1 FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN THE MATTER OF
THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK
DENIAL OF A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING 21ENT-0253 LOCATED AT 1665 APPIAN WAY
AS A CITY LANDMARK OR STRUCTURE OF MERIT
SECTION I. Shyle LP, the owner of the property at 1665 Appian Way, filed a demolition permit application, on February 15, 2021. On March 18, 2021, Shawn Hugus submitted historic resource designation application 21ENT-0067 to nominate the property at 1665 Appian Way as either a Landmark or a Structure of Merit. The Landmarks Commission, having held a Public Hearing on November 08, 2021 found that the subject building located at 1665 Appian Way met one or more the of the criteria for designation as a City Landmark as enumerated in SMMC 9.56.100. On November 16, 2021, Shyle LP filed a timely appeal of the Commission’s decision. The City Council, on appeal, having held a Public Hearing on June 14, 2022 hereby denies the designation of 1665 Appian Way as a City Landmark or Structure of Merit based on the following findings:
LANDMARK CRITERIA
SMMC 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 is a simple, unremarkable example of a duplex typology, built in a period where a variety of multi-family building typologies were being built in the area closest to the beach as well as the adjacent Ocean Park neighborhood. As there were about 112 multifamily residential properties built in this era and more than 10 percent of those properties remain extant, the property does not warrant recognition. Additionally, other multi-family properties from this era in the immediate and surrounding neighborhoods (Bay Street Cluster, 4 th Street Historic Corner District) have been recognized as exemplary of this typology.
Therefore, the subject property does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 1.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(2). It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
The subject property is a vernacular building that lacks the distinctive characteristics of a particular architectural style. Its features are more a testament to function than they are to 2 aesthetics. Because of its vernacular appearance, the building reads as a simple structure that was erected to provide affordable, functional housing options to Santa Monica’s working and middle-class residents – and was not intended to be a building of particular architectural or aesthetic merit in the spirit of this criterion.
For these reasons, 1665-1671 Appian Way does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 2.
SMMC 9.56.100(a)(3). It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history.
There is insufficient evidence indicating that any of the people associated with the subject property made significant contributions to history. Original owner John S. Stotler – who also lived in one of the building’s dwelling units between 1914 and 1931 – appears to have had a successful career, first in the mining industry and later as a local real estate developer, but does not appear to have made any significant inroads to history that would render him a historically significant individual in the spirit of this criterion. None of the subsequent owners or tenants associated with the building appear to be of historical significance. The scant information that is available about these individuals indicates that they lived typical lives and were employed in typical vocations.
There is also insufficient evidence to indicate that the property is associated with a significant event in local, state, or national history. It appears to have functioned as nothing more than a typical multi-family dwelling between its original (1914) construction and the present day. For these reasons, 1665-1671 Appian Way does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 3.
SMMC 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.
As discussed in the evaluation against Landmark Criterion 2, the subject property is a vernacular structure that lacks distinctive characteristics of an architectural style. There is 3 also nothing particularly noteworthy about its method of construction or craftsmanship, as it is a conventional wood frame building utilizing methods and materials typical of the era in which it was constructed. The subject property does not read as a particularly strong example of any particular multi-family property type identified in the City of Santa Monica Historic Context Statement. It has four units, but does not present as a fourplex; it also contains a pedestrian passage between its volumes, but lacks the shared open space that is characteristic of bungalow courts and courtyard housing. It lacks the height and the density characteristic of apartment houses. For these reasons, there is insufficient evidence showing that it is a unique or rare example of an architectural or historical type valuable to a study, per this criterion.
The building does not appear to be significant on the merits of its architecture. Its significance is derived from its use and associative qualities, not for reasons relating to its physical design.
Therefore, 1665-1671 Appian Way does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 4.
SMMC 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.
Original building permits for the subject property are not available; supplemental research about the property indicates that it was not designed by an architect, and was built by building contractor F.N. Jones. No pertinent information could be found about the life, career, or contributions of Jones; available documentation indicates that he was a locally-based building contractor who erected the occasional building but was not especially prolific in their craft.
Given the lack of information about F.N. Jones – and the lack of an architect of record – there is insufficient evidence demonstrating that the building is a representative example of the wok or product of a notable builder, designer, or architect. For these reasons, 1665-1671 Appian Way does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 5.
SMMC 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. 4 The subject property does not possess any singular feature or physical characteristic that stands out as memorable or noteworthy. While it reads as considerably older that most other buildings in the immediate vicinity, there is nothing particularly notable about its design or appearance apart from its relative age. It is located on a typical residential lot on a lesser-traveled street, and does not occupy a particularly prominent location. It may be familiar to those who reside in the neighborhood and pass by on a regular basis, but to the casual passer-by the building does not stand out as an aesthetically distinctive resource in the spirit of this criterion. It is compatible with, and blends into its surroundings. For these reasons, ARG concludes that 1665-1671 Appian Way does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion 6.
STURCTURE OF MERIT CRITERIA
9.56.080(A): The structure has been identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.
The subject property has been identified in the City’s Historic Resource Inventory (HRI). As noted, in the most recent (2018) iteration of the HRI, it was flagged as potentially eligible for individual listing and was assigned the California Historical Resources Status Code of 5S3:
“appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation.” However, based on further evaluation as noted above, the property does not appear eligible for listing under any Structure of Merit criteria.
9.56.080(B): The structure is a minimum of 50 years of age and meets one of the following criteria:
The subject property is a minimum of 50 years of age as it was constructed in 1914.
Therefore, the structure is eligible for further consideration under the following criteria:
(B)(1). The structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type.
The subject property is a simple design of a property type for which more than 10% of similar property types built in the 1910s are extant. The subject property does not stand out as an architectural design, detail or historic type and is not rare, and therefore does not appear to be eligible for designation under this criterion.
(B)(2). The structure is representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent. 5 The building is more than 50 years of age. However, as noted in the evaluation against Landmark Criteria 2 and 4, it is a vernacular building that lacks distinctive characteristics of an architectural style. Additionally, while the property was not influential on other properties, vernacular buildings are ubiquitous throughout Santa Monica and remains prevalent. For these reasons, Appian Way does not appear to satisfy Structure of Merit Criterion B.2. (B)(3). The structure contributes to a potential Historic District.
The subject property has not been identified as a contributor to a historic district. Therefore, it does not appear to be eligible for listing as a Structure of Merit under this criterion.
SECTION ll. Parcel Designation
Because staff is not recommending designation of the structures, staff does not recommend designation of the parcel.
SECTION lll. I hereby certify that the above Findings and Determination accurately reflect the final determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica on June 14, 2022 as determined by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record of the proceedings relating to this designation. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
Respectfully Submitted
June 14, 2022
Sue Himmelrich, Mayor
6 Attest:
Stephanie Reich,
Landmarks Commission Secretary