit for 17 parking stalls on
site
3/18/1996 B63795 Sign
Off
Hershey
Associates
N/A Permit for tenant improvements
to both bldgs. Site map and
plans attached incl. landscaping
and parking.
7/21/1997 E24805 Steve Perry Andy Gump Inc. Electrical – temporary power pole
8/26/1997 97513-066 Bandit Films Desert Blasters Wet sandblast on two buildings – interior and exterior brick
8/27/1997 B64581 Steve Perry,
Prinzavalli Films /
Colorado-Seven
LLC
N/A $5,000 Repairs – 49 linear feet of
parapet wall on building and
raise floor 33’x 50’
9/18/1997 P20494 Steve Perry Bob Haus (C), ATK
Builders
Plumbing
9/29/1997 E24959 Steve Perry Bob Haus (C) Electrical – 28 under floor boxes and conduits only
10/7/1997 E24959 Steve Perry Bob Haus, ATK
Builders (C)
New Electrical – supplemental
to permit 9/29/1997
1/7/1998 B64908 Steve Perry Boto Design (A)
Bob Haus (C)
$100,000 Building permit for 2nd floor
addition and renovation
7/29/1998 B65428 Steve Perry Boto Design (A)
Bob Haus (C)
Concrete pylons, wrought iron
fence
6/13/2002 Continuation
of permits –
see note
Bay Films
Feb 2002 Colorado
Seven LLC sells to
500 Pounds of
Dog, Inc.

Boto Design (A) Reinstate expired 1998 permit
to complete work per B64908
and B64581—for a 2-story 50’ x
100’ and a 25’ x 42’ one-story
office production buildings
(plumbing/electrical included).

Change of use: auto repair to
office production 22
6/27/2002 E27611 Michael Bay N/A Temporary power pole
N/D N/A Water piping and gas piping
22 Additionally, the City of Santa Monica Architectural Review Board approved minor changes to the building exterior and the addition of a fence along Colorado Boulevard on October 20, 1997. The prior property owner began construction work on the building, with the majority of the improvements completed. However, a final certificate of inspection was never obtained for the work and upon expiration of those permits, the City required issuance of a new Administrative Approval and Building Permits. 22 Administrative approval to change the use from auto repair to film production and to add 730 square feet to the second story of the larger of the two buildings was approved March 24, 2002.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 43 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: Santa Monica History Museum, Bill Beebe
Collection, photographer: Emerson Gaze. Catalog
Number 3.2.4225.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 49
Building A with original storefront configuration along Colorado Avenue, 1945
SOURCE: EDR 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 50
Sanborn Map depicting Buildings A and B and
surrounding neighborhood with subject property outlined in red, 1986
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 44 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 51
Site plan for property including Buildings A, B, and
parking lot as included on building permit, 1995
Building B
In 1941, four years after the construction of Building A, a building permit was issued for the construction of a loading canopy at the western extent of the subject property at 621 Colorado Avenue. All building available permits are presented in Table 2. The loading canopy was constructed for use by the A. B. C. Distributing Company, and it likely served as a shelter when loading trucks with product prior to regional distribution. The canopy was rectangular measuring 16’ x 38’ in plan, 16’ tall, and included a composition roof. Noted Santa Monica architect Frederic C. Barienbrock, AIA, was listed as the architect for the canopy. Barienbrock had achieved notoriety by the 1940s period and his knowledge of reinforced groutlock brick masonry, which was used in Building A, is documented in a Los Angeles Times article from 1934. A photograph taken in 1945 illustrates Building B’s configuration four years after construction, and likely reflects its original configuration (Figure 52). The structure was oriented east toward the central parking lot that was shared with Building A and included five bays for cars or trucks. It appears that the south elevation, west wall, and the bulkhead at the north elevation were comprised of brick. A metal chain-link fence once lined Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B.

In 1947, a building permit was issued to A. B. C. Distributing Company owner, Glen Moyer, to enclose the canopy with five pairs of sliding doors, which were to be installed within the five bays at the eastern elevation. This modification transformed the canopy into a storage building, and also included the installation of a 3’ platform at the interior for a total valuation of $800. The City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 45 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 sketch accompanying the building permit illustrated the existing brick canopy walls, the new sliding doors, and then new platform (Figure 53). A Sanborn map issued in 1950 indicates several additional auxiliary storage buildings abutting Building B to the north and continuing along the northern extent of the property line leading to Building A (previously referenced Figure 43). These structures were likely similarly canopies in-type, as indicated by the dashed line on the Sanborn map, yet they were not comprised of brick, as Building B was, as indicated by the structural symbols on the map. These auxiliary storage structures are also visible in a 1952 aerial photograph (previously referenced Figure 44). Building B was sandblasted in 1955, according to a building permit.

Several building permits were issued in 1958 which included: the enlargement of Building B to be used to polish cars; a large sign for “Keystone Auto Body;” plumbing; and for cinder block walls, which were either part of Building B or retaining walls at the site. A sketch accompanying the permit to enlarge the Building illustrated a “proposed shelter” as a standalone structure measuring 24’ x 30’ in plan, in the area that is presently used as the property’s driveway along 6th Court (Figure 54). This canopy is no longer extant today. By the time of a 1964 aerial photograph, some of the auxiliary storage along the northern property line had been demolished (previously referenced Figure 45). A 1965 Sanborn map notes Building B’s use as an auto painting building, with the newly erected canopy addition serving as a metal spray booth (previously referenced Figure 46).

After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the property’s ownership changed, and many building permits were issued between 1994 and 1995 for neighboring Building A. Some of these permits illustrate work done to Building B as well. A sketch plan accompanying a 1995 building permit illustrates a new entrance to Building B located at the east elevation, and a new restroom in the southern portion of the building (previously referenced Figure 51). Building B was transformed from a paint shop into a storage building for office use. The adjacent spray booth was removed during this time, and a concrete wall extension along 6th Court was illustrated on the site plan. In 1997, Building B’s exterior and interior were sandblasted. It is likely around this time that Building B was encased in a smooth concrete stucco finish. Evidence of Building B’s original brick walls remain today, visible at the interior of the building, at the location of the original structure. The canopy addition has since been enclosed, unifying the disparate structures.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 46 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 TABLE 2
621 COLORADO AVENUE, BUILDING B
CITY OF SANTA MONICA BUILDING PERMITS23
Issued
Permit/
Assessor
Record Owner
Contractor (C),
Architect (A), or
Engineer (E)
Valuation
($) Description
12/11/1941 B5928 A. B. C. Distributing
Co.

Frederic
Barienbrock (A)
$500
(Day Labor)
Original building permit for a onestory structure 16’ wide by 38’ in length and 16’ tall at the highest point
with a composition roof. Use of
building listed as a loading canopy.
3/5/1947 B1401 Glen Moyer Glen Moyer (c) $800 Storage – addition of a loading platform and doors
10/1/1958 B24734 Keystone Body Shop Owner (C) $1,000 Permit for canopy enlargement – open walls with metal roof – 24’ x 30’
x 11’ at highest point, use specified
for “polishing cars”
11/28/1958 E38869 Keystone Body Shop Plumbing
8/26/1997 97513-066 Bandit Films Desert Blasters Wet sandblast on two buildings – interior and exterior brick
SOURCE: Santa Monica History Museum, Bill Beebe
Collection, photographer: Emerson Gaze. Catalog
Number 3.2.4225.
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 52
Building B when used as a loading canopy for truck
storage, 1945
23 Documentation exists for all permits and certificates of occupancy listed in this table.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 47 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 53
Sketch plan as included with building permit to modify
Building B with doors, 1947
SOURCE: City of Santa Monica Building Permit 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 54
Sketch plan as included with building to construct
addition to Building B, 1958
Method of Construction: Reinforced Groutlock Brick System by Simons Brick Company
Before brick kilns were established in California, the earliest sources of masonry were adobe, riverbeds, stone quarries, and constructed with ships’ wood ballasts. 24 The earliest buildings constructed entirely of brick in California were built in the 1830s and 1840s in the Monterey, San 24 Fred Turner, “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings,” Structural Engineers Association of California, January 28, 2020, https://www.seaoc.org/news/486967/Revisiting-Earthquake-Lessons--- Unreinforced-Masonry-Buildings.htm
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 48 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Diego, and San Francisco regions.25 As early as 1854, Sacramento had 500 brick buildings. By the 1880s, there were 50 large brick manufacturers in the state producing 120 million bricks annually. By 1900, most small brick manufacturers were forced out of business by larger manufacturers, most likely due to market dominance. Older bricks may have been inconsistently fired by small manufacturers resulting in variable strengths and durability.26 This is one of the reasons that buildings constructed of older brick failed in the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. As brick manufacturing became more industrialized and consistent, the quality most likely improved.

Simons Brick Company was among the early group of large brick manufacturers in late nineteenth-century Los Angeles and operated from approximately 1892 to 1952. The company was first mentioned in Los Angeles newspapers in 1892 in a reference to brick work completed in Pasadena.27 In 1895, the Simons Brick Company office was listed at South Fair Oaks Avenue, South Pasadena, and by 1902 the company had an additional brickyard in Boyle Heights, Los Angeles. A newspaper article published in 1903 explains that Simons Brick Company, “…has a large force of men and teams at work skimming off the surface of the bluff, . . . the material thus removed will be used for bricks.”28 In 1904, with the purchase of 30 acres of land in Santa Monica, Simons Brick Company announced the upcoming establishment of a brick and tile factory in East Santa Monica.29 In 1906, Simons Brick Company constructed their main brick factory in Montebello as their other brick factory sites were smaller and becoming less productive as the material to make the brick was slowly depleted.

In 1925, and at its peak of operation, Simons Brick Company was advertised as the largest brick manufacturing plant in the world.30 The company associated itself with successful architects and builders, listing completed projects in their advertising. The Edwards & Wildey Building at 6th and Grand Avenue in Los Angles, which was designed by the prestigious firm of Walker and Eisen was constructed with Simons Brick.

One year prior to the 1933 Long Beach earthquake, Simons Brick Company introduced an innovative new product called groutlock brick. Used to build reinforced brick masonry walls, the groutlock bricks were hollowed at the inner angles to allow space for reinforcing steel rods sealed in grout. Reinforced brick is a term that is used to generally describe steel reinforced brick masonry, while groutlock brick is a specific type of reinforced brick. The use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for over 175 years and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its history.31 In the aftermath of the 1933 fatally destructive 6.3 magnitude earthquake, brick sales dropped temporarily as municipalities responded to the threat 25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.
27 "The Pasadena News: Proceedings of the Council in Regular Session," Los Angeles Evening Express, February 22, 1892.
28 Newspaper Entry, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1903. 29 “More New Industries,” Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1904. 30 Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1925. 31 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996 (https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brickmasonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 49 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 of unreinforced masonry. Some cities, including Pasadena, banned the use of brick as a construction material altogether in an effort to make their communities “earthquake proof.”32 Immediately after the Long Beach earthquake, Simons Brick Company actively marketed this product. However, public perception of brick masonry was compromised by the mounds of toppled brick following the seismic event. As a result, reinforced groutlock brick was marketed as the successful solution to the failure of unreinforced brick masonry. Just nine days after the quake, Simons Brick Company ran an advertisement in the Los Angeles Times with the headline “Reinforced Groutlock Brick Masonry is Earthquake Proof!” (Figure 55).33 The advertisement also included the following:

A careful survey and inspection has been made of all the Reinforced Groutlock Masonry Walls and Chimneys completed to date and not a crack or any other defect whatsoever has been found. The Flexible Rigidity feature of these walls, designed by Mr. Paul E. Jeffers, Structural Engineer, to resist earthquakes is effective. We will gladly supply anyone interested with a complete list and location of all jobs completed before and under construction during the recent earthquake. We particularly invite inspection by all architects, engineers, building officials and owners. Every claim made for Reinforced Groutlock Brick Masonry has been verified. Nothing tests earthquake resistant construction better than a very severe earthquake.34
Following the destruction caused by the 1933 earthquake, the state legislature recognized the need for state level regulation to ensure uniform building requirements. To that end, the State of California passed new safety regulations including the Riley Act and the Field Act.35 Prior to 1933, only some larger cities had building departments. The 1933 Riley Act “required all local governments to review design, issue building permits, and inspect construction for other buildings.”36 In post-earthquake California, the Riley Act “effectively prohibited new bearing wall unreinforced masonry construction.”37 In writing about the impact of the Long Beach earthquake, John Parrish states, “In the affected area, “seventy schools were destroyed and 120 damaged, which represents about 75% of the schools in the area.”38 Further, due to this level of destruction, the “Field Act took the extraordinary step of revoking local authority for public schools of grades K-14 and assigning that new regulatory authority to the State Architect,” in an effort to ensure that school buildings would be safe in future earthquake events.39 32 “News Behind the News,” The Pasadena Post, March 22, 1934. 33 Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1933. 34 Ibid.
35 Fred Turner, “Seventy Years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s Building Stock,” 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada. August 1-6, 2004), Paper No. 313. 36 Ibid.
37 Fred Turner, “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings,” Structural Engineers Association of California, January 28, 2020, https://www.seaoc.org/news/486967/Revisiting-Earthquake-Lessons--- Unreinforced-Masonry-Buildings.htm
38 John Parrish, “The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and The Field Act, Improving the Design and Building Standards for California Schools,” https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/earthquakes/long-beach (accessed October 12, 2021. 39 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 50 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Three months after the 6.3 magnitude tremor, a 1933 Los Angeles Times article (Figure 56) published an interview with owner Walter Simons about the company’s unique method of reinforcing this type of masonry construction:
“The process,” Mr. Simons explained, “involves a combination of materials consisting of steel bars spaced both vertically and horizontally two feet on centers firmly imbedded in center diaphragm of rich concrete grout. The vertical steel bars tie the roof to the foundation. The outside of the wall is laid up with especially shaped bricks that lock with the concrete grout. All wall voids are completely filled, making a solid homogeneity. The combination develops enormous flexural or binding resistance. The concrete grout in the center space between the outer courses of brick is waterproofed. This is opposite to the old system of applying waterproof mixture to the exteriors.”40 Simons Brick Company excelled in advertising and its groutlock brick product and production increased by 250% in 90 days, and soon, the company was producing 150,000 bricks a day according to an article in the Los Angeles Times.
41 In August of 1933, Walter Simons had a new
project for the V-O Food Mill in the East Side industrial area [of Los Angeles], and noted that “several hundred thousand of this new brick will be used in the warehouse buildings.” 42 To further entice architects and builders to use their product, in November of 1934 Simons Brick Company sponsored an architectural contest in which the company selected a winning architect and three honorable mentions who designed residences that could be constructed with reinforced groutlock masonry. Simons donated the groutlock brick building material to the homeowner, furthering its dominance in the southern California building industry.43 The physical legacy of Simons Brick Company is evident in the built environment of the greater Los Angeles area, in California, and beyond. The Simons Brick Company boasted that it was one of the largest brickyards in the world and shipped up to one million bricks each day before it closed in 1952. Residents in Los Angeles, San Francisco and the greater southern California region would continue to encounter this brick as it was widely used in commercial, industrial, and residential building.44 Due to the Riley and Field Acts, by law virtually any brick masonry building constructed in California between 1933 and 1952, was to be constructed with reinforced brick – in many cases, most likely Simons groutlock brick due to its market dominance. The Montebello site remained in business under owner Walter Simon’s direction until the company closed in 1952.
40 “Unique Brick Stirs Interest: Inventor Explains New Masonry Style,” Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1933. 41 “East Side Adds New Plant,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1933. 42 Ibid.
43 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 44 Margarita López López, “Restoring History, Brick By Brick,” Latinx Talk, March 24, 2020 https://latinxtalk.org/2020/03/24/restoring-history-brick-by-brick/ City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 51 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: Advertisement, The Los Angeles Times, March 9,
1933
631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment
Figure 55
Advertisement promoting the “earthquake proof”
reinforced groutlock brick masonry as used on a
residence
SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1933 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 56
Newspaper article discussing new groutlock method of
construction, 1933
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 52 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Frederic C. Barienbrock, Architect of Building B
Frederic Charles (C.) Barienbrock was born in Massachusetts on October 16, 1904, and by 1925 he was living in southern California. Barienbrock received his license in 1934, and the same year won an honorable mention in an architectural design contest in which Simons Brick Company was to donate their groutlock brick product for the construction of the exterior walls of the winning design.45 At that time, Simons Brick Company was aggressively marketing their groutlock brick in the aftermath of the 1933 Long Beach earthquake. Barienbrock began his own practice in Santa Monica in 1936.46 The original 1937 building permit for Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue does not list an architect. However, the original 1941 building permit issued for the construction of Building B includes Santa Monica architect Frederic Charles (C.) Barienbrock as the architect. The original permit for Building B refers to the canopy as an unenclosed, onestory brick building constructed for the purpose of the loading and unloading of warehouse goods. The building permit did not d indicate groutlock brick. Barienbrock became an emeritus member of the American Institute of Architects in 1946, practicing architecture in Santa Monica as an independent architect and later as a partner in the firm Barienbrock and Murray for over 50 years. He is known for his civic and institutional projects for the Santa Monica Branch Courthouse and County Building with Robert Kliegman (1951) and on the post-World War II additions to Santa Monica High School (Science Building,1954-1956).47 In 1952, his work on a contemporary modular single-family home was published in Arts & Architecture magazine.48 Barienbrock died in 1978 in Santa Monica.49
Ownership/Occupancy History
The occupancy and ownership history of the subject property illustrates the overall pattern of economic development along Colorado Avenue from the pre-World War II to post-World War II periods, to the mid- to late-twentieth century, and through the first two decades of the twenty-first century. Both buildings on the subject property, Buildings A and B, appear to have been owned and occupied by the same owners/tenants throughout their history. From post-Prohibition initial construction as a wholesale liquor distribution office and warehouse, use of the property then briefly supported post-war classified missile development and atomic research. With the post-war resurgence of automobile production, the site reflected the dominance of American car culture in its use as an auto body paint and repair shop along a busy thoroughfare. With the changing economic focus and explosive growth of media and communications in the twenty-first century, 45 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 46 Nelson White Architectural History + Preservation, “Villa Ruchello: A History, 609 E. Channel Road, Santa Monica, CA,” Prepared for The Agency, N.D., 7.
47 “Santa Monica Dedicates New County Building,” Los Angeles Times, July 28, 1951; and “$520,000 High School Building Completed,” Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1956.
48 “A Modular House by Frederic Barienbrock, Architect and Eugene Memmler, Designer,” Arts & Architecture, April 1952, Vol. 69, No. 4, 30-31
49 American Institute of Architects, Application for Membership, “Frederic Charles Barienbrock,” Application No. 4070, January 7, 1926. AIA Historical Directory website, https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AHDAA/pages/35823390/ahd1002119.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 53 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 the property has been home to a series of highly successful film production companies. An occupancy table with all known tenants and owners is provided in Table 3.

In 1937, during the first few years of the post-Prohibition era, Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue was constructed specifically for use by the A. B. C. Distributing Company. The A. B. C.

Distributing Company purchased the property from Etta Moxely, an African American woman who owned and occupied the property prior to the property sale.50 In 1941, 621 Colorado, Building B was constructed for use as a loading canopy to load and unload inventory. The A. B.

C. Distributing Co. owned and occupied subject Buildings A and B between 1937 and 1954.

Building permit history, city directories, newspaper advertisements, and a subsequent newspaper article confirm this occupancy.

In 1955, Aerophysics Development Corporation (Aerophysics) expanded its business to occupy the subject property likely for use as offices.51 The company was founded in Santa Monica in 1951 and by 1956 was experiencing explosive growth. The company had rapidly increased its staff in a few short years and needed additional space. This location was one of at least 4 other locations in Santa Monica. Aerophysics researched missile design for the U.S. military and for the Atomic Energy Commission. It appears that Aerophysics only occupied the parcel for one to two years before the company relocated to Santa Barbara52 The next owner of the property was the Keystone Body Shop who remained at the site for almost 36 years, from 1958 until 1994. The building permit history documents this occupancy beginning in 1958 with the addition of a large canopy erected for polishing cars underneath its shelter.

Building A was used as a body shop and Building B used as a paint shop.

In 1995, the city directory listed Hershey Associates as the owner and extensive tenant improvements were completed in 1996. In 1997, Colorado-Seven, LLC/Steve Perry was the listed owner and Prinzavalli Films was conducting business at the site. In 2000, Bandit Films appears in the Haines & Company directory. The ownership remained consistent for the following five years until the property was sold in 2002 and ownership was transferred from Colorado-Seven, LLC to 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc. From 2002 until the present day, the property has been owned by 500 Pounds of Dog, Inc., and the property has been occupied by film production companies: Bay Films and Platinum Dunes.

TABLE 3
621 AND 631 COLORADO AVENUE OWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANCY
Year Source Owner/Occupant Notes
1937-
c. 1953
Original Building Permit; Los
Angeles Directory Co.; Building
Permits; San Bernardino County
Sun; Evening Vanguard (Venice)
A. B. C. Distributing Co.;
Glen Moyer [owner and
occupant]
Wholesale Liquor, and
Distributor for Aztec Brewing
Company (1937-1948); Altes
Brewing Company (1948-53)
50 For further information about Etta Moxely, see Nina Fresco’s 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Designation Application report (2021).
51 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 52 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 54 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Year Source Owner/Occupant Notes
1955 Building Permits Aerophysics Development
Corporation
[owner/occupant or tenant
– unconfirmed]
1958-1994 Pacific Telephone; Pacific Bell;
Building Permits; Santa Monica
Rapid Evaluation Safety
Assessment; Cole Information
Services
Keystone Body Shop Inc.;
Jack Hammer
[owner and occupant]
Keystone Body Shop and
Jack Hammer are both listed
on permits as business and
owner throughout occupancy
c. 1995-1996 Building Permits Hershey Associates
[owner and occupant]
Communications design firm
c. 1997-2000 Building Permits; Cole Information
Services; Haines & Company
Colorado-Seven, LLC;
Prinzavalli Films; Steve
Perry; Bandit Films
[owner and occupant]
c. 2002-Present Building Permits; Haines Co., Inc.;
Cole Information Systems
Michael Bay; Bay Films;
Platinum Dunes; 500
Pounds of Dog, Inc.
[owner and occupant]
Film production companies
occupied both Buildings A
and B
A. B. C. Distributing Company
The A. B. C. Distributing Company was a distributing warehouse/depot for the Aztec Brewing Company (A. B. C. Brewing Company). The Aztec Brewing Company, or Cerveceria Azteca, S.A., was a brewery founded in Mexicali, Mexico in 1921 by San Diego businessmen Edward P.

Baker and Herbert Jaffe, and brewing engineer William H. Strouse.53 The American businessmen established the brewery in Mexico to avoid the constraints imposed by the 1919 federal passage of the 18th Amendment, the National Prohibition Act, which did not allow for manufacture, sale or transport of alcohol in the United States.54 Alcohol was still legal in Mexico during Prohibition, and American crowds travelled to the border-adjacent cities of Mexicali and Tijuana.

In 1920, Tijuana’s population was just over 1,000 people and by 1930, the population had grown to over 11,000 people.55 The growth in population paralleled the growth of the brewery business as Aztec Brewing Company and Cerveceria Mexicali, another popular Mexican brewery, competed and their businesses quadrupled during this period.56 In the Journal of San Diego History, Ernie Liwag asserts that “before Prohibition, San Diego had approximately 112,000 people, seven breweries and fifty-five saloons.”57 Some of these San Diegans would visit various parts of Mexico, including Baja, in order to drink alcohol openly. In 1928, the Agua Caliente Casino and Hotel opened in Tijuana, and with an associated horse racing track opening soon after. Some of the beer for the Agua Caliente Casino and Hotel was supplied 53 Ryan Hand, “Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum website, https://www.chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/. 54 Ernie Liwag and Matthew Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture,” The Journal of San Diego History 59, nos. 1 and 2 (Winter/Spring 2013): 11. http://sandiegohistory.org/journal/v59-1/v59-1.pdf. 55 Ibid.
56 Ibid.
57 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 55 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 by the Aztec Brewing Company, known as Cerveceria Azteca, S.A. in Mexico, which won a gold medal at the International Exposition in Seville, Spain in 1929.58 In 1933, with the repeal of the 18th amendment, Prohibition came to an end. The success of the breweries established in Mexicali and Tijuana during the previous decade dropped dramatically with the loss of their target market of American tourists, as alcohol was once again legal in the United States.59 As a result, Aztec Brewing Company founders and entrepreneurs Baker and Jaffe shifted their equipment and operations back into the United States to establish their company in San Diego’s Barrio Logan neighborhood. Very quickly, the brewery became the largest of three breweries in San Diego, brewing A. B. C.–branded beer (Figure 57).60 The company redeveloped the former site of the Savage Tire Company, invested approximately $450.000 and renovated the property into a state-of-the-art brewery that could brew up to 100,000 barrels a year initially.61 The company’s production was operating at a high capacity, and product distribution expanded to Hawaii, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and Oregon.62 The company’s sales went from 17th place to 3rd place in sales west of the Rocky Mountains in only three months after re-opening.63 To handle the demand and distribution of A. B. C. beer, the company designated local distributors in the west region as soon as the company was relocated in San Diego (Figure 58). A 1933 newspaper advertisement listed six A. B. C. Distributing Company locations serving different cities in the greater Los Angeles region (Figure 59).64 During the same year, the company advertised selected days as “A. B. C. Day” featuring A. B. C. beer, claiming “the full pint bottle brings you value in tune with the New Deal,” reflecting President Roosevelt’s economic New Deal for the country.65 In San Francisco, a newspaper article expressed how high the demand was for beer in the early post-Prohibition days.66 Bars were so busy in the years following the repeal of Prohibition that they were often packed with patrons trying to be served alcohol and proprietors feared running out of beer. The high demand for beer in the post-Prohibition years was evident in the number of A. B. C. Distributing Company franchises in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and the entire west region.67 Building A was constructed in 1937 as a warehouse and offices. Building B was constructed in 1941 for truck storage for the loading and unloading of inventory.

In 1948, the Aztec Brewing Company was purchased by the Altes Brewing Company of Detroit.

Coincidentally, the Altes Beer was also referred to as “A. B. C. Beer.” Instead of continuing to brew the Aztec Brewing Company’s recipe, Altes Brewing Company halted its production after a 58 Sheldon Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953,” West Coaster, September 13, 2018, https://westcoastersd.com/2018/09/13/a-look-back-san-diego-beer-history-from-1868-to-1953/. 59 Liwag and Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.”
60 Ibid.
61 Sheldon Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953” in West Coaster, San Diego Beer & Beverage News, September 13, 2018 (https://westcoastersd.com/2018/09/13/a-look-back-san-diego-beer-historyfrom-1868-to-1953/, accessed 10/18/2021) 62 Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953.” 63 Ibid.
64 “A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933. 65 Ibid.
66 “Nation Consumes Floods of Beer on ‘Opening Day,” Daily News, April 8, 1933. 67 “A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 56 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 few years and replaced it with its own Altes Brewing Company beer, which was more in line with east coast tradition.68 Historian Stanly Baron, in Brewed in America: The History of Beer and Ale in the United States, explains that from the onset of World War II and through the initial phase of the post-War period, national brewing companies “used their massive resources to buy out local breweries across the nation. The national breweries’ dominance in packaged beer, the increasing barrel taxes, grain rationing, the inability to adapt to stricter food and industrial laws, and the growing desire for imported beer led to the closure of all the local San Diego brewers by 1953.” 69 Altes Brewing Company was later bought by the National Brewing Company of Baltimore, Maryland and the San Diego brewery closed in 1953.70 SOURCE: The Journal of San Diego History 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 57
Aztec Brewing Company in San Diego, c. 1933 showing
the state-of-the-art production capability of the newly renovated brewery in the early post-Prohibition period. 68 Kaplan, “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953.” 69 Ibid.
70 Liwag and Schiff, “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.”
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 57 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 SOURCE: The Journal of San Diego History 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 58
Aztec Brewing Company, c. 1933, advertised its
Famous A. B. C. Beer as “Class in a Glass.”
SOURCE: The Los Angeles Times 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 59
Aztec Brewing Company, 1933, listing A. B. C.

Distributing Co. franchises in the Los Angeles area. The Santa Monica location was not listed, as it was not yet constructed by this time.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 58 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Glen Moyer, early owner
Glen A. Moyer operated at least one other A. B. C. Distributing business in Ocean Park, and there were at least four other distributing locations in the Southern California area. Born in Iowa in 1891, Glenn was living in Wyoming by 1917 and was working as a farmer.71 By 1930, Glen and his wife Gloria, also referred to as Zora, were living in San Diego where Glen worked as a machinist at a steel mill.72 It is possible that Glen became familiar with the Aztec Brewing Company, or the A. B. C. Distributing Company during his time in San Diego, where the headquarters was located. Eight years later, the 1938 Santa Monica City Directory indicated that Glen was a manager for A. B. C. Distributing Company and living in Santa Monica.73 Glen was listed as the owner of the subject property on a 1947 building permit for Building B. By the 1940 U. S. Federal Census, Glen, erroneously listed as “John A Moyer,” was working a distributor for a brewery.74 Two years later World War II draft registration cards indicate that Moyer was drafted in 1942, and was self-employed.75 An announcement for his funeral service in 1951 indicated that he was a “founder of a wholesale beverage distributing company.”76 Aerophysics Development Corporation
Aerophysics Development Corporation (Aerophysics) was organized in 1951 by Dr. William Bollay, a well-known scientist in the field of aeronautics and rocketry.77 The corporation focused on research and development of highly classified missile research projects for branches of the United States military, as well as the Atomic Energy Commission. Techniques that were researched for military purposes would later be applied to industrial and commercial applications.78
Founded in Santa Monica in 1951, the company experienced rapid expansion in its first five years and, according to a 1956 article in the Jet Propulsion Archive, “increased its staff from zero to over five hundred scientists, engineers, technicians, and supporting staff”.79 Building permits show that Aerophysics occupied 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue between 1954 and 1956. There is no indication of what specific activities were completed by Aerophysics at this address. During this period of rapid Post-War expansion, Aerophysics occupied at least four different locations in Santa Monica.80 The number of Aerophysics employees doubled each year following its establishment, offering training programs and becoming a source of employment for engineers and technicians in the area. The Jet Propulsion Archives article further explained, “Many of the present staff members have been among the leaders in developing the revolutionary advances 71 “Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards,” 1917-1918. 72 “Glen Moyer,” U. S. Federal Census, 1930.
73 “Glenn A (Zora) mgr A B C Distributing Co.” Bay Cities Directory, Published by Los Angeles Directory Co., 1938, p. 375.
74 “John A. Moyer,” U. S. Federal Census, 1940.
75 “Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942, ancestry.com. 76 “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951. 77 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 78 Ibid,
79 Ibid.
80 Newspapers.com research of ABC addresses, 1951-1956.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 59 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 made in the field of aeronautics during the past decade – in supersonic aerodynamics, in jet and rocket propulsion, and in guided missiles.”81
The corporation became a subsidiary of Studebaker-Packard and in 1956 the Aerophysics Development Corporation moved its headquarters to a new state-of-the-art plant in Santa Barbara stating that “the most modern principles of building design are being incorporated in the construction of Aerophysics Development Corporation headquarters plant to provide the ideal atmosphere for research.”82
Keystone Body Shop
Keystone Auto Body Shop operated a full-service automobile repair facility including body and fender repair as well as a paint shop at the subject property from 1958 to about 1994. Keystone Body Shop, Inc., a California corporation, was incorporated on 6 August 1957, and dissolved on October 27, 1997.83
Bay Films and Platinum Dunes
Michael Bay is an award-winning American film director and producer and owner of Bay Films, a film production company that has produced a series of successful high-concept action films including top-grossing Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and the Transformers film series, among others.84 Bay formed the production company, Platinum Dunes, with Brad Fuller and Andrew Form in 2001 to produce films in the horror genre such as The Purge, A Nightmare on Elm Street, and A Quiet Place.85 According to building permits and city directory sources, Bay Films and Platinum Dunes have occupied 631 Colorado Avenue since 2002.

81 “Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956, Part 2, p7-S., https://doi.org/10.2514/8.6995 82 Ibid.
83 Certificate of Dissolution, Corporation Number D-0342151, Keystone Body Shop, Inc., signed by directors H.

George Nojima and Joanne Nojima on October 10, 1997, and filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of California on October 27, 1997.

Additionally, the business is noted in the popular culture of southern California as frequented by Jan Berry of Jan and Dean musical fame, in the book The Jan and Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances and Chart Positions, which documents that Jan Berry had his 1958 Chevrolet Corvette repaired at Keystone Body Shop at 631 Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica. See: Mark A. Moore, “The Jan & Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances and Chart Positions, ” Appendix D: Jan Berry, Keystone Auto Body Shop, Inc. 2016.
84 IMDb, “Michael Bay: Biography,” IMDb website,
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm, accessed 10-13-21. 85 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 60 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Historic Contexts
Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977)86
Introduction
The Santa Monica area’s first commercial endeavors were based in agriculture. Ranches specialized in sheep herding, cattle, or various crops, such as lima beans. However, when the first tourists pitched house tents at Santa Monica’s beaches, commercial ventures such as a general store and a large sleeping tent were launched, beginning Santa Monica’s long history as a resort destination. Hotels, bathhouses, and saloons reflecting Santa Monica’s early history as a recreational destination gave way over time to specialized stores and services as railway and automobile access made year-round living more feasible. A growing economic base at Douglas Aircraft created steady demand for commercial growth elsewhere in the city.

Economic engines in Santa Monica included ranching, agriculture, shipping, the entertainment industry, and the aviation industry. However, the most significant factor in Santa Monica’s economic development was arguably the city’s prime beachfront location, which has played a significant role in its development and identity. As a result, Santa Monica has resources associated specifically with beach tourism and recreation, including pleasure piers and grand beach-front hotels, in addition to a thriving commercial center that grew exponentially in the 1920s.

The Great Depression and World War II slowed commercial development almost to a halt in Santa Monica. Building activity declined dramatically beginning in the Great Depression, and Santa Monica’s tourist attractions struggled. Tourists and locals frequented local beaches, taking up free recreational activities such as surfing and beach volleyball. During World War II, the military presence in Santa Monica and the large workforce at Douglas Aircraft Company boosted business for local leisure activities such as pleasure piers, movie theaters, and restaurants.

After World War II, the population boom and rise in consumer culture spurred retail and commercial development in Santa Monica. Santa Monica continued to expand its resort- and tourist-oriented activities throughout the period and embraced its emerging role in the provision of healthcare and financial services for Los Angeles’ west side.

Theme: Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-
1944)87
This theme addresses commercial development between 1920 and 1945. It explores the continued growth of Santa Monica between the World Wars, when the downtown commercial core grew 86 Historic Resources Group, and Architectural Resources Group, “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department, March 2018.
87 This theme primarily discusses commercial development in Santa Monica between the World Wars. The period of significance extends to 1944 to capture the few commercial businesses established in the 1940s; these are largely a reflection of prewar patterns and the ability of Santa Monica to maintain the tourism industry during the war, and do not merit a separate “during the war” theme as is warranted in the industrial development section.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 61 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 beyond its previous boundaries. Santa Monica’s beachside location influenced its continued commercial development, from the establishment of grand hotels to serve the growing tourism industry to the construction of the city’s first high-rises and department stores. Commercial endeavors included beach recreation, tourism, and the expansion of the downtown commercial core and Ocean Park’s commercial area, serving both the growing permanent population and seasonal tourists.

Santa Monica experienced continued growth and development following World War I. In the 1920s, Santa Monica’s population jumped from 15,000 to 37,000, the largest increase in the city’s history.309 Commercial activity increased apace, and buildings were constructed to accommodate Santa Monica’s new or expanding businesses and increased tourist activity.

Commercial trends that began in the early 20th century continued in the 1920s, with the establishment of numerous prominent commercial buildings downtown, including the city’s first skyscrapers, along with the continued development of resort- and tourist-related resources. The downtown commercial core continued to expand along with the growing population. However, the Great Depression and World War II slowed commercial development in Santa Monica.

Building activity declined, and new commercial construction was rare. Santa Monica’s tourist attractions struggled throughout the Great Depression.

This section begins with a brief examination of the continued growth of the downtown commercial core, followed by a discussion of tourism, recreation, and beach culture in Santa Monica following World War I through the end of World War II, and the effects of the Great Depression on Santa Monica. Santa Monica’s commercial development during this period provided the foundation for postwar economic expansion and contributed to the continued development of Santa Monica’s identity as a beach resort town.

Sub-Theme: Economic Development: Post Prohibition (1933-1940) Between 1875 and 1930, Santa Monica’s driving commercial force was “not agriculture, manufacturing, commerce, or the budding movie industry. Instead, due to its proximity to the ocean Santa Monica flourished as a leisure destination. Activities such as sea bathing, airplane flights, drinking, and car racing drew tourists from all over the country to Santa Monica.”88 Since the late nineteenth century Santa Monica debated the moral dilemma of prohibition as “alcohol took a firm hold in tourist centers” and “Hotels, restaurants, and entertainment options such as billiard rooms plied their customers with alcohol. By 1895, Santa Monica had seven saloons, six restaurants, and two beer gardens.”89 What some citizens viewed as an almost equally increasing number of churches as saloons, the opposing groups battled. By the late 1880s, a Santa Monica branch of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union was established with the support of a wealthy Santa Monica landowner with a Puritan background, Frederick H. Rindge. In 1900, the first prohibition law in Santa Monica was enacted and by 1902 its success was evident by the fact that there were no saloons or beer gardens on Sanborn maps. Alcohol could still be sold, as 88 Architectural Resources Group, Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement, March 2018, 152.
89 Ibid, 163.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 62 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 restaurants and hotels retained the right to serve drinks with meals costing over 25 cents or, later, even if it accompanied food.

In 1917, Santa Monica passed the full prohibition of alcohol sales two years before the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified making the manufacture, transport, and sale of alcohol illegal. Santa Monica moved its alcohol consumption behind closed doors in speakeasies all over town as well as in private rooms in the finest hotels. During Prohibition in the 1920s, Santa Monica experienced its largest population boom and commercial development expanded exponentially in the downtown area concentrated on 2nd and 3rd Streets between Santa Monica Boulevard and Colorado Avenue. There was an additional area of commercial activity on Main Street as early as 1918. Ocean Park developed its own commercial center as “shops, movie theaters, hotels lined the Promenade and Pier Avenue and piers such as Fraser’s Million Dollar Pier were home to shops, dance halls, saloons, restaurants, and movie theaters.”90 As the “small seaside resort town was transformed into a metropolitan shopping district,” commercial buildings of two and three stories rose along the downtown streets.91
At the end of the decade, the Great Depression slowed development: new commercial construction was rare and tourist attractions struggled. Businesses went bankrupt across the city and people could no longer afford the attractions of the amusement piers. “Building projects in Santa Monica declined dramatically during the Depression. Where the city had projects valued at $3 million begun in 1929, projects started in 1933 were valued at less than $500,000.”92 Since 1921, the Santa Monica pier at the foot of Colorado Avenue was a hub of development and the city continued to invest in and promote its seaside location to spur its economy. Hotels constructed during the 1920s and early 1930s included the Palisades Building at the Miramar Hotel (1924), the Breakers (1926), Sovereign Hotel (1928), Georgian Hotel (1931), Lido Hotel (1931), and the Shangri-La Hotel (1939). Many of these hotels established private beach clubs during these years and while tourism slowed, it never disappeared.

During the early 1930s, the Santa Monica Yacht Harbor was constructed with funds from a bond measure passed in 1931. In 1934, the Santa Monica City Council announced the completion of the breakwater. The newly completed harbor “boasted 99 yacht moorings, among them Charlie Chaplin’s yacht, Panacea.” [Context, p. 169.] The economy was revived, and new restaurants and businesses thrived.

In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Cullen-Harrison Act, permitting the manufacture and sale of low-alcohol beer and wines (up to 3.2 percent alcohol by volume). In December of 1933, Prohibition was repealed at the federal level with the ratification of the Twenty-first Amendment. Notably, the repeal still allowed for prohibition to be maintained at the state and local levels.93 The economic profile of Santa Monica during the post-Prohibition era 90 Ibid, 163-164.
91 Ibid, 167.
92 Ibid, 171.
93 “Prohibition, United States History [1920-1933]: Repeal,” Encyclopedia Britannica website, https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933/Repeal.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 63 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 was one of slowed, but continued growth that depended on tourism, the hotel industry, gambling, and the flow of alcohol.

Tourism and alcohol consumption were mutually supportive endeavors in these post-Prohibition years leading up to the outbreak of World War II. The Santa Monica Context states:

Gambling ships moored in the Santa Monica Bay drew gamblers by the score, and the pastime, though illegal, quickly infiltrated even the most prestigious Santa Monica businesses. The Casa del Mar beach club ran illegal slot machines in the 1930s, and Santa Monica restaurants hosted illegal card games disguised as charity fundraisers. Bookmakers (“bookies”) met bettors in hotel rooms, and bingo parlors abounded in Ocean Park. An initiative was passed in 1933 banning gambling on Ocean Park’s piers, and Santa Monica residents petitioned to eradicate gambling from the city, only to be counteracted by a more popular petition, signed by local gamblers, to keep gambling in the area.94 During this period, the Downtown commercial core expanded beyond its previous boundaries of 2nd and 3rd Streets and several businesses were established in Santa Monica during the Depression. These included Merle Norman Cosmetics, which opened the first Merle Norman Studio in Santa Monica in 1931. In 1936 the successful company added an energized Streamline Moderne façade to a commercial building on Main Street and “brought hope to Depression-era Santa Monica.”95 Reinvention was the key to survival and other Santa Monica businesses adjusted to the environment. The Santa Monica Brick Company “turned to producing tile for furniture decoration under the name Taylor Tilery. W.I. Simonson took over Santa Monica’s Packard dealership” in 1937.96
With the outbreak of World War II, commercial development slowed again. However, because of the military presence in Santa Monica, the leisure industry was able to adapt once again in the early 1940s.97
Sub-Theme: Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s1960s) The pattern of industrial development along Colorado Avenue was influenced by city founders Baker and Jones in the very early days of city planning when they brought the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad to the Long Wharf in Santa Monica Bay. The boundary on the southern edge of the downtown neighborhood was natural and manmade as the natural arroyo dropped down below grade, while the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad curved along Railroad Avenue (now Colorado Avenue). The design that would influence this southern end of the commercial-industrial side of town was laid out in the original Santa Monica city plan as the edge of the city extended to the south only as far as the natural arroyo. The original organization of the 94 Ibid.
95 Ibid, 172.
96 Ibid, 173.
97 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 64 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 city design never really changed; industries changed, but the established early pattern of the city did not.

While the original downtown commercial core centered on 2nd and 3rd Streets between Santa Monica Boulevard to the north and Colorado Avenue to the south, the 1895 Sanborn map already showed the presence of some industrial development along Colorado Avenue. Early Sanborn fire insurance maps show that the southern-most lots along Railroad Avenue between 8th and 9th Streets were developed with the Santa Monica Light and Power Company and the adjacent Santa Monica Lumber Planing and Feed Mill. In subsequent years, Sanborn maps illustrate additional early development along Colorado Avenue would include Standard Oil Company, Southern California Edison, and smaller businesses through the 1940s.

Beginning in 1922, Donald Douglas established his own company, Douglas Aircraft, in Santa Monica. In 1929, after notable successes, he moved its operation to the Santa Monica Airport and reaped almost immediate rewards:

Douglas “won a competition for the design of the DC series of planes, which eventually would carry over 95 percent of air traffic. The first DC-1 took off from the Santa Monica Airport in 1933. The demand for commercial aircraft and the success of Douglas’ planes resulted in dramatic growth of the company in the 1930s, and it became one of the largest employers in Santa Monica.”98
In the 1930s, changes in the pattern of transportation would contribute to the development of the southern edge of the city. The 2018 Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory explains that in 1935, “Olympic Boulevard was extended towards the beach through the wide arroyo next to the Pacific Electric tracks, which separated the original townsite from Ocean Park.99 In 1936, the expansion of Route 66 further connected Los Angeles and Santa Monica and access from the city to the beach was made easier with the construction of the Palisades Tunnel (now McClure Tunnel) which was built as a Works Progress Administration (WPA) project.100 The Santa Monica Context states that “Santa Monica had been a distinctly non-industrial city until the 1930s” – a city with residential development and commercial ventures, but no dedicated industry.101 The first phase of industrial development in Santa Monica centered around aviation in the pre-World War II years. This set the stage for the second phase of expanded industrial growth in the immediate post-war period in the fields of aviation, aerospace, and electronics beginning in 1946. Even later, major industries would include computers and laser technology.

With the outbreak of World War II, Douglas Aircraft expanded to become one of the largest defense contractors of the period. The company occupied a 124-acre site at the Santa Monica Airport and by the end of the war had developed forty distinct “units” that occupied the site with functions ranging from manufacturing, tooling, metal working, assembly, research and development, storage, shipping and receiving, auto repair, cafeteria, executive’s club, and 98 Ibid, 248.
99 “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” 2018, pages 246-247. 100 Ibid, 247.
101 Ibid, 246.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 65 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 engineering.”102 32,000 workers were employed at the Santa Monica plant during the early 1940s.103
“Douglas dominated the city’s economy for years, and its wartime expansion was responsible for the transformation of the City of Santa Monica from beach resort to bustling industrial center. Douglas brought a flood of residents, new businesses, social change, and a legacy of aviation and aerospace that would have ripple effects on the community for decades to come.”104
In the immediate post-war period, the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce wanted to diversify the City’s industrial base. The areas of land along the east-west railroad tracks between Colorado Avenue and Olympic Boulevard were vacant and available for growth and development.105 The Santa Monica Historic Context Statement explains that “[h]istoric aerial photographs of the area, combined with Sanborn maps from the 1940s, indicate that industrial development present north and south of the railroad tracks grew significantly during the postwar period.”106 A resident of the City of Santa Monica since 1944, John Drescher recalled that “the present industrial corridor along the area generally bounded by Olympic and Colorado was a wasteland until after World War II. There were brick pits everywhere.”107 In addition, light industrial businesses operated alongside dwellings on Colorado and Broadway.108
The Santa Monica Context describes additional factors that promoted post-war industrial growth in Santa Monica:
the proposed Santa Monica Freeway extension [1966] (contributing to new transportation opportunities for goods), the continued presence of Douglas Aircraft Company and its related industries, the development of the former municipal yards along Colorado Avenue north of Lincoln Boulevard, and the rezoning of residential land for industrial use.109 In the post-World War II phase of development, a number of industrial businesses were established along the east-west thoroughfare of Colorado Avenue. In 1949, Tavco Inc. “made aircraft and missile parts as well as contributed to the atmospheric system on the Mercury capsule.”110 Alpha Engineering Corporation formed an electronics division in 1955. Waldo D.

Waterman returned to 5th Street and Colorado Avenue to continue developing and producing his Arrowbiles (a flying vehicle prototype). Other notable companies established in Santa Monica during this period include RAND (1948), Lear Inc. (1949), Aerophysics Development Corporation (1951), Paper Mate (1957), and the Korad Corporation (1962).111 102 Ibid, 251.
103 Ibid, 254.
104 Ibid, 250.
105 Ibid, 257- 258.
106 Ibid.
107 Ibid, 258.
108 Ibid.
109 Ibid.
110 Ibid, 263.
111 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 66 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 In 1954, John M. Stahl, who was a leader in the development of industrial areas in southern California, acquired an irregularly shaped, thirty-five-acre tract of land near the railroad tracks, bounded by Olympic Boulevard to the south, Colorado Avenue to the north, 26th Street and Stewart Street to the east, and Cloverfield Boulevard to the west. This area would be developed as the Stahl Commercial Manufacturing District and would include a division of the RAND Corporation, Paper Mate, and the Burton Manufacturing Building.112 The City’s planned diversification of the area’s industrial uses was successful and by 1950, Santa Monica was home to 140 manufacturing plants of a variety of sizes. By 1962, 250 companies reflecting 60 different industries were present in Santa Monica.113
Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950)
The advent of the 20th century saw a marked change in how commercial buildings were constructed. In the 19th century, commercial structures typically went up in small groups with related architectural elements employed across several buildings or were built as infill with designs that drew on architectural elements from existing buildings to create visual cohesion.

However, the new century brought with it a heightened sense of individualism, and the owners of commercial buildings now sought to have their buildings stand out from the surrounding built environment. The goal of this change was to draw in customers through the architecture of the building itself, and lead to several general design changes in commercial buildings (representative example in Winters, California visible in Figure 60). Storefront configurations were changed to maximize design space and interior light, and ornamentation and color were designed to attract the eye. These overarching changes in the philosophy of commercial architecture encouraged window shopping. The rise of plate glass, which allowed for larger, unobstructed display windows, facilitated the changes in storefront design. American vernacular commercial buildings took a variety of forms, including single-front, false-front, iron-front, and brick-front types. In some cases, elements from high-style architecture such as the Romanesque, Italianate, or Modern styles were incorporated into the design of the front façade. Brick-front was the most popular type of Commercial Vernacular architecture. These were typically one to three stories tall and tended to be narrow and deep, rarely more than four bays wide. Storage space or apartments usually occupied the upper floor or floors. A transom light typically extended over the door and display windows. This type usually employed one major cornice and other additional decorative elements to break up the brick front.114
112 Ibid, 269-270.
113 Ibid, 259.
114 Herbert Gottfried and Jan Jennings, American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960 (New York: W.W.

Norton & Company, Inc., 2009), 233-264.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 67 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment/ D202100734.00
SOURCE: Gottfried and Jennings, American Vernacular
Buildings and Interiors, 242 Figure 60
Corner brick commercial building in Winters, California, built circa 1906
According to the Santa Monica Historic Context, “Commercial Vernacular describes simple commercial structures with little decorative ornamentation, common in American cities and towns of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They are typically brick in construction, with minimal decorative detailing.”115 Character-defining features of the architectural style include a simple rectangular form, flat roof with a flat or stepped parapet, brix cladding on the primary façade, first story storefronts often with a continuous transom window above, double-hung sash windows on the second floor if there are more than one floors, segmental arched windows and door openings on the side and rear elevations, and minimal decorative details, including cornices, friezes, quoins, or stringcourses. 116
Commercial Vernacular Buildings in Santa Monica
There are several other examples of the Commercial Vernacular building type in Santa Monica which have previously been identified as potentially significant and significant resources by the City of Santa Monica. Table 4, below, includes 47 extant Commercial Vernacular buildings in Santa Monica that were constructed between 1911 and 1961. 115 “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement,” 2018, 333. 116 Ibid.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 68 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 TABLE 4
OTHER COMMERCIAL VERNACULAR BUILDINGS IDENTIFIED IN SANTA MONICA117 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1151 11th St. 1926 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of automobile-oriented development
that shaped Santa Monica's
commercial landscape prior to World
War II. Constructed as an auto sales
and service center in 1926, it is
associated with the proliferation of
auto-related services in the early
twentieth century as the automobile
became a dominant mode of
transportation. It is one of few extant
service centers from this formative
period of growth.
1304 12th St. 1910 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.

Constructed in 1910, the building
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape in
the early decades of the twentieth
century. It is one of relatively few
remaining examples of a mixed-use
commercial building of this era. The
building does not retain sufficient
integrity to be eligible as a
Landmark, but it appears eligible as
a Structure of Merit
1150 18th St. 1930 6L Previously identified as eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Structure
of Merit. The building was reevaluated as part of this 2017 Historic Resources Inventory Update
and does not appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for listing.
1452 2nd St. 1922 6L Previously identified as a contributor to the Central Business District
Historic District. However, this area
is no longer eligible as a historic
district. While the property
contributed to the scale, continuity,
and character of the former historic
district, it does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
117 Ibid.
118 All photographs are form Google Street View
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 69 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1327 5th St. 1930 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a Santa Monica Structure of Merit.

Constructed in 1930, the building
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica’s central business district
prior to World War II. The building
does not retain sufficient integrity to
be eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit.
510 Arizona
Ave.
1956 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Central Business Historic
District. However, this area is no
longer eligible as a historic district.

While the property contributed to the
scale, continuity, and character of
the former historic district, it does
not, on its own, appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for local,
state, or federal listing.
202 Bicknell
Ave.
1915 5S3 Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. The boundary for
this district has been revised and no
longer includes this property.

However, the property appears
individually eligible for listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit. It is
a rare remaining example of a 1910s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. The building
does not retain sufficient integrity to
be eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit.
127 Broadway
(Whitworth
Block)
1920 5S3 127-131 Broadway (Whitworth Block)
appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district in the early decades
of the twentieth century. Constructed
in 1920, it is one of relatively few
extant commercial buildings from this
formative period of neighborhood
growth.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 70 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
201 Broadway
or Carmel Hotel
1923 5D3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district prior to World War
II. Constructed in 1928, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. As one of few intact hotels
from this period, it also represents
patterns of economic development
associated with Santa Monica's early
tourism-driven economy
719 Broadway* 1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.

Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth.
1925 Broadway -- 7R Identified by the Quinn Research
Center for its possible association
with the African American community
that historically resided in the Pico
neighborhood of Santa Monica.

Additional research and analysis
regarding this association are
needed to make a determination of
eligibility, so the evaluation could not
be completed
2028 Broadway 1934 7R 2020-2028 Broadway was identified by the Quinn Research Center for its
possible association with the African
American community that historically
resided in the Pico neighborhood of
Santa Monica. Additional research
and analysis regarding this
association are needed to make a
determination of eligibility, so the
evaluation could not be completed.
2015 Main St
(Santa Monica
Farms)
1923 6L Previously identified as a contributor
to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 71 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2403 Main St. 1921 6L Previously identified as a contributor to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
2503 Main St. 1924 6L Previously identified as a contributor to the Main Street Commercial
Historic District. However, the
boundary for this district has been
revised and no longer includes this
property. It does not, on its own,
appear to satisfy the registration
requirements for local, state, or
federal listing.
2821 Main St. 1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.

Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. The property is also
significant for its association with
artists Sam Francis and Richard
Diebenkorn. Francis and Diebenkorn
were renowned painters who made
invaluable contributions to the
abstract expressionist movement.

They shared a studio in the building
in 1966, before Francis moved his
studio to 345 W. Channel Road.

Diebenkorn remained at the property
until moving to a new studio in 1976.

During this time he began his
celebrated Ocean Park series, a
collection of painting inspired by the
neighborhood. The property is also a
contributor to the Main Street
Commercial Historic District.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 72 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2924 Main St. 1913 5B Appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. It is an rare
remaining example of a 1910s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. Constructed in
1913, it is one of few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth. The
property is also a contributor to the
Main Street Commercial Historic
District.
3008 Main St. 1927 5B Appears eligible for listing as a Santa Monica Landmark. It is a rare
remaining example of a 1920s
vernacular mixed-use commercial
block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. It is also
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape in the early decades of
the twentieth century. Constructed in
1927, it is one of few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth. The
property is also a contributor to the
Main Street Commercial Historic
District
672 Marine St
or Marine
Market
1928 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of neighborhood commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape in
the early decades of the twentieth
century
1646 Ocean
Ave.
1924 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Structure of Merit.

Constructed in 1926, the property
represents patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica's commercial landscape prior
to World War II. The building does
not retain sufficient integrity to be
eligible as a Landmark, but it
appears eligible as a Structure of
Merit
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 73 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1633 Ocean
Front Walk (Hot
Dog on a Stick)
1946 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the founding location of
Hot Dog on a Stick. Hot Dog on a
Stick, a fast-food enterprise that
specializes in the sale of corndogs
and other casual dining fare, has
been in continuous operation at this
location since 1946 and is an
established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape. It
has since grown into a national chain
with multiple locations and has
widespread brand recognition. In
addition to local listing, the property
appears eligible for listing in the
National Register and California
Register.
1700 Ocean
Park Blvd.
1945 6L Previously identified as eligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Structure
of Merit. The building was reevaluated as part of this 2017 Historic Resources Inventory Update
and does not appear to satisfy the
registration requirements for
individual listing. However, it is
located within the boundaries of the
Ocean Park Boulevard Commercial
Conservation District.
1722 Ocean
Park Blvd.
1941 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit.

Constructed in 1926, the property
represents broad patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II. The
building does not rise to the level of
significance needed to be eligible as
a Landmark, but it appears eligible
as a Structure of Merit.
1727 Ocean
Park Blvd.
(Douglas
Airview Co.

Magazine)
1946 7R 1727 Ocean Park Boulevard was
identified through research and
reconnaissance survey work as part
of the 2017 Historic Resources
Inventory Update. Research
suggested that there may be an
important association between this
building and the Douglas Aircraft
Company, which played a significant
role in Santa Monica's aerospace
economy. Specifically, the building
was identified as the publishing
house of a periodical issued by the
company. However, additional
research and analysis regarding this
association are needed to make a
determination of eligibility
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 74 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
3015 Ocean
Park Blvd
(International
Association of
Machinists and
Aerospace
Workers
Aeronautical
Lodge No.
1578)
1941 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing broad
patterns of institutional history in
Santa Monica. As early as 1952, the
property was used as a lodge for the
International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers,
a trade union that represented
Douglas Aircraft Corporation
employees during and after World
War II. Prior to its use as a lodge, the
property was also used as a medical
office for Douglas Aircraft workers.

The property's association with the
aviation company reflects the
widespread effect Douglas Aircraft
had on industrial, commercial, and
residential development during and
after the war. Additional research is
needed to determine the period of
significance for this association.
302 Pico Blvd. 1925 5S3 1920s vernacular commercial retail block, exhibiting distinctive
characteristics that are associated
with the property type as expressed
by its form, massing, composition,
and architectural details. The
property does not retain sufficient
integrity to be eligible as a
Landmark, but it appears eligible as
a Structure of Merit.
3101 Pico Blvd.
(McCabe's
Guitar Shop)
1957 5S3 3101 Pico Boulevard (McCabe's
Guitar Shop) appears eligible for
listing as a Santa Monica Landmark.

The property is significant as the
long-term location of a local business
that is important to the commercial
identity of Santa Monica. McCabe's,
a musical instrument store and
concert venue, was established in
1958, and has been at its current
location since 1972. Today, it is an
established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape.
401 Santa
Monica Blvd.
(Security
Building)
1925 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Structure of Merit. The
property represents patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica’s central
business district prior to World War
II. Constructed in 1925, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth. The building does not
retain sufficient integrity to be eligible
as a Landmark, but it appears
eligible as a Structure of Merit.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 75 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
1521 Santa
Monica Blvd.
(Busy Bee
Hardware;
Haine &
Batterson
Grocery)
1921 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the long-term location
of a local business that is important
to the commercial identity of Santa
Monica. Busy Bee Hardware, a retail
store that specializes in the sale of
hardware, tools, and industrial
supplies, has been in continuous
operation at this location since 1947
and is an established element of
Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape. Constructed in 1921, the
building is also significant for
representing broad patterns of
commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.
2301 Santa
Monica Blvd.
1923 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant for representing patterns
of commercial development that
shaped Santa Monica's commercial
landscape prior to World War II.

Constructed in 1923, it is one of
relatively few extant commercial
buildings from this formative period
of growth.
2030 Wilshire
Blvd. (The Gas
Lite)
1961 5S3 Appears eligible for local listing as a
Santa Monica Landmark. The
property is significant as the longterm location of a local business that is important to the commercial
identity of Santa Monica. The Gas
Lite, a themed restaurant, opened in
the 1960s and has been in
continuous operation ever since. The
business is an established element
of Santa Monica’s commercial
landscape.
2313 Wilshire
Blvd.
1926 5S3 2313 Wilshire Boulevard appears
eligible for listing as a Santa Monica
Landmark. The property is significant
for conveying patterns of commercial
development that shaped Santa
Monica's commercial landscape prior
to World War II. Constructed in 1926,
it is one of relatively few extant
commercial buildings from this
formative period of growth.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 76 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2323 Wilshire
Blvd.
1944 5S3 Long-term location of a local
business that is important to the
commercial identity of Santa Monica.

Snug Harbor, a neighborhood café,
opened in 1941 and appears to have
been in continuous operation at this
location since 1944. The business is
an established element of Santa
Monica’s commercial landscape.
2729 Wilshire
Blvd. (Tinder
Box)
1961 5S3 Appears eligible for listing as a Santa
Monica Landmark. The property is
significant as the long-term location
of a local business that is important
to the commercial identity of Santa
Monica. The Tinder Box, a retail
store that specializes in the sale of
pipes and cigars, has been in
continuous operation at this location
since 1951 and is an established
element of Santa Monica’s
commercial landscape.
2633 Main St. 1934 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2716 Main St.* 1927 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic District
2720 Main St. 1934 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 77 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2732 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2801 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2810 Main St. 1926 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2821 Main St. 1923 5B Main Street Commercial Historic
District
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 78 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
2919 Main St. 1912 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2929 Main St. 1922 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2937 Main St. 1922 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2941 Main St. 1911 5D3 Main Street Commercial Historic
District
2001-2011
Main St.
(Horizons West
Surf Shop)
-- Santa Monica City Landmark
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 79 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Address Year Built
Historic
Status Significance Photograph118
174 Kinney St.
(Famous
Enterprise Fish
Company)
1926 Santa Monica City Landmark. It was
originally owned by the Pacific
Electric Railway who constructed a
reinforced brick garage, stores and
offices in 1926.119
Summary of Research on Reinforced Brick Buildings in Santa Monica A targeted search of the industrial zones in the City of Santa Monica was completed in an effort to identify any extant commercial vernacular or commercial-industrial buildings constructed with groutlock brick. The industrial zones were identified using the 2012 Land Use Designation & Current Zoning Districts map, and then a search was completed using Google Earth Pro in each of the following areas:
 Area 1: between Colorado Avenue, Olympic Avenue, and the Santa Monica Freeway north of Lincoln Boulevard and south of Stewart Street to Bergamot Station  Area 2: between Ocean Park and McKinney on Neilson Way  Area 3: between Pico and Bay south of Lincoln Boulevard and north of 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard and Broadway
A second targeted search of industrial buildings within the time period of 1932-1952 was completed in the Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory (SMHRI).

A total of 27 potential properties were identified in the targeted search (Table 5 in Appendix E).

This group of properties was then cross-referenced with a search of the Public Records at the City of Santa Monica to obtain the building permits in order to find any documented record of the specific use of groutlock brick.

Results: Of the 27 identified properties, the oldest comparable structure, located at 1631 10th Street, dates to 1946 (Figure 61). 1631 10th Street is a 1-story commercial, light manufacturing building. This building was constructed using the cement beam grid system as seen at Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue. None of the building permits documented the specific use of groutlock brick. Instead, the reference is general and denotes “reinforced brick” or “reinforced masonry.” These findings are in line with the overall historic pattern of brick masonry construction. A Technical Notes article published by the Brick Industry Association, explains that reinforced brick is a term that is used to generally describe steel reinforced brick masonry, while groutlock brick is a specific type of reinforced brick. The use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications 119 Architectural Resources Group, 174 Kinney Street, Santa Monica, Landmark Assessment Report, March 31, 2015, page 6.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 80 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 throughout its history.120 One other early reinforced brick commercial/industrial building in Santa Monica that is similar to the subject property, with decorative pylons delineating three structural bays on the primary façade and a warehouse space to the rear, is the designated City Landmark at 174 Kinney Street, depicted at the bottom of Table 4. In addition, the utilitarian industrial building at 2920 Nebraska Avenue appears to be another similar example that was constructed in 1946 (Figure 62).

SOURCE: Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 61
1631 10th Street, a light manufacturing building
constructed in 1947
SOURCE: Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory 631 Colorado Avenue Landmark Assessment Figure 62
2920 Nebraska Avenue, a utilitarian industrial
building constructed in 1946
120 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996 (https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brickmasonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 81 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Evaluation of Significance
Person(s) of Historical Importance
The original building permit for Building A, 631 Colorado Avenue indicated A. B. C.

Distributing Co. as the original owner, while the original permit for Building B, 621 Colorado Avenue indicate that Glen Moyer was the original owner, and was constructed to designs by architect Frederic C. Barienbrock.

Glen Moyer was listed as the owner of the subject property on a 1947 building permit.

While an announcement for his funeral service in 2951 indicated that he was a “founder of a wholesale beverage distributing company,” there was no evidence identified to suggest that Moyer’s involvement with the distribution industry influenced the economic development of Santa Monica, nor that he was a person of historical importance.121 Frederic C. Barienbrock’s design for Building B, a loading canopy which was later modified into a garage for truck storage, does not appear to be a significant project in the larger body of his work. Building B was later modified to include doors in the 1950s, and later, completely enclosed and reconfigured at the end of the 20th century. Barientbrock was known for his residential architecture, and large-scale civic and education buildings, however, Building B is not a significant work within architect Barienbrock’s portfolio in Santa Monica.

Statement of other significance
Groutlock brick was a construction method that included reinforced metal rebar within specially designed interlocking masonry bricks, which promised to be earthquake proof due to increased strength provided by internal reinforcement. The groutlock brick method of construction was developed prior to the 1933 earthquake, after which Building A was constructed. As such, Building A was not a novel building for the incorporation of the groutlock reinforced brick construction method.

No other evidence was discovered in current research of the property to indicate other significance.

Is the structure representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent?
The subject property is an example of the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architectural style, although it is not a rare example. The Commercial Vernacular style is no longer prevalent in the City, although several good examples remain. Based upon a review of the City’s Historic Resources Inventory and a windshield survey of the main corridors of Santa Monica, it appears that there are still several good examples of the Commercial Vernacular architectural style within the City of Santa Monica, as shown by Table 4.

Most examples of this style in Santa Monica are in the main commercial district of the city, of which the subject property is not a part. There is even a potential Main Street Commercial District of which there are many better examples of the architectural style.

Further, in comparison, the subject property appears to be a modest and altered example of the Commercial Vernacular style within the city in comparison with the many other buildings of the style previously identified by the city, as seen in the Santa Monica Historic resources Inventory and excerpted in Table 4. 174 Kinney St, commonly known as the former Famous Enterprise Fish Company, is a designated City Landmark that was 121 “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 82 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 originally owned by the Pacific Electric Railway who constructed a reinforced brick garage, stores and offices in 1926, which has a similar 3-bay storefront divided by four vertical pylons.122
Does the structure contribute to a potential historic district? The structures do not contribute to a potential historic district.

Landmark Criteria

9.56.100(a) (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.

The subject property, a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular building, does not manifest the cultural and economic history of Santa Monica in its historical type and architecture. The subject property was not the first commercial or industrial building built along Colorado Avenue within the Town of Santa Monica Tract, as the original downtown commercial core was established in the late 1800s, with Colorado Avenue serving as the southern boundary. By the 1895 Sanborn map, commercial/industrial development was wellestablished along Colorado Avenue due to its close proximity to the railroad line. Most of the commercial development in downtown Santa Monica occurred during the 1920s, when the small seaside resort transformed into a metropolitan shopping district.

Development in the industrialized area where the subject property lies then included large-scale lumber, oil and power companies, in addition to smaller commercial/industrial businesses and aviation-related manufacturing which continued up through the 1940s. In the post-war period, later development along Colorado Avenue included prominent businesses associated with aerospace, aviation, and other industries such as Alpha Engineering Corporation’s electronics division, and Tavco Inc. that contributed to the atmospheric system on the Mercury capsule.

Building A was built in 1937, and Building B was built in 1941, after the commercial construction boom of the 1920s, yet prior to the post-war period of commercial/industrial development in the City. Its construction coincided with the Federal repeal of prohibition in the United States and the burgeoning beer and alcohol sales that ensued throughout Southern California and the nation. Its construction was not associated with the local patterns of commercial or industrial development in Santa Monica. The subject property has been used as a commercial alcohol beverage wholesale and distribution business, as an defense research office for Aerophysics, as an automobile body shop by Keystone Body Shop, and most recently as a film production office for Bay Films Platinum Dunes.

The subject property is a small, commercial improvement that is not representative of a significant pattern of commercial or industrial development in the City. It does not exemplify the cultural and economic history of the City of Santa Monica. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.

While the subject property is tangentially associated with Santa Monica as a leisure/recreation destination, since the subject property distributed alcoholic beverages to local and regional restaurants and to individual buyers for consumption, those businesses/enterprises did not exist or develop further because of the distribution of alcoholic beverages from the subject property. Therefore, the subject property did not have a significant influence on economic or recreational patterns of development in Santa 122 Architectural Resources Group, 174 Kinney Street, Santa Monica, Landmark Assessment Report, March 31, 2015, page 6.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 83 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Monica. Furthermore, with regard to the aftermath of prohibition, the subject property was developed in response to local, regional and national legal changes, and the subject property did not bring these changes about. The headquarters of the company was in San Diego and the subject property was one of several/many distributing warehouses in the southern California/Los Angeles region and did not in and of itself have any individual significance in the distribution and sale of alcoholic beverages. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.

9.56.100(a) (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.

Buildings A and B do not appear to meet this criterion. As examples of Commercial/Industrial Vernacular architecture, the buildings are considered modest in comparison to other buildings in the style. They have limited decorative features except for the concrete scored pylons, parapet, and brickwork. Specifically, the property’s spatial arrangements, massing, fenestration, materials, and overall form, while functionally successful, do not reflect the deft aesthetic hand of a master designer.

Furthermore, the subject property has been substantially altered from its original appearance. The subject property lacks sufficient aesthetic or architectural value and historic integrity necessary for designation.

9.56.100(a) (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history.

The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Etta Moxley was an early property owner and occupied the property when there were previous buildings on the parcel, which were demolished prior to the construction of the existing improvements. While it was unusual for African American women to own property in the early 20th century, the extant buildings are not associated with Moxley and the existing improvements do not have any material association with her life. Current research does not indicate that this resource is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history in local, state, or national history.

9.56.100(a) (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study.

The property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. Both Buildings A and B are simple examples of buildings designed in the Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style. Building B was originally constructed as a loading canopy which was later used as a garage for truck storage, and was later infilled to its current appearance. The buildings incorporate architectural features such as minimal decorative detailing, largely simple rectangular forms, horizontal parapets and concrete pylons. Modifications to both of the buildings have altered their original design, workmanship, and materials, as well as their function.

All of the original doors and windows have been removed, and contemporary metal industrial type windows have either been installed, many in the original openings, and one large new window in a former garage door opening on the west facade. Additionally, brick infill of door openings has occurred, at an original garage door opening (now the main entrance) at the two original door openings of the storefronts, and at a man door on the west elevation of Building A; and the original open bays of Building B have been entirely infilled. Furthermore, repairs were made to the brick parapet that are clearly visible on the west facade. These areas of Building A were repaired/infilled with City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 84 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 salvaged brick to match, but exhibit differences in brick color, mortar application, and brickwork with lower quality craftsmanship than that of the original construction.

Furthermore, the brick infill and repairs were also sandblasted, so they must have been completed before the last sandblasting campaign in 1997. The building’s original brick masonry has been painted at least once and sandblasted at least twice according to building permits. This has destroyed all of the brick’s original hard-fired finish and mortar pointing which has resulted in brick-and-mortar deterioration. At least one pulverized brick was observed in the interior east corner office of the building. Later modifications include a second-story addition at the northern extent of Building A that has altered the scale and massing of Building A when viewed from the public right of way along 7th Street, and a one-story concrete wing on the west elevation at the north corner of Building A that has altered the original appearance of the west elevation of Building A when viewed from the public right of way on Colorado Avenue or 6th Court.

Two of the four elevations of Building B have been altered from their original appearance by an addition to the north end of the building, and by alteration and infill of the east façade to adapt the building’s use for offices. Furthermore, the two buildings are not rare examples of the commercial vernacular building type, as shown in Table 4 above. There are many such examples in the City of Santa Monica that have more architectural merit and retain higher integrity, such as 174 Kinney Street, a similar reinforced brick warehouse built in 1926. There are two examples of utilitarian industrial buildings in the Santa Monica inventory, 2920 and 2944 Nebraska Avenue; 2920 Nebraska Avenue appears to be a similar example to the subject property that was constructed in 1946.

Therefore, the subject building does not appear to satisfy this criterion as a rare, extant example of a Commercial/Industrial Vernacular historical property type.

Buildings A and B do not appear to be eligible as examples of a method of construction.

Building A was constructed with groutlock brick, as indicated on the original building permit. It is possible that Building B, which was originally constructed as a canopy and was later used as a garage for truck storage, was also constructed with groutlock brick based upon physical observation of the brickwork by ESA, and documentary evidence as the architect of record, Frederic C. Barienbrock was evidently familiar with the building system as evidenced by his participation in a groutlock brick competition as included in a 1934 newspaper article. Groutlock brick was a construction method that included reinforced metal rebar within specially designed interlocking masonry bricks, which promised to be earthquake proof due to increased strength provided by internal reinforcement.123 Simons Brick Company, the company that produced groutlock brick operated from 1906 to about 1952. While Building A of the subject property was documented on the original building permit as constructed of groutlock brick and concrete framing, our research does not indicate groutlock brick became a highly utilized, important construction material in Santa Monica as a result of its application at this building. Further, the use of reinforced brick masonry has been recorded internationally for over 175 years, and has been adapted to a wide variety of applications throughout its history, and as such groutlock brick was just one reinforced brick masonry system of many that have been implemented over time.124 The project was not published in any architectural or engineering journals, nor was its construction method mentioned in any 123 “Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934. 124 Brick Industry Association, Technical Notes 17 – Reinforced Brick Masonry – Introduction Reissued Oct. 1996 (https://www.gobrick.com/docs/default-source/read-research-documents/technicalnotes/17-reinforced-brickmasonry---introduction.pdf?sfvrsn=0, accessed 10/15/2021).

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 85 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 local or regional newspapers.125 Although other examples of reinforced brick masonry walls with concrete framing are found in Santa Monica, this was a ubiquitous construction method in southern California and in the United States and the use of reinforced brick and concrete framing at the subject property did not have a significant influence on the local, regional or national building industry. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.

9.56.100(a) (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.

The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. Building A is not a significant or representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect, as there was no one listed for the design of the building on the original building permit.

Santa Monica architect Frederic C. Barienbrock was listed as the architect on the original 1941 building permit for Building B, which was originally permitted and constructed as a canopy structure, which was later converted into a garage for truck storage. While Barienbrock was an established architect by the 1940s, he was best known for his civic and institutional work, some of which still remains today including the Modern style Santa Monica County Courthouse, and the vernacular Modern apartment building at 827- 829 6th Street. As originally constructed, Building B included three brick exterior walls, with a fourth elevation comprised of open bay for truck parking. The building has been highly modified over time and is not a significant or representative example of the work of Frederic C. Barienbrock. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion.

9.56.100(a) (6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City.

The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. At the time of construction, the subject property was built as a distribution center for alcoholic beverages, in the industrial part of the City, among several large plants and other commercial businesses and the building fell into a common pattern of early 20th century industrial development.

The brick structures are located on a corner of a commercial-industrial area, abut a busy thoroughfare and are both largely obscured by bushes. It is a simple, utilitarian property with few distinguishing features other than its concrete pylons. As such, the subject property does not appear to have a unique location, singular physical characteristic, nor is an established visual feature of a neighborhood or of the City. 125 A search of the Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals for articles or publications about groutlock brick and 631 Colorado Avenue yielded no results. A search for “reinforced brick” more generally yielded two articles: “Products and Practice: R-B-M Reinforced Brick Masonry,” Architectural Forum, January 1939, 367–70 and “Reinforced Brick Walls for Surface Shelters: Home Security Bulletin,” Builder, January 1941, 243–45. Several other articles on the work of Modern architect Eladio Dieste in Uruguay also appeared in this search. None of these articles appear to be directly relevant to groutlock brick or the property at 631 Colorado Avenue.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 86 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Structure of Merit

9.56.080 (a) The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory The resource meets this criterion as it is identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.

9.56.080 (b) The Structure is a minimum of 50- years of age and meets one of the following criteria.

The resource meets this criterion as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84 years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941, making it 80 years of age.

9.56.080 (b)(1) The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historic type.

The resource does not appear to meet this criterion. The structure is not a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historic type. The resource does not have any distinctive design details and ornamental details are limited to concrete scoring at Building A, and concrete stepped pyramidal capitals at both buildings. Furthermore, it is a common form for Commercial/Industrial Vernacular buildings built in the early 20th century, and is not a unique design or type, nor does it have any distinctive details. There are also many examples of Commercial Vernacular buildings in Santa Monica that are better-designed, as previously discussed above and included in Table 4 above.

9.56.080 (b)(2) The Structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent.

The resource does not meet this criterion. As stated previously, the structure is not a rare example of the building type, as discussed above and illustrated in Table 4 above. There are many such examples in the City of Santa Monica, specifically in the Main Street Commercial District as well as 174 Kinney Street (1926), and 2920 Nebraska Avenue (1946).

9.56.080 (b)(3) The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.

The resource does not appear to meet this criterion as it is not a contributor to a potential historic district.

Historic Integrity
As Buildings A and B have consistently been owned by the same owners, and both buildings have similarly undergone modifications at the same time. Alterations most notably occurred upon ownership changes when the buildings were modified to suit new uses. As originally constructed, Building A included two storefronts within three bays along Colorado Avenue, while Building B included multiple open bays in order to serve as a truck garage.

The subject property retains integrity of location, as the buildings have not moved over time. The historic setting has been altered as the original entrance to the subject property was formerly along Colorado Avenue; and as the early auxiliary buildings that were once a part of the A. B. C.

Distributing Company have since been demolished; and as a new entrance was created in the City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 87 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 western portion of the site, that also includes a new metal automated gate, whereas the original entrance to the subject property was off Colorado Avenue. An additional metal gate with new concrete pylons and a lower concrete wall stretches across the south side of the property from Building A to Building B, and mature plants cover the formerly exposed Colorado Avenue elevations of both buildings. Further, the surrounding setting has been altered with the demolition of smaller buildings, and the construction of large multi-family apartment buildings. The subject property is presently bordered by mixed development: multi-family housing to the north and east, and both large- and small-scale commercial developments and some multi-family housing to the south, and west. A low-rise brick commercial building is located on the lot immediately to the east of the subject property on the east corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street. To the west of the subject property, across the alley, is a block of low-rise commercial buildings on Colorado Avenue that extends to the corner of Colorado Avenue and 6th Street. As such, the subject property lacks integrity of property setting.

The original design of both buildings has been substantially altered as all of the fenestration has been either replaced or altered, the entrances have been reconfigured, and the exterior and interior surfaces sandblasted twice. All that remains intact is the brick, parapet (repaired), and arched wood truss roof. The original wood and glass storefronts on the south facade located along Colorado Avenue have been removed and infilled with industrial type metal windows that substantially detract from the original design intent of Building A, and a new recessed entrance in a former garage opening was constructed toward the center of Building A’s west elevation. A contemporary addition at the ground-floor and at the second floor has altered the foot print and massing of Building A’s design.

Building B was originally designed as an open-bay garage structure, and underwent later changes to include sliding doors, and later, to include an addition at the north end, expanding the building’s footprint. The east façade was reconfigured to adapt the building for office use, and a new entrance and windows were installed, and the entire building covered in smooth concrete stucco to create a uniform modern industrial look.

As a result of substantial alterations, the subject property lacks integrity of design from its original construction.

Furthermore, as originally constructed, Building A was built utilizing –the groutlock reinforced brick system. It is also possible that groutlock brick was also used at Building B. However, heavy sandblasting of the original bricks and mortar pointing (exterior and interior), infill former door and garage openings, and parapet repairs, have substantially detracted from the integrity of materials and workmanship of the subject property. Additionally, nearly the entire exterior of Building B has been covered in smooth stucco leaving only a portion of the brick surface visible at the south elevation. On the interior, the wood trusses and open-beam ceilings have also been sandblasted and no longer have their original sawn wood finish. Therefore, the subject property lacks integrity of materials and workmanship.

However, the subject property still retains its overall historic feeling and association with the 1930s commercial/industrial development along Colorado Avenue from the post-Depression, preWorld War II years, although as noted, the property is not a unique example of such development.

Overall, the subject property lacks historic integrity.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 88 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Further, there is no remaining historic significance for the former structures that were once occupied and owned by previous owner, Etta Moxley, as all previous improvements associated with her life and ownership of the subject property were demolished prior to the construction of the existing improvements.

Conclusion
In summary, based on current research and the above assessment, the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to meet any of the City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria

9.56.100(a)(1) through (a)(6) as discussed above. However, it does meet Structure of Merit criterion 9.56.080(a) as it was previously identified in the City’s Historic Inventory. It also meets the Structure of Merit 50-year age criterion 9.56.080(b) as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84 years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941 making it 80 years of age.

However, the subject property does not meet criteria 9.56.080 (b)(1) through (3) as discussed above, and therefore is ineligible as a Structure of Merit.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 89 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 References
“A. B. C. Day Oct. 6th,” Newspaper advertisement, The Napa Valley Register, October 5, 1933. “A Modular House by Frederic Barienbrock, Architect and Eugene Memmier, Designer.” Arts & Architecture, April 1952, Vol. 69, No. 4, 30-31.
“Aerophysics Development Corporation. A Studebaker-Packard Subsidiary: Santa Monica, Calif.” Jet Propulsion Archive, Volume 26, Number 5, May 1956.

American Institute of Architects, Application for Membership, “Frederic Charles Barienbrock,” Application No. 4070, 1926. [AIA Historical Directory:
https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/].
“Awards Made in Residential Design Contest,” Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1934.

Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: A Pictorial History of Santa Monica, Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga. Santa Monica, California: Hennessey + Ingalls, 2001.
“Beach City Growing at Rapid Rate,” Los Angeles Times, January 21, 1923. “Beautiful Bay District Grows,” Los Angeles Times, August 16, 1925.

Certificate of Dissolution, Corporation Number D-0342151, Keystone Body Shop, Inc., signed by directors H. George Nojima and Joanne Nojima on October 10, 1997, and filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of California on October 27, 1997.

Charleston, James H. “Looff’s Hippodrome,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, November 1984.
“East Side Adds New Plant,” Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1933.

Encyclopedia Britannica. Online Version. https://www.britannica.com “Funeral Services Held for Glen A. Moyer,” Mirror News, January 17, 1951. “$520,000 High School Building Completed,” Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1956. “Glen Alvin Moyer.” U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards.” 1917-1918, Ancestry.com. “Glen Alvin Moyer,” U.S., World War II Draft Registration Cards, 1942, Ancestry.com. “Glenn A (Zora) mgr A B C Distributing Co.” Bay Cities Directory, Published by Los Angeles Directory Co. 1938.
“Glen Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census. 1930.

Gottfried, Herbert and Jan Jennings. American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960.

New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2009.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 90 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 Hand, Ryan. “Aztec Brewing Company,” Chicano Park Museum website, https://www.chicanoparkmuseum.org/logan-heights-archival-project/aztec-brewery/, n.d.

Historic Resources Group and Architectural Resources Group. “City of Santa Monica: Historic Resources Inventory Update, Historic Context Statement.” Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department, 2018.

IMDb, “Michael Bay: Biography,” IMDb website,
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000881/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm, accessed 10-13-21. “John A. Moyer.” U. S. Federal Census, 1940.

Kaplan, Sheldon. “A Look Back: San Diego Beer History from 1868 to 1953,” West Coaster, September 13, 2018.

Liwag, Ernie and Matthew Schiff. “San Diego’s Craft Brew Culture.” The Journal of San Diego History, 59, nos. 1 and 2, Winter/Spring 2013.

López López, Margarita. “Restoring History, Brick By Brick,” Latinx Talk, 2020.

Moore, Mark A. The Jan & Dean Record: A Chronology of Studio Sessions, Live Performances and Chart Positions, 2016.
“More New Industries,” Los Angeles Times, December 9, 1904. “Nation Consumes Floods of Beer on ‘Opening Day,” Daily News, April 8, 1933.

Nelson White Architectural History + Preservation. “Villa Ruchello: A History, 609 E. Channel Road, Santa Monica, CA.” Prepared for the Agency, n.d.
“News Behind the News,” The Pasadena Post, March 22, 1934.

Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, December 20, 1925.

Newspaper Advertisement, Los Angeles Times, March 19, 1933.

Newspaper Entry, Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1903.

Parrish, John, “The 1933 Long Beach Earthquake and The Field Act, Improving the Design and Building Standards for California Schools.” California Department of Conservation, n.d.

PCR Services and Historic Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Historic Preservation Element, 2002.

Pitt, Leonard and Dale Pitt. Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County.

Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1997. “Prohibition, United States History [1920-1933]: Repeal,” Encyclopedia Britannica website, https://www.britannica.com/event/Prohibition-United-States-history-1920-1933/Repeal. “Santa Monica Bay New Scene of Great Activity,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1911.

City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report
631 Colorado Avenue 91 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 “Santa Monica Dedicates New County Building,” Los Angeles Times, July 28, 1951.

Scott, Paul A. Santa Monica: A History on the Edge (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2004). "The Pasadena News: Proceedings of the Council in Regular Session," Los Angeles Evening Express, February 22, 1892.

Turner, Fred. “Revisiting Earthquake Lessons –Unreinforced Masonry Buildings.” Structural Engineers Association of California, 2020.

Turner, Fred. “Seventy Years of the Riley Act and its effect on California’s Building Stock.” 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 2004. “Unique Brick Stirs Interest: Inventor Explains New Masonry Style,” Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1933.

Attachment A
Professional Qualifications

Margarita Jerabek-Bray, Ph.D., has 32 years of professional practice in the United States with an extensive background in historic preservation, architectural history, and historical archaeology. She specializes in American Architecture, Modern and Contemporary Architecture, Urban History and Design, and Cultural Landscape, and is a regional expert on Southern California architecture. Her qualifications and experience meet and exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in History, Architectural History, and Archaeology. Margarita assists clients with strategic advice and historic preservation consultation services to support project success. Highly experienced and solution oriented, she provides historic resources management and preservation consultation services for all stages of project development, from due diligence through planning and design, to preparation of required documentation for environmental review and permitting. She provides expert historic preservation services for environmental review and, when necessary, implements mitigation requirements and preservation treatment measures.

Margarita is a highly experienced and respected authority in the evaluation, management and treatment of historic properties, and is expert in the preparation of legally defensible documentation for compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and local ordinances and planning requirements. She has managed and conducted hundreds of projects for public and private clients throughout California and the United States, and as primary investigator she has authored numerous historic resources technical reports, plan reviews, HABS/HAER/HALS reports, salvage inventories, rehabilitation plans, relocation plans, construction monitoring reports, interpretive programs, as well as curated exhibits, provided input for interpretive websites and assisted in the development of content for documentary films.

Margarita Directs ESA’s Southern California Historic Resources Practice, leading a team of historians, architectural historians, and preservation specialists who are a part of ESA’s more than 30-member Cultural Resources Group. She has conducted a broad range of planning and technical studies for development projects throughout Los Angeles County. Her relevant on-call contracts with various municipalities and agencies throughout the Southland and her West Hollywood experience, including historic resource assessments for commercial, industrial, studio, and residential resources, is summarized below.

EDUCATION
Ph.D., Art History,
University of California,
Los Angeles
M.A., Architectural
History, School of
Architecture, University
of Virginia
Certificate of Historic
Preservation, School of
Architecture, University
of Virginia
B.A., Art History,
Oberlin College
32 YEARS

EXPERIENCE
AWARDS
2020 Gold Nugget Merit
Award, PCBC, Best
Rehabilitation Project
2018 Merit Award,
Environmental Analysis
Document, Association
of Environmental
Professionals
2016 Preservation
Design Award,
Interpretive Exhibit,
California Preservation
Foundation
2014 Preservation
Award, Los Angeles
Conservancy
2014 Westside Prize,
Westside Urban Forum
2014 Design Award:

Westside Urban Forum
2012 Preservation
Design Award,
California Preservation
Foundation
Relevant Experience
Agency On-Call Preservation Contracts. Margarita currently manages ESA’s on‐ call preservation consulting contracts with the City of Santa Monica, City of Hermosa Beach, and serves as principal investigator for historic resources for our on-call contracts with the City of Los Angeles’s Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering, and Los Angeles Unified School District.

Policy Documents. Margarita has contributed her preservation planning expertise to several projects including Lincoln Specific Plan (Whittier), and CPA7 (Culver Studios). Her knowledge of preservation policy and law is also demonstrated in the Citywide Survey and General Plan Update completed by ESA for the City of Hermosa Beach, and the Culver City General Plan Update.

City of Santa Monica On-Call Historic Preservation Services, Santa Monica, CA.

Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. Dr. Jerabek is the primary point of contact and contract administrator for ESA’s on-call contract for historic preservation services with the City of Santa Monica. Under her 12-year tenure, ESA’s historic division has prepared hundreds of studies including preliminary assessments, landmark assessments, structure of merit assessments, Secretary of the Interior’s Standards plan reviews and preservation recommendations, landscape assessments, character-defining features reports and CEQA impacts analyses.

Historic Resources and Preservation Consultation Service for Santa Monica City Hall, City of Santa Monica, CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. Prepared a Section 106 Effects Evaluation report and provided mitigation services pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement for Structural Seismic Upgrades, ADA Improvements, Relocation of Wood Paneling, and Adaptive Re-use of the Historic Jail under a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). Dr. Jerabek was the primary point of contact, provided project management and agency coordination, and served as principal architectural historian for the project. ESA prepared a HABS report for the historic jail located in the northeast wing of City Hall; conducted Plan Reviews and provided preservation recommendations for the seismic upgrades; reviewed proposed ADA improvements and provided recommendations to avoid impacts; reviewed the wood paneling relocation plans and worked with the City to select a qualified master craftsman and conducted construction monitoring for the project; reviewed the jail rehabilitation project for conversion of the two-story jail into an IT Center and offices and provided design consultation for conformance with the Standards, including in-kind replacement of the historic windows; curated, designed and oversaw installation of an interpretive exhibit in the IT Center lobby. Follow-on services for the City included Preservation Consultation and Monitoring for restoration of the entrance to City Hall, and Paint Analysis and color recommendations for repainting City Hall. Dr. Jerabek also conducted a Landscape Analysis and provided Plan Reviews for the City’s Ken Genser Square and Tongva Park projects that received a 2014 Design Award from the Westside Urban Forum.

City of Hermosa Beach On-Call Historic Preservation Services. Project Director.

ESA has performed a number of surveys, Certificate of Appropriateness, and CEQA compliance reviews for historic structures while serving as a historic preservation consultant for the City of Hermosa Beach. Projects include historic resources surveys on three of the oldest commercial buildings in the downtown area of Hermosa Beach for the City of Hermosa Beach: Bank of America Building at 90 Pier Avenue, the Hermosa Hotel at 26 Pier Avenue, Art Deco-style Community Center, and the Neoclassical Revival-style Bijou Theatre located at

PROFESSIONAL

AFFILIATIONS
California Preservation
Foundation
Santa Monica
Conservancy
Society of Architectural
Historians, Life Member
American Institute of
Architects (AIA),
National Allied Member
Neutra Institute, Fellow
1221-1227 Hermosa Avenue. ESA prepared a comprehensive assessment of each building, and reviewed all plans for compliance under the local preservation ordinance and CEQA, which stipulate the use of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as mitigation. Upon implementation of rehabilitation work on the Bijou, ESA also monitored all construction work until final completion. ESA was later commissioned to undertake a Certificate of Appropriateness and CEQA compliance review of interior tenant improvements to the Bijou Theater for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. ESA has carried out site reviews of the work to examine the scope and nature of selective demolition and new construction, provided guidance on technical preservation matters, and undertook a substantial completion review of the works. Most recently, ESA provided project review for tenant improvements, and conducting construction monitoring and oversight for restoration of ornamental plasterwork in the Bijou Building. Additionally, ESA provided paint analysis and restoration treatment recommendations for the Art Deco-style Hermosa Beach Community Center.

Hermosa Beach General Plan Update and EIR, City of Hermosa Beach, CA. Project Manager for Cultural Resources/Principal Architectural Historian. Managed ESA’s Cultural Resources scope of work and collaborated with Raimi & Associates and PMC to provide consulting services to the City of Hermosa Beach for preparation of a Comprehensive Integrated General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan Update and EIR Focused on Sustainability and Low Carbon Future.

Directed city-wide reconnaissance survey to identify potentially eligible historical resources. Developed historic contexts and themes for the City’s historical resources. Reviewed and provided recommendations for revisions to the preservation ordinance. Provided input for preparation of historic preservation goals and policies for the General Plan update. Managed preparation of the cultural resources technical report, and oversaw preparation of the historic resources, archaeological and paleontological discussions and analyses for the EIR.

City of Long Beach, Environmental Consultation and HABS Documentation.

Margarita has assisted the City of Long Beach by preparing documentation for the City Hall and Library Complex HABS and associated landscape plaza; she provided historic resources support for the City’s EIR, and prepared documentation for the Atlantic Theater HABS and an Interpretive Exhibit for installation in the new North Long Beach Public Library.

City of Whittier, Preservation Consultation Services for the Public Library Rehabilitation Project. Margarita lead a Historical Resources Assessment and Impacts Analysis and provided design consultation for rehabilitation of the Modern-style Whittier Library. Constructed in 1958, the property is significant for its association with Mid-Century Modernism, postwar period institutional properties, and architect William Henry Harrison. ESA found that the library possesses sufficient historical significance and architectural merit to convey its significant as an individual resource under National Register Criteria A and C.

Margarita’s role on the project was to direct and manage the ESA project team, coordinate with the architect and City, provide review and internal quality assurance/quality control to the ESA team in the preparation of both the Historic Resources Assessment to evaluate the significance and integrity of the building, as well as for the plan review that was conducted to evaluate the proposed project’s conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and hearing attendance. ESA is currently completing a HABS report as baseline documentation for the rehabilitation project.

City of Burbank, Historic Preservation Consultation Services. Margarita directed preparation of ESA’s historic resources technical report and CEQA impacts analysis, and prepared the historic section of the IS/MND for the Burbank Reservoir No. 1 Replacement Project, which evaluated the eligibility of the Burbank Reservoir facility and analyzed the potential impacts of the Project for compliance with the CEQA. Margarita directed preparation of ESA’s historic resources technical report and historic resources EIR section for the Burbank Bob Hope Airport Replacement Terminal Project EIR, which evaluated the eligibility of the buildings and structures for eligibility as a potential historic district and as individual resources, and analyzed the potential impacts of the Project for compliance with the CEQA. While the Airport did not appear eligible as a historic district, ESA evaluated 11 hangars and buildings over 45 years in age as potential individual resources. The majority of the buildings and structures were found ineligible, however, Hangars 1 and 2, which are the earliest intact hangars, were recommended eligible for the National Register, California Register, and for local listing. Under contract with the City of Burbank, Margarita managed and conducted a historic resources impacts analysis and plan review for Rehabilitation of the Casting Building as a Fitness Center, by Marmol Radziner and Associates, AIA, located in the Disney Studio’s Historic District. The Project repurposed and expanded the existing 4,000 square feet Casting Building on the Studio Lot by about 8,700 square feet for an Employee Fitness Center adjacent to the historic Commissary. Margarita provided design consultation for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to rehabilitate the Casting Building as a fitness center. To reduce potential impacts, Margarita prepared a HABS report to record the Casting Building in professional large format HABS photographs and a narrative history and description of the building.

SoCal Historic Resource Surveys. Margarita has managed and conducted several large historic resources survey projects including three surveys for the Adelante‐Eastside (Boyle Heights), Wilshire Center/Koreatown, and Normandie 5 redevelopment areas that were among the earliest to utilize SurveyLA tools and methods and to employ the Multiple Property Documentation Approach, working in close collaboration with the Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources.

These surveys have been incorporated into the Los Angeles Citywide Survey.

Other notable accomplishments include Hermosa Beach Citywide Survey, and Santa Monica North of Wilshire Survey for which she served as Project Director.

Mills Act Applications and Architectural Conservation. Margarita has assisted applicants in Los Angeles, Beverly Hills and West Hollywood with the preparation of Mills Act Applications. Her expertise in the preservation of Modern architecture is represented by the Landmark nomination and Mills Act Application for Victor Gruen’s Rosenstiel Residence, 1210 Coldwater Canyon Drive in Beverly Hills. Her forward-looking landmark nomination for a Mills Act application for the Post-Modern Sun Tech Townhomes in Santa Monica, illustrates her broad ranging knowledge in resources of the recent past. Her conservation and interpretation skills are represented by the award-winning Montebello Home Savings and Loan project that involved cleaning and restoration of the historic bank building and art works designed by Millard Sheets Studio, and design and installation of a 5-panel interpretive exhibit and rediscovery of a lost tapestry originally designed for the building, for which she received a California Preservation Design Award, 2016. Her in-depth and award-winning preservation work includes the RMS Queen Mary Survey of Fine and Decorative Art, the RMS Queen Mary Historic Structure Report, and the Queen Mary Conservation Management Plan (California Preservation Foundation Preservation Design Award, 2012).

Environmental Documentation and Compliance with CEQA. Margarita has prepared a full range of CEQA documentation for historic preservation projects throughout greater Los Angeles including Categorical Exemption Letters, assessments and plan reviews for Certificates of Appropriateness, Initial Studies/MNDs, Focused EIRs, and EIRs. A partial list of important environmental documents for projects in Los Angeles involving substantial historical analysis completed by Dr. Jerabek-Bray includes the LAX Specific Plan Amendment Study EIR, Academy of Motion Pictures Project EIR, The New Century Plan EIR for Westfield, Washington Square EIR, Sunset Doheny Mixed‐ Use EIR, One Santa Fe Mixed‐Use MND, Lindbrook & Gayley Mixed‐Use MND, 6230 Sunset Mixed-Use Project EIR, Hollywood Center EIR, Palladium EIR, Sunset and Crescent Heights EIR, and Yucca and Argyle EIR. In Santa Monica she contributed to the Fairmont Miramar Hotel & Bungalows Revitalization Plan EIR, St. John’s Health Center Development Agreement Addendum EIR, Santa Monica Pier Gangway Project and Phase 4 Structural Upgrade, and CEQA support for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District-Wide Facilities Plan. In Pasadena her experience includes the Glenarm Power Plant Repowering Project EIR. In Long Beach she provided expertise and support for the Art Exchange Redevelopment Project EIR support, and the Golden Shore Master Plan EIR.

Educational Facilities and University Campuses, CA. Principal Investigator/Project Manager. Dr. Jerabek-Bray has conducted numerous evaluations of school and university campuses throughout Southern California.

Under ESA’s on-call contract with the Los Angeles Unified School District, she has managed and completed over 30 task orders involving historic resources, including campus assessments, character-defining features analysis, and project reviews for compliance with CEQA. For example, Margarita managed and conducted preparation of a historic resources technical report for Jefferson High School and provided preservation design consultation for this site-specific school upgrade and modernization project under the District’s School Upgrade Program (SUP). The proposed project included the rehabilitation of existing character-defining buildings and landscapes, demolition and removal of noncontributing buildings, and construction of new facilities. Rehabilitation work included modernization and seismic upgrade to existing buildings. Because the school site is considered a historical resource under CEQA, Margarita provided design consultation for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to reduce potential project impacts to less than significant. Once project plans were developed, Margarita oversaw review of the proposed project by ESA historic staff and completed impacts analysis findings regarding potential project impacts to identified historical resources that would be affected by the project. Margarita also provided project management, oversight and contributed to the preparation of CEQA and NEPA procedural guidelines to help the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to comply with the historical resources requirements of CEQA and NEPA, and to implement practical approaches to preserving culturally significant resources whenever possible. The LAUSD’s Office of Environmental Health and Safety requested the preparation of CEQA and NEPA guidelines, in addition to design guidelines and treatment approaches, specifically in support of the School Upgrade Program, and generally to guide ongoing repair and maintenance work on these sites. The guidelines build upon the District’s ongoing efforts to identify historical resources, including the recently updated Historic Context Statement, survey of 55 campuses, creation of an ArcGIS-compatible database with current and previous survey results, and a Historic Resources Inventory. Dr. Jerabek-Bray worked with LAUSD and facilities staff to determine the scope, class, and type of projects that would impact historical resources and need to be addressed in the procedural guidelines. As a final work product, Dr. Jerabek-Bray authored a CEQA and NEPA procedural guidelines document that included the following sections: introduction, regulatory setting, environmental setting, project description, management and planning guidelines, procedural low charts for CEQA and NEPA/Section 106, and standard mitigation measures.

Margarita served as the project manager and principal investigator for the district-wide cultural resources survey for Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD) which included the evaluation of 70 potentially eligible District school facilities for listing in the National Register and California Register, and included preservation guidelines for the district-wide facilities modernization program.

She conducted CEQA Compliance reviews for select projects including rehabilitation of Long Beach Polytechnic Auditorium and Woodrow Wilson Auditorium. Margarita completed a district-wide historic resources survey for the Santa Monica Unified School District, and provided preservation consultation for modernization and additions to selected school sites.

As part of the larger USC Master Plan Project Margarita prepared a historic resources analysis for the USC Student Union Project IS/MND evaluating the Formalist Modern Norman Topping Center and impacts to the adjacent Commons Building and surrounding historic district. She also prepared a HABS report for the Schoenburg Institute at USC. Other HABS reports for educational facilities include the Gymnasium at the University of La Verne, and the Administration Building at Harvard-Westlake Academy.

Harkham Hillel Hebrew Academy Renovation and Expansion Project, Historic Resources Assessment and Impacts Analysis, Beverly Hills, CA. Principal Investigator/Project Manager. Margarita directed the historic significance analysis of two school buildings—the original Oakhurst Building designed by master architect Sydney Eisenshtat in 1963 in the Modern Style and the Doheny Building constructed in 1989 and designed by Harshad Patel. She oversaw preparation of an intensive-level Historic Resource Assessment Report for the two buildings in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s requirements for preparing historic resource evaluation reports. ESA found that the Oakhurst Building is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources under criteria A/1 and C/3, but it did not meet the requirements for local eligibility under the City of Beverly Hills criteria.

The client plans to rehabilitate the existing buildings, which would be updated for current use and continue to function as school buildings. The proposed project would add two additions to the rear of the property in order to accommodate additional classroom and gymnasium space. Margarita oversaw preparation of a character-defining features analysis and provided design consultation for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to reduce potential project impacts to less than significant. She also conducted an impacts analysis of the proposed project and prepared a preservation plan that was incorporated into the project as a project design feature to ensure the project would meet the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The project has been reviewed and approved by the City of Beverly Hills as an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Rehabilitation of the Dunbar Hotel, 4255 S. Central Avenue, Los Angeles, CA.

Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. As a Project Manager, Dr.

Jerabek-Bray directed a careful space-by-space inventory of character-defining features (including all windows) associated with the Dunbar Hotel’s period of significance (1928-1970). This included photo documentation of each feature along with a written description, condition, and treatment options. ESA recorded 425 character- defining features and spaces into an electronic database. Dr. Jerabek was principal author for the rehabilitation report that included a project description, methods, historical background and construction history, accompanied by historic photographs, an architectural description of existing conditions, a maintenance plan for high-integrity features, a restoration plan for low-integrity features, and a replication plan. The written report also provided a list of any issues and concerns that should be taken into account during the building rehabilitation and for the long-term preservation of the Dunbar Hotel. The hotel reopened in June 2013 as a senior living facility amidst local fanfare, “An encore for the historic Dunbar Hotel,” Los Angeles Times, June 11, 2013. The project was the recipient of the 2014 Westside Prize from the Westside Urban Forum and recipient of a 2014 Preservation Award from the L.A. Conservancy.

Historical Resources and Preservation Consulting Services for The Culver Studios, Culver City, CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. Since late 2014, Dr. Jerabek-Bray and ESA’ s Historic Resources Practice has provided a suite of services including historical resources evaluation, environmental review and documentation, and historic preservation consultation services for the CPA-6 Specific Plan, and the CPA-7 Specific Plan known as “The Innovation Plan,” a blueprint for the future of The Culver Studios. Dr. Jerabek is the point of contact for historic services, attends client and city meetings, attends public hearings, provides technical direction and advice, directs and conducts the preparation of report deliverables, directs and conducts construction monitoring, and acts as the City’s preservation officer for the Innovation Plan.

The Plan will transform the 14.3-acre Studio into a new media production hub, keeping the Studio on the vanguard of changing production practices in the entertainment industry. The Culver Studios is a motion picture studio in downtown Culver City established in 1919 by Thomas Ince, and eventually became the home of RCA, one of the “Big Eight” major motion picture companies in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The Studio was the production site of historically significant motion pictures like King Kong, Gone with the Wind, and Citizen Kane. The Innovation Plan will restore and re-group historic structures adjacent to the Mansion, build new support buildings near existing historic sound-stages, and establish a creative campus in the core of the 14.3-acre studio lot. The Studio’s 100-year history will be showcased, historic bungalows will be preserved, and original landscaping in front of the Mansion will be restored. The Innovation Plan balances the need to provide state-of-the-art studio facilities, while retaining the Studio’s unique ambiance and prominent place in the community. ESA surveyed and evaluated the Studio’s historical resources, provided input to the development of The Plan to reduce impacts to historical resources, completed HABS report for Bungalows S, T, U and V, prepared a Relocation and Rehabilitation Plan for the bungalows, conducted construction monitoring for relocation of the bungalows, conducted plan reviews for tenant improvements to the Mansion and associated historic buildings in the historic core, conducted a landscape analysis, and provided documentation and input for the landscape restoration. ESA also prepared the environmental documentation for The Innovation Plan EIR, and is implementing the mitigation program for historical resources including HABS documentation of Stages 2/3/4 and a salvage program, preparation of a preservation plan for the Studio, and development of an interpretive program for the Studio.

Historic Resources and Preservation Consultation Services for the Redevelopment of the Fred C. Nelles State Reform School, Whittier, CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian. The Fred C. Nelles Correctional Facility is a listed California State Landmark, and is significant as the state’s first reform school for boys. The 1920s-1930s Tudor Revival-style campus is currently vacant and will soon be redeveloped as a multi-use residential and commercial project, “The Groves”, entitled under the certified Lincoln Specific Plan EIR. For over a decade, Dr. Jerabek-Bray has been providing Historic Resources and Preservation Consultation services to the developer, Brookfield Homes. Work began with preparation of a historic resources assessment report to clarify the regulatory status and assessed the potential eligibility of a historic district. No district was found to be present, but eight individual resources were identified. Margarita conducted an opportunities and constraints analysis and provided input to the developer on managing impacts to historic resources and the feasibility of adaptive reuse of the individual buildings for the project.

She directed preparation of feasibility studies for the EIR, that were peer reviewed by the City’s consultants. She provided peer review of the Lincoln Plan EIR on behalf of the developer, and attended city meetings and hearings for the EIR. Once the EIR was certified, she worked with the developer’s architect to prepare rehabilitation plans for the individual resources to be retained and adaptively reused. The rehabilitation plans were peer reviewed by the City and the City’s preservation consultant. She directed ESA’s historic team in the completion of a HABS/HALS for the campus, with photography by Positive Image. She also worked with Eye-Glass Productions on a documentary film, and oral histories. Dr. Jerabek-Bray assisted the client to implement a full suite of mitigation measures including a heritage trail, a signage program, oral histories, salvage program, and construction monitoring for rehabilitation historic buildings. She recently completed consultation services and construction monitoring for adaptive reuse of the school’s Commissary as a community center (The Commons), which is the first historic building to be restored. The Commons project received a Gold Nugget merit award (2020) for best rehabilitation project from Pacific Coast Builders Conference (PCBC).

Home Savings and Loan Art and Architecture Conservation Services, Interpretive Exhibit, Montebello, CA. Project Manager/Principal Investigator. Margarita provided project management and oversight for the conservation work of the art and architecture and an interpretive exhibit for the Montebello branch of Home Savings and Loan Association. Constructed in 1973, the Montebello branch was designed by Millard Sheets (1907–1989), an accomplished, nationally prominent artist and designer, with integrated art works by the Millard Sheets Design Company. The building and art works were preserved in preparation for the building’s new use as a medical office by PIH Health. ESA provided oversight for the conservation work undertaken by Preservation Arts.

Additionally, Margarita assisted with the development of a project schedule, conducted conservation monitoring and documentation, and provided project oversight during the implementation of the conservation project to ensure that the cleaning and repair of the art works and exterior architectural materials was conducted in accordance with accepted standards for art and architectural conservation work, that the work completed is of acceptable quality, and that the project stayed on schedule and within budget. After the conservation work was completed, she oversaw the development of an interpretive exhibit to beautify the interior and protect the building’s important art, architecture, and history. The exhibit contains professionally mounted permanent narrative panels and photographic enlargements with captions illustrating the key information about the Montebello Branch and its historic use. One of the highlights of the interpretive exhibit is a reproduction of the original tapestry hung its original location for which ESA coordinated with the Mingei International Museum. The project was the recipient of a prestigious 2016 Preservation Design Award from the California Preservation Foundation.

Rancho Los Amigos South Campus EIR, County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Downey. CA. Project Manager/Principal Architectural Historian.

The County of Los Angeles (County) proposes redevelopment of a portion of the Rancho Los Amigos (RLA) South Campus which is located in the City of Downey.

The 74-acre RLA South Campus was the home of the “Los Angeles County Poor Farm” that was established in 1880s to provide room and board to indigent citizens in exchange for agricultural labor, then served as an infirmary and later evolved into a hospital facility in 1932. The RLA South Campus functioned as a major hospital complex from 1956 to the 1990s, when it was abandoned. The RLA South Campus is currently unoccupied and has been designated as the RLA Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places. The County is proposing redevelopment of a 21-acre portion of the RLA South Campus with County uses, including a Sheriff’s Station Crime Laboratory, Internal Services Department Headquarters, and Probation Department Headquarters. The project will include supporting parking and installation of utilities and other features on a site that has been abandoned for nearly 30 years. Building demolition and/or repurposing or relocation of existing buildings will be required. ESA lead the CEQA process on behalf of the County, including preparation of all technical studies in support of a full-scope EIR for the RLA South Campus Project. This included a Historic District Evaluation, archaeological surveys, traffic, water supply, arborist services, and all other CEQA-required topics. ESA is also served in an Executive Consultant role to the County, to advise on other potential future projects at the RLA Campus.

Alison Garcia Kellar
Senior Architectural Historian
Alison is a senior architectural historian with 9 years of professional and academic experience with a background in historic preservation, design, and museum collections. Her work with historic resources and cultural heritage in California has included managing and authoring historic resource assessments, National Register Nominations, historic structure reports, feasibility studies, Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit applications, in addition to extensive archival research and resource documentation. Alison applies her understanding of preservation design and historic interiors to inform impacts analyses of proposed development and recommendations for adaptive reuse.

Relevant Experience
Earl Carroll Theatre Historic Structure Report, Los Angeles, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Alison was the lead author of the Historic Structure Report created for the rehabilitation of the historic Earl Carroll Theatre in Hollywood.

Constructed in 1938, the property is significant for its association with owneroperator Earl Carroll, Hollywood nightlife, and architect Gordon B. Kaufmann. The theatre is a listed LA Historic-Cultural Monument and has been identified as eligible for the National Register. In recent years, the theatre has been rented by television network studios as sound stages, and as a result some public areas have been modified over time. Alison conducted supplemental in-depth research, participated with the creation of a detailed interior and exterior characterdefining features analysis, and assisted with the analysis of the theatre’s current condition. She developed recommendations in compliance with the SOI standards that sensitively guide stakeholders with ongoing preservation efforts.

Celes King III Swimming Pool Historic American Building Survey, Los Angeles, CA. Senior Architectural Historian, Deputy Project Manager. ESA was hired to conduct HABS documentation for the City of Los Angeles Park and Recreation Department. Constructed in the early 1960s, the Celes King III Swimming Pool was designed by architect Albert Criz in the Mid-Century Modern-Expressionist style.

Alison conducted in-depth research related to the history of the surrounding recreational complex, construction of the swimming pool, architect, and neighboring communities.

Alpine Village Preservation Consulting Services, Unincorporated Los Angeles County, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Alison was the lead author of the preliminary historical significance evaluation determination for the Alpine Village complex, a European-style shopping center located near Torrance, California.

Comprised of seven buildings constructed between 1969 and 1974, the complex is an example of an increasingly rare type of roadside architecture, and retains high historic integrity. Alison participated in conducting in-depth construction chronology research, determining the complex’s period of significance, and

EDUCATION
MS, Historic
Preservation, University
of Pennsylvania
BA, Design, University of
California at Davis
9 YEARS EXPERIENCE

PROFESSIONAL

AFFILIATIONS
Latinos in Heritage
Conservation, Education
Committee Member
California Preservation
Foundation, Member
Society of Architectural
Historians, Southern
California Chapter
Member
National Trust for
Historic Preservation,
Member
AWARDS
Albert Binder Travel
Fellowship, 2012 and
2013
PennDesign
Departmental Grant,
2011-2013
Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.

identified both interior and exterior character-defining features for the property to help guide ongoing planning efforts.

Whittier Public Library, Whittier CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Alison was the lead author of the Historic Resources Assessment which determined that the library is significant as an individual resource under National Register Criteria A and C. Constructed in 1958, the property is significant for its association with MidCentury Modernism, postwar period institutional properties, and architect William Henry Harrison. Alison assembled the construction history for the library and the Whittier Civic Center. She created a detailed character-defining features analysis identifying significant and contributing features at the property’s interior, exterior, and site. Alison coordinated with the project architect to ensure that the project met the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOI) in order to meet community’s contemporary needs while respecting the building’s historic character. Alison authored and oversaw the production of a HABS report to document the library building prior to selective demolition and project construction.

Benjamin Franklin Elementary School Historic Resource Evaluation and Mitigated Negative Declaration, San Diego, CA. Senior Architectural Historian.

Alison conducted an HRA for the 1930s, 40s, and 50s-designed elementary school campus. The property was found to be a historic district eligible for its association with the post-war development of the Kensington neighborhood, and for its association with two master San Diego architects. The proposed project was reviewed for compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and a CEQA analysis was performed, resulting in the Mitigation Measures and design considerations for future construction within the district. Alison authored and oversaw the production of a HABS report to document the campus and its buildings prior to project construction.
1202 3rd Street Promenade Preservation Consulting, Santa Monica, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. Constructed in 1949 as a JC Penny department store, the commercial building was designed in the Late Moderne style. ESA previously worked to produce a Landmark Assessment Report, and today, the property is recognized as a City of Santa Monica Landmark. Alison conducted a SOI Standards conformance review of a proposed tenant improvement project for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
1221 Hermosa Avenue Preservation Consulting, Hermosa Beach, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. ESA serves as a historic preservation consultant to the City of Hermosa Beach, and has a longstanding relationship with the building at 1221 Hermosa Boulevard, known as the Bijou Building. The building is a former historic theatre and bank designed in the NeoClassical Revival style, constructed in 1923.

Alison evaluated proposed tenant improvement modifications including the removal of non-original features and the retention of original features related to original theatre and bank uses. Alison has conducted design reviews which included an understanding of all modifications to the space over time, characterdefining features analyses, and reviews of proposed plans against CEQA thresholds and the SOI Standards for compliance. Alison is currently participating with overseeing the construction monitoring efforts for the theatre space as part of this ongoing project.

Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.

Universal Hilton Historic Resources Technical Report and Environmental Impacts Report for 555 W Universal Terrace Parkway, Los Angeles, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The Universal Hilton Hotel was designed by master architect, William L. Pereira in 1983 in the Postmodern style. As one of Pereira’s final commissions, the hotel building was originally part of a master plan and was designed to accommodate visitors to the expanding Universal Theme Parks.

Alison conducted in-depth architect and postmodern style research, and evaluated the property for historic significance as part of the Historic Resources Technical Report.

Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration Plan Program, Cultural Resource Assessment, Seal Beach, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The Los Cerritos Wetlands Restoration EIR project will reinstate historic wetlands to a previously developed oil rig/production site that has been in operation since the early 20th century. As part of the larger restoration plan program, ESA was hired to conduct a cultural resources study to observe, document, and prepare preliminary mitigation measures related to identified built environment resources. Alison collaborated with the archeology team during a field visit to identify potential sites for later investigative studies. She reviewed historic aerial photographs, and conducted research to determine the companies and general ages of oil-industry related infrastructure including oil rigs, operations sheds, and decommissioned tank farms. Mitigation recommendations presented for the structures included Historic Resource Assessment reports to be conducted in the future. 3325 Monterey Road CEQA Impacts Analysis and Design Review, San Marino, California. Senior Architectural Historian. A two-story Art Deco style single-family residence, constructed in 1927 in San Marino, California was determined to be a historic resource. Proposed modifications to the residence included a two-story rear addition and building rehabilitation. Alison assisted with preservation design consultation and conducted a plan review for conformance with the SOI Standards for the proposed project. She coordinated with the project architect to better convey preservation components of the proposed work into the drawing set for city review. The review required a character-defining features analysis to determine the level of significance of the remaining features.

Golden Gate Village Historic Resource Evaluation, Marin City, CA. Architectural Historian. The highly-intact Golden Gate Village low-income housing complex was constructed in 1958 to house many of the former Marinship workers and their families. Designed by prominent mid-century designers including Aaron G. Green, John Carl Warnecke, and Lawrence Halprin, the property serves as an example of a well-designed housing complex, significant as a product of post-war urban development and for its prominent mid-century designers. Alison performed the site visit and conducted research through local and private archival repositories, plan analysis, and interviews, to produce the report narrative and historic evaluation for the property. Today, the property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

McDonnell Hall/Our Lady of Guadalupe Chapel Historic Structure Report, San Jose, CA. Architectural Historian. Constructed as a parish church in 1914, the building moved to its current location in 1953. Here, the building served as a Alison Garcia Kellar, M.S.

newly formed Catholic Mission, the Center of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The property is associated with civil rights activist and labor rights leader Cesar Chavez, and the mid-20th century Mexican American civil rights movement. Alison assisted with the research, production, and design recommendations, including bringing the building back to its appearance during its period of significance, which required a meticulous analysis of the building’s historic integrity. The property today is listed as a National Historic Landmark.

Historic YMCA Hotel Preservation Consulting in the Embarcadero, San Francisco, CA. Senior Architectural Historian, Project Manager. Built in the early 20th century, the building was formerly a YMCA hotel used by young navy men and is currently a hotel along the waterfront with an adjacent YMCA recreational center. The hotel was proposing modifications which included rehabilitation work and reconfiguring the interior lobby space. Alison researched and documented the interior evolution by reviewing old plans, movies filmed on-location, post cards, and existing fabric. She established the building’s construction chronology with a focus on the building’s public spaces at the interior, overseeing the entire production of the report and created recommendations to update the client’s proposed plans which included acceptable sensitive modifications to historic features and recommendations for potential future demolition.

Palo Alto History Museum Historic Preservation Consulting, Palo Alto, CA.

Architectural Historian. The Spanish Revival style Roth Building was the original location of the Palo Alto Medical Foundation. The former medical building is undergoing a conversion into a local history museum with gallery space, interpretive areas, and archival and study rooms. Alison assisted with secondary research efforts of both the medical foundation and the building, upon modifications to the museum’s scope of work. She conducted a Part 2 Federal historic rehabilitation tax credit application review which included recommendation to best comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation.

Half Moon Bay Barn and Jail Museum Historic Resource Evaluation and Preservation Consulting, Half Moon Bay, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The City of Half Moon Bay was working with a local historical society to implement a history museum at the site of its early 20th century jail and adjacent barn. Alison conducted an in-depth historic resource assessment then reviewed proposed plans for buildings and site modifications to accommodate gallery space, offices, and archival storage. Coordinating with project architects, she assisted with the creation of recommendations for project compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.

Toscano Hotel Preservation Consulting, Sonoma State Historic Park, Sonoma, CA. Senior Architectural Historian. The two-story wood framed Toscano Hotel was constructed in the 1850s and is a contributing resource to the Sonoma Plaza National Historic Landmark District and the Sonoma Plaza National Register Historic District. Alison conducted a Secretary of the Interior’s Standards reviews of proposed changes to the interior of the building. Proposed changes included the conversion of a portion of the building from a hotel saloon museum display area into a retail concession area for the California State Parks. Project recommendations included sensitive design solutions to maintain original features.

Robin Rundle
Architectural Historian
Robin brings a unique set of skills and expertise to the southern California cultural resources group. With extensive experience in arts and architecture, she conducted primary archival research in Florence, Italy and was an archivist at the Getty Research Institute. Focusing on multimedia production, oral history, and arts education, Robin has created and managed projects for corporate, commercial, and non-profit clients. Ranging from documentary to kiosk-based interactive programs, audio tours and oral histories, she has completed productions for clients including SoCalGas and Southern California Edison, the Beall Center for Art + Technology, the Bowers Museum, the Orange County Museum of Art, and the University of California. In addition, she has completed various historic preservation projects in southern California, specifically Phase I of the video documentation of the 76-acre Rocketdyne Factory in Canoga Park for ESA, Robinson’s Beverly Hills, and the Annenberg Beach House in Santa Monica.

Robin has considerable experience interviewing artists, architects, and subject matter experts. Additionally, she served as an interviewer for the USC Shoah Foundation -- The Institute for Visual History and Education. Robin is committed to promoting deep understanding through interpretive content.

Relevant Experience
Kun House II, Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Nomination (LAHCM), Los Angeles, CA.

Architectural Historian. Robin co-authored the Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument Landmark nomination for Kun House II, designed by master architect Richard Neutra. The nomination involved archival research and physical inspection of the property as well as an analysis of the home’s significance as an example of Neutra’s small-scale residential designs.

Lockwood Avenue Elementary School Character Defining Features Matrix , Los Angeles, CA.

Architectural Historian. Robin identified character-defining features of the 1936 Art Deco / Streamline Moderne Lockwood Avenue Elementary School and provided preservation recommendations and treatments for the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD).

Main and Naud, Historic Resources Assessment, Los Angeles, CA.

Architectural Historian. An assessment of three mid-century industrial buildings on the site of the former Carnation Company Ice Cream and Milk Plant in the Central City North Community Plan Area (CPA). Robin conducted extensive research on this multi-building complex for milk and ice cream production, storage, and distribution against four historic contexts of evaluation eligibility.

EDUCATION
MA, Art History, Syracuse
University, Florence, Italy
BA, History/Art History,
University of California,
Irvine
AWARDS
The Florence Fellowship,
Graduate Studies in
Italian Renaissance Art,
Syracuse University
Attachment B
Building Permits

Attachment C
Sanborn Maps

Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90401 August 09, 2021 6610038.3 Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Certified Sanborn Results:

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
- page
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris &
Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track
historical property usage in approximately 12,000
American cities and towns. Collections searched:

Library of Congress
University Publications of America
EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™
Limited Permission To Make Copies
Sanborn® Library search results
EDR Inquiry # Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:

Certification #
PO #
Project
1986
1965
1950
1918
1909
1902
1895
1891
08/09/21 631 Colorado Ave 631 Colorado ESA 626 Wilshire Blvd Santa Monica, CA 90401 6610038.3 Los Angeles, CA 90017 [email protected] The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by ESA were identified for the years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Results can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn.

The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the collection as of the day this report was generated. AA11-4A72-B169 NA Maps Provided: NA Certification #: AA11-4A72-B169 ESA (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.

This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.

Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2021 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 6610038 3 2 - page
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn Fire Insurance map sheets.
1986 Source Sheets
1986
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
1986
Volume 1N, Sheet 50
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
1986
Volume 1S, Sheet 60
1965 Source Sheets
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
1965
Volume 1S, Sheet 60
1965
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
1950 Source Sheets
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 16
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 38
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 39
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 42
6610038 3 3
- page
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn Fire Insurance map sheets.
1950 Source Sheets
1950
Volume 1, Sheet 50
1918 Source Sheets
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 16
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 38
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 39
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 42
1918
Volume 1, Sheet 50
1909 Source Sheets
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 8
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 12
1909
Volume 1, Sheet 13
6610038 3 4
- page
Sanborn Sheet Key
This Certified Sanborn Map Report is based upon the following Sanborn Fire Insurance map sheets.
1902 Source Sheets
1902
Volume 1, Sheet 5
1902
Volume 1, Sheet 9
1895 Source Sheets
1895
Volume 1, Sheet 7
1895
Volume 1, Sheet 8
1891 Source Sheets
1891
Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 5
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1986 1986 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1S, Sheet 60
Volume 1S, Sheet 42
Volume 1S, Sheet 39
Volume 1N, Sheet 50
Volume 1N, Sheet 38
6610038 3 6
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name: Address: City, ST, ZIP: Client: AA11-4A72-B169 AA11-4A72-B169 1965 1965 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90401 ESA EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Copyright 6610038 3 7
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name: Address: City, ST, ZIP: Client: AA11-4A72-B169 AA11-4A72-B169 1965 1965 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90401 ESA EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Copyright 6610038 3 8
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name: Address: City, ST, ZIP: Client: AA11-4A72-B169 AA11-4A72-B169 1965 1965 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90401 ESA EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Copyright 6610038 3 9
- page
Certified Sanborn® Map
Site Name: Address: City, ST, ZIP: Client: AA11-4A72-B169 AA11-4A72-B169 1965 1965 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave Santa Monica, CA 90401 ESA EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Copyright 6610038 3 10
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1950 1950 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 50
Volume 1, Sheet 42
Volume 1, Sheet 39
Volume 1, Sheet 38
Volume 1, Sheet 16
6610038 3 11
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1918 1918 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 50
Volume 1, Sheet 42
Volume 1, Sheet 39
Volume 1, Sheet 38
Volume 1, Sheet 16
6610038 3 12
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1909 1909 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 13
Volume 1, Sheet 12
Volume 1, Sheet 8
6610038 3 13
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1902 1902 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 9
Volume 1, Sheet 5
6610038 3 14
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1895 1895 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 8
Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 15
This Certified Sanborn Map combines the following sheets.

Outlined areas indicate map sheets within the collection. 0 Feet 150 300 600 - page
Certified Sanborn® Map
AA11-4A72-B169
AA11-4A72-B169 1891 1891 Order Date: 08/09/2021 Certification # Site Name: Address: 631 Colorado 631 Colorado Ave City, ST, ZIP: Santa Monica, CA 90401 EDR Inquiry: 6610038.3 Client: ESA Copyright Volume 1, Sheet 7
6610038 3 16
Attachment D
Table 5. Summary of Research
on Reinforced Brick Buildings in
Santa Monica

Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-1 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 TABLE 5

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH ON REINFORCED BRICK BUILDINGS IN SANTA MONICA Address Year Built Notes
Area 1
1001 Colorado 1960 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
1546 14th Street 1957 Single-story brick building,
auto body shop
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1415 Colorado 1955 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-2 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1519 Colorado 1956 Single story-brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
wood frame and stucco
(this note signifies the brick
is a veneer)
1601 Colorado 1955

Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
wood frame and stucco
(this note signifies the brick
is a veneer)
1631 Colorado 1958 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-3 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 2235 Colorado 1970 No permit records
2800 Colorado 1984 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Image Unavailable
1630 Colorado 1959 Single-story brick building,
commercial industrial
1740 Stewart 1967 Single-story brick building,
commercial industrial
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-4 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1220 Olympic 1968 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1201 Olympic 1949 Single-story brick building,
commercial-industrial
1660 Euclid 1966 Single-story brick building,
renovated commercial
Building Permit Notes:
brick
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-5 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1630 Euclid 1955 Single-story brick building,
renovated commercialindustrial
Building Permit Notes:
masonry
1716 12th Street 1972 Single-story brick building,
commercial-industrial
Building Permit Notes:
concrete block
1635 12th Street 1979 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-6 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1101 Olympic 1955 Single story brick building,
commercial-industrial
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
1639 11th Street 1961 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
1631 10th Street 1946 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
masonry and concrete
(concrete beam grid
system)
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-7 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 929 Olympic 1957 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
concrete
1661 9th Street 1957 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick and concrete
1668 9th Street 1955 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-8 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 1660 Lincoln 1953 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Area 2
2910 Main
Street
1913 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
1940 alteration, 1945
alteration at interior and to
front brick, 1945 permit
granted to A. B. C.
2802 Main
Street
1946 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Attachment E. Table 5. Targeted Search: Comparable Brick Buildings in Santa Monica 631 Colorado Avenue E-9 ESA / D202100734.00
City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report December 2021 2926 Main
Street
1948 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
cement block
177 Pier
Avenue
1909 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
Area 3
2012 Lincoln 1967 Single-story brick building,
commercial storefront
Building Permit Notes:
brick masonry
Attachment E
DPR Forms

P1. Other Identifier: ____
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County Los Angeles and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T ; R ; ☐ of ☐ of Sec ; B.M.

Address 621 and 631 Colorado Avenue City Santa Monica Zip 90401 UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11S , 362445.82 mE/ 3764920.97 mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN: 4291-023-009
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The subject property is located on a rectilinear lot on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the Downtown area of Santa Monica. The property contains two brick, single-story, Commercial/Industrial Vernacular style buildings: Building A constructed in 1937 and Building B constructed in 1941. Building A faces south toward Colorado Boulevard and encompasses the full south-to-north depth of the lot; its east side elevation sits on the east property line, and its west side elevation faces an on-site parking lot; the rear north elevation sits on the north property line. Building B is located at the west corner of the lot and is oriented to the east toward the parking area and Building A; its south side elevation sits on the south property line and its west rear elevation sits on the west property line. [See Continuation Sheets]
*P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP6 (1-3 story commercial building) *P4. Resources Present:
☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: (view, date,
accession #) 631 Colorado Avenue,
view west, August 2021
*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic ☐
Prehistoric ☐ Both
1937/Los Angeles County Assessor
*P7. Owner and Address:

Michael Bay, 500 Pounds of Dog,
Inc., 9100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite
1000, Los Angeles, CA
*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation,
and address) Alison Garcia Kellar,
ESA, 626 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
*P9. Date Recorded: December
2021
*P10. Survey Type: (Describe)
Intensive Pedestrian
*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey
report and other sources, or enter "none.")
ESA, 631 Colorado Avenue, Santa
Monica, California: City Landmark
Assessment and Evaluation Report,
December 2021
*Attachments: ☐NONE ☐Location Map ☒Continuation Sheet ☒Building, Structure, and Object Record ☐Archaeological Record ☐District Record ☐Linear Feature Record ☐Milling Station Record ☐Rock Art Record ☐Artifact Record ☐Photograph Record ☐Other (List):

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other
Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P5a. Photograph or Drawing (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.) *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica *NRHP Status Code 6Z

B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica
B3. Original Use: Commercial B4. Present Use: Commercial *B5. Architectural Style: Commercial/Industrial Vernacular *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Located at 631 Colorado Avenue, the subject property is located on the north corner of Colorado Avenue and 7th Street in the Downtown Neighborhood in the City of Santa Monica.1 The property is bound by 7th Street to the east, Colorado Avenue to the south, and 6th Court, an alleyway, to the west. Situated on Block 193, on Lots K and L, the property contains two buildings: a one-story brick building with a rear second story addition at the east extent (Building A), and a one-story stucco-clad brick building at the western extent (Building B). A surface parking lot separates the two buildings from one another and is accessed from along Colorado Avenue at the southern extent of the site and from 7th Street at the northern extent of the site. The property is oriented along Colorado Avenue. A metal security fence with cement walls and pylons extends along Colorado Avenue between Buildings A and B. The fence includes a metal pedestrian gate located immediately west of Building A. A vehicular gated entrance to the property is accessed from 6th Court alleyway. [See Continuation Sheets]
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

Brick construction, minimal decorative detailing, flat roof, simple rectangular form B9a. Architect: N/A b. Builder: N/A
*B10. Significance: Theme Santa Monica Commercial Development (1875-1977); Pre-World War II Commercial Development (1920-1944), Industrial Development Along Colorado Avenue (1890s-1960s); and Early 20th Century Commercial Vernacular (1900-1950) Area Downtown Santa Monica Period of Significance 1937-1941 Property Type Commercial Applicable Criteria (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) Based on current research and assessment, the property located at 631 Colorado Avenue does not appear to meet any of the City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria 9.56.100(a)(1) through (a)(6) as discussed above. However, it does meet Structure of Merit criterion 9.56.080(a) as it was previously identified in the City’s Historic Inventory. It also meets the Structure of Merit 50-year age criterion 9.56.080(b) as Building A was constructed in 1937 making it 84 years of age, and Building B was constructed in 1941 making it 80 years of age. However, the subject property does not meet criteria

9.56.080 (b)(1) through (3), and therefore is ineligible as a Structure of Merit. [See Continuation Sheets] B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References:
[See Continuation Sheets]
B13. Remarks:
*B14. Evaluator: Alison Garcia Kellar, ESA
*Date of Evaluation: December 2021
1 City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory.

State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
(This space reserved for official comments.)
State of California  Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEET
Property Name: 621-631 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica