Montana Avenue, Santa Monica

Transcription

1 Montana Avenue, Santa Monica Landmark Assessment Report Prepared for: City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department 1685 Main Street, Room 212 Santa Monica, CA Prepared by: Pasadena, California May 30, 2017

2 Table of Contents... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1. Introduction Architectural Description Site and Setting Building Exteriors Alterations and Chronology of Development Historic Contexts Pre World War II Commercial and Multi Family Residential Development in Santa Monica Courtyard Apartments Streamline Moderne and Spanish Colonial Revival Architecture Owners and Occupants of Montana Avenue Builder Harry J. O Donnell Regulations and Criteria for Evaluation City of Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance Evaluation of Significance Previous Evaluations Evaluation of Local Significance Conclusion Bibliography ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP i

3 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP ii

4 1. Introduction At the request of the City of Santa Monica s Planning and Community Development Department, Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (ARG) has prepared this Landmark Assessment Report for Montana Avenue in Santa Monica, Los Angeles County. The property contains a complex of three buildings on one parcel: two one and two story multifamily residential buildings facing each other across a courtyard, and one one story commercial building between them that faces Montana Avenue. The buildings reflect a hybrid Streamline Moderne/Spanish Colonial Revival style. All three were constructed in 1941 by the same owner. ARG evaluated the property to determine whether it appears to satisfy one or more of the statutory criteria associated with City of Santa Monica Landmark eligibility, pursuant to Chapter 9.56 (Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance) of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. Completion of this assessment involved a site visit and visual inspection of the buildings exteriors on April 13, 2017; compilation and review of information, including archived building permits and previous architectural inventories, obtained from the City s Planning and Community Development Department; archival research conducted at various online repositories; development of applicable historic contexts and themes; and evaluation of eligibility under Santa Monica Landmark criteria. This report was prepared by ARG staff Katie E. Horak, Principal, and Mary Ringhoff, Associate, both of whom meet the Secretary of the Interior s Professional Qualification Standards for Architectural History and History. In summary, ARG finds that the property appears eligible under City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria (A)(1) and (A)(4). The following sections provide a contextual basis for analysis and a detailed discussion of how this determination was made. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 1

5 2. Architectural Description 2.1 Site and Setting The property at Montana Avenue is a three building, mixed use complex located in north central Santa Monica, on the northwest side of Montana Avenue between 9 th Street and 10 th Street. Montana Avenue serves as the boundary between the Wilshire Montana and North of Montana neighborhoods. 1 The street grid is skewed southwest/northeast as a reflection of the original townsite layout. The subject property lies within the Montana Avenue business district, which stretches from 7 th Street to 17 th Street and is dominated by one story commercial and two story mixed use buildings dating from the 1920s to the 2010s. A wide range of architectural styles are represented in the district. Montana Avenue has concrete sidewalks and plantings of mature ficus street trees. The topography slopes very gently to the southeast, and many of the properties on the northwest side of the street are elevated above street level on this block and adjacent blocks. The area s lots are uniformly rectangular, but exhibit a wide range of sizes; building orientations also vary, with newer (post 1950) buildings more likely to have primary facades paralleling the street with incorporated parking areas. Location map Montana Avenue is outlined in red. Aerial imagery: Google Maps. 1 These neighborhood names are identified in the City of Santa Monica s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE, 2010) and are not historic names. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 2

6 Site plan, Montana Avenue. Base map courtesy City of Santa Monica, Building Exteriors The Montana Avenue complex contains a two building courtyard apartment with a small commercial building in the center. The commercial building sits at street level and is flush with the sidewalk, while the courtyard apartment is slightly elevated from street level, accessed by two sets of concrete steps flanking the commercial building. The residential buildings are essentially mirror images of each other, with their primary façades and unit entries facing the shared courtyard. Each contains eight units, for a total of 16. The courtyard apartment buildings are irregular in plan, stepping inward from the front to the rear to lend each unit slight articulation. Each building is one story in height at the front, rising to a two story volume at the rear that extends toward the courtyard to create a shallow L shape; together, the two buildings form an open U shape. The second stories are reached by exterior concrete and stucco stairways with horizontal metal tube railings. The buildings have flat roofs and are designed in a hybrid Streamline Moderne/Spanish Colonial Revival style incorporating a speedline like string course on the second stories; curved corners with vertical fluting; clay tile coping; decorative arches; smooth stucco cladding with a brick water table; and Moderne style stair railings and canopy supports. First floor units have metal entry hoods with standing seams, while the second floor units have flat, curving canopies with horizontal scoring. Doors to individual units are plain wood with aluminum screens. All of the windows are single or paired ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 3

7 double hung wood with divided lights and horns. Some of the upper story windows have metal awnings. The commercial building is one story in height and has a flat roof with clay tile coping. Its symmetrical primary façade has a central, recessed, fully glazed, wood door between two canted window bays with glazed tile bulkheads and butted glass. The two exterior corners of the bays are curved, with glass block. A modern fabric awning has been added, spanning the entire primary façade. The building s other facades have smooth stucco cladding and small, narrow, replacement sliding aluminum windows with security bars added. The stucco retaining walls demarcating the front of the property directly abut the commercial building. The property has low stucco retaining walls with landscaping of shrubs and small mature trees at its front; staggered decorative concrete block entry walls are present at each set of entry steps. The courtyard has two parallel concrete walkways flanking an open lawn, with foundation plantings at the primary (courtyard facing) façade of each residential building. The rear of the courtyard contains a concrete patio area delineated by low brick walls. Foundation plantings are present at each building. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 4

8 Montana Ave., overview west. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., courtyard, view west. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., south building, view northwest. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., north building, view northeast. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., courtyard entry, view west. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., side façade of north building showing curved fluted corner, view northwest. ARG, 4/13/17. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 5

9 Montana Ave., side façade of south building showing curved fluted corner, view northwest. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., commercial building, view north. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., side façade of commercial building, view northwest. ARG, 4/13/ Montana Ave., side and rear façades of commercial building, view south. ARG, 4/13/17. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 6

10 3. Alterations and Chronology of Development Upon review of previous research, archived building permits obtained from the City of Santa Monica s Planning and Community Development Department, historic aerial photographs, Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps, and property data obtained from the Los Angeles County Assessor s Office, ARG produced the following chronology of development for Montana Avenue. This chronology provides a summary of the property s development and alterations that have been made over time. Date Description of Work Performed Owner on Record 1941 Courtyard apartment buildings constructed 2 Neal L. and Fannie E. Niblack 1941 Commercial building constructed for use as office 3 Neal L. Niblack 1957 Awning added to commercial building, now in use as restaurant 4 Neal L. Niblack Ca Commercial building side/rear windows replaced with aluminum sliding 5 Unknown Post 1986 Fabric awning added, security window bars added 6 Unknown 2004 Interior repairs 7 Juan Nersessian The two courtyard apartment buildings appear to be unaltered. The commercial building has had its side and rear windows replaced with sliding aluminum windows, and security window bars and a front fabric awning have been added. The awning replaced an aluminum awning which was not original to the building but may have been the one added in The decorative concrete block entry walls at each set of courtyard entry steps may have been a later addition. 2 Building Permit B3899, 12/9/40. The original building permit for only one of the two buildings is available, but the two were clearly designed as a unified complex and are presumed to have been constructed at the same time or within a year of each other. 3 Building Permit 5716, 11/10/41. 4 Building Permit B21567, 4/11/57. 5 ARG field observation, 4/13/17. 6 ARG field observation, 4/13/17. 7 Building Permit C12397, 10/25/04. 8 The aluminum awning was present during the 1986 Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory. Historic Resources Inventory Continuation Sheet for 909 ½ Montana Avenue (commercial building), 12 November 1986 (in landmark application materials from City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department). ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 7

11 4. Historic Contexts 4.1 Pre-World War II Commercial and Multi-Family Residential Development in Santa Monica The original townsite of Santa Monica, with boundaries at 26 th Street, Railroad (now Colorado) Avenue, the Pacific Ocean, and Montana Avenue, was platted and recorded in After incorporation in 1887, Santa Monica became well known as a tourist destination acclaimed for its recreational culture, balmy climate, bathhouses, opulent hotels, and amusement piers. Tourist based development spread south along the coast, into the area that would become known as Ocean Park in 1895, and residential and commercial development accelerated throughout the city. Santa Monica s early development primarily focused on single family residences, with commercial services concentrated in the downtown commercial district in the southern part of the original townsite. Development of all types expanded as Santa Monica began to come of age as a residential enclave in the 1900s 1910s, aided by the proliferation of electric streetcar lines. The city began to spread north and south from its earlier core, well into the northern part of the original townsite (now part of the Wilshire Montana neighborhood). Secondary commercial corridors around downtown and in Ocean Park slowly began to emerge to serve the growing city, and multi family residential properties began to grow in number, serving both permanent residents and those who sought short term housing in the oceanfront town. Two and three story mixeduse buildings appeared downtown and along the early commercial corridors; these properties typically featured retail storefronts on the first floor with residential units on the second, and were built in commercial vernacular or Period Revival styles. They tended not to have integrated parking, as their residents and patrons typically arrived on streetcars and then walked, though this pattern quickly changed as the automobile changed transportation patterns across Southern California. Santa Monica boomed after World War I, seeing its population increase from 15,000 to 37,000 during the 1920s. 9 Commercial, residential, and mixed use development hastened to keep pace, seeing the construction of numerous commercial buildings downtown (including Santa Monica s first skyscrapers) as well as tourist based properties in the western part of the city. By the end of the 1920s, the city s commercial core had transformed into a truly metropolitan shopping district. 10 The city also grew noticeably to the north, as the blocks above Montana Avenue rapidly filled with single family residences. Santa Monica s new residents included many retirees and widows, both blue collar and white collar, which increased the demand for rental 9 Dave Berman, Founders Dreams Dashed City Finds its Own Identity, Santa Monica Outlook, Centennial Edition, , 5A in Historic Resources Group and Architectural Resources Group, City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Context Statement (prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department, 31 January 2017), City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Context Statement, ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 8

12 properties. 11 As a result, multi family residential and mixed use properties along larger streets joined the more common single family type all over the city. They ranged in size from duplexes to large apartment buildings, with one of the most prominent concentrations found north of California Avenue and east of Euclid Street, in a sparsely developed part of the Wilshire Montana neighborhood. 12 Bungalow courts and courtyard apartments were popular multifamily types during this time, with courtyard apartments reaching particular prominence in the decades to follow. Owned by individuals, small corporations, and large investment groups, the multi family residential properties of the 1920s displayed styles like Craftsman, Spanish Colonial Revival, Mediterranean Revival, Art Deco, and Streamline Moderne; commercial and mixed use properties typically exhibited varieties of these styles, with more minimal, restrained expressions gaining ascendance in the 1930s and 1940s. 13 Commercial and mixed use development slowed noticeably during the Great Depression, though multi family residential development was bolstered by the continued attraction of the city to residents (including students at UCLA, which saw rapidly rising enrollment). 14 The growth of Douglas Aircraft and other defense industry related companies in Santa Monica in the late 1930s early 1940s attracted thousands of new workers and led to a transformation of the city s built environment. The City of Santa Monica created zoning variances to assist the war effort, resulting in a more diverse mix of property types in many areas, as well as a shift from owner occupied single family residences to a city of renters. 15 The 1940s development of Montana Avenue, discussed below, exemplifies the changes that happened during the prewar and wartime era. During the postwar period, development of all kinds exploded across Santa Monica as older buildings were torn down to make way for the new. Many of the new buildings were multifamily properties of two stories or more, made profitable by economic incentives that encouraged construction and renting of new apartment buildings. 16 The built environment of the downtown commercial core and the city s secondary commercial corridors also saw great changes, due to the proliferation of multi family properties and the construction of more skyscrapers, through the rest of the 20 th century. Pre-World War II and Wartime Commercial and Multi-Family Development in Wilshire Montana, North of Montana, and on Montana Avenue Today s Wilshire Montana neighborhood occupies the northern part of the original Santa Monica townsite, and the North of Montana neighborhood is immediately north of the original townsite boundary, Montana Avenue. This dividing street is now a major corridor containing a commercial district with multi family residential areas on either side of it. Residential 11 ICF Jones & Stokes, Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update Final Report (prepared for the City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department, 2010), City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Context Statement, City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Context Statement, Ibid. 15 Ibid., Ibid., ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 9

13 development began to spread north into Wilshire Montana from its earlier core in the southern part of the Santa Monica townsite in the 1900s and 1910s, though it was not rapid at this time, nor did it include much commercial development. Sanborn fire insurance maps indicate that Wilshire Boulevard was only partially developed, mostly with single family residences, in Montana Avenue saw virtually no construction prior to 1918, and the residential blocks adjacent to it had only a few scattered single family residences. 17 During the population boom of the 1920s, the Wilshire Montana and North of Montana neighborhoods saw expanded single family residential development, as well as a newly burgeoning crop of multi family, commercial, and mixed use properties. The new residential buildings included a few large apartment houses and courtyard apartments as well as mixed use buildings and smaller scale types like bungalow courts and one story courtyard apartments. By the end of the 1930s, almost all of Wilshire Montana and North of Montana had been developed with residential properties, and Wilshire Boulevard had become more commercial than residential. Montana Avenue received its first commercial buildings in the 1920s, with a few additional buildings constructed during the 1930s; most were concentrated in the area between 7 th Street and 17 th Street. 18 Commercial development there, as in the rest of the city, was slow during the early years of the Great Depression. The rest of Montana Avenue, continuing northeast and southwest of the commercial area, contained multi family and singlefamily buildings. Montana Avenue experienced its most intense period of development during the 1940s and continuing through the 1950s. Commercial construction was limited to the stretch between 7 th Street and 17 th Street, with multi family residential construction extending in either direction of the business district. The residential properties were commonly one and two story buildings and complexes built in in Streamline Moderne, Art Deco, Hollywood Regency, and Minimal Traditional styles. The commercial area expanded the nascent district of the 1920s 1930s to include new retail blocks, office buildings, two story mixed use buildings, and prominent landmarks like the Aero Theater, which opened in 1940 as a 24 hour theater serving Douglas workers getting off shift at all hours. 19 Many of the new commercial buildings were built in the commercial vernacular idiom, though some featured higher style Streamline Moderne, American Colonial Revival, and Spanish Colonial Revival designs. The Montana Avenue business district also included a few purely multi family residential properties in addition to residential upper stories of mixed use buildings, but they appear to have been rare; the district assumed its current commercial character during this period. 20 With a few notable exceptions, Montana Avenue residential and commercial architecture dating to the period tended to be modest in scale and economical in stylistic detail. As Santa Monica s population continued to grow through the 1950s and 1960s, Wilshire Montana and parts of North of Montana saw denser development and the construction of new 17 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, Santa Monica, California, City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Context Statement, chronology map, Ibid., combined with field observation 13 April Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, Santa Monica, California, 1950 corrections to 1918 map. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 10

14 multi family and commercial buildings. On Montana Avenue, numerous new buildings replaced some of the older ones and filled in the few empty parcels that remained in the commercial district. The area of Montana southwest of the business area saw the construction of large apartment buildings two or more stories in height. With the exception of a few two story mixeduse buildings and the courtyard apartment/commercial property at Montana Avenue, the business district assumed an exclusively commercial character as the remaining low scale residential properties within the district were replaced with larger commercial buildings. Redevelopment has continued through the present day, resulting in the replacement or alteration of many of the street s older buildings. Today, the courtyard apartment/commercial complex at Montana Avenue appears to be the only property of its type in the city, and is one of few unaltered 1940s buildings within the commercial district spanning Montana between 7 th Street and 17 th Street. It is neither the only historic multi family property in the Wilshire Montana/North of Montana area nor the only courtyard apartment; however, it is the only known property that combines both residential and commercial uses into the courtyard form. 4.2 Courtyard Apartments The property at Montana Avenue is a courtyard apartment, and an unusual iteration of the type with its incorporation of a commercial building as a hyphen between two residential buildings. The courtyard apartment evolved from its predecessor, the bungalow court, which originated in Southern California in the 1910s and reached widespread popularity by the 1920s. The bungalow court is typically composed of a series of small single family residences, often with a two story apartment house at the rear, arranged around a common central courtyard. Bungalow courts commonly feature rear detached garages, shared outdoor landscaped spaces, and entrances that face into the central court rather than the street. Although early bungalow courts were often constructed by builders rather than architects and intended for residents of modest means, their evolution represented a major shift from preceding idioms of American dwelling types. Bungalow courts were the first multi family prototype to focus more on space than object, providing residents with the advantages of parks and shared spaces for communal interaction within a densely urban setting. As multi family housing became a more prevalent option in the late 1920s, the bungalow court matured into a new prototype of apartment dwelling: the courtyard apartment. While bungalow courts were modest and restrained, courtyard apartments tended to be a type of high style architecture. They were often designed by architects inspired by various types of courtyards in in the Mediterranean region, including patio houses, palaces, markets, and inns. The temperate California climate enabled architects to design spacious patios, verandas, and balconies opening into a central courtyard, which was almost always lushly landscaped with spaces designed for both rest and meditation as well as pedestrian circulation. Hallways and corridors were placed out of doors, encouraging interaction among residents. Buildings were arranged in U and L shaped configurations, acting as both dwelling and enclosure for carefully designed courtyards. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 11

15 The elaborate Mediterranean inspired courtyard apartments of the 1920s were surpassed by more stripped down, vernacular versions during the Depression, World War II and the postwar era. As California s population skyrocketed during and after the war, the demand for housing outweighed supply; the need to quickly build residences for defense workers and returning veterans influenced the more stripped down appearance of the courtyard apartment. Tastes in style shifted in favor of more minimal, Modern modes of architecture, though courtyard apartments of the 1940s and 1950s usually retained the open, landscaped courtyards of the earlier types. The postwar years brought increased concerns about privacy, which influenced courtyard housing plans: open U and L shaped plans were replaced with O and C shaped plans, which featured a solid or nearly solid street wall with only a small front or side opening into the courtyard. Though residential units or common entry halls were still accessed through the courtyard, the communal function of the space changed. Lush landscaping and sitting areas for rest and contemplation gave way to paving and swimming pools for communal recreational use. As illustrated by examples like properties in the designated San Vicente Boulevard Courtyard Apartments Historic District, courtyard apartments were an important property type in Santa Monica during the prewar and postwar periods. They appeared in a variety of scales and architectural styles across the city, all of which exemplified a particularly Californian multi family residential idiom emphasizing access to open outdoor spaces. The courtyard apartment at Montana Avenue is the only known example in Santa Monica to incorporate a commercial building into its site plan. 4.3 Streamline Moderne and Spanish Colonial Revival Architecture The property at Montana Avenue was designed in an eclectic style incorporating elements of both Streamline Moderne and Spanish Colonial Revival architecture. As was common for 1940s buildings in Santa Monica, its style is more minimal and stripped down than the higher style examples of the 1920s 1930s. Streamline Moderne Moderne architecture, commonly reflected in the sub styles of Streamline Moderne, PWA Moderne, or, in its later iterations, Late Moderne, materialized during the Great Depression when the highly stylized Art Deco mode that preceded it had become perceived as excessive and overly flamboyant. Whereas Art Deco architecture is typically brightly colored and richly decorated, Moderne styles are sparse, unornamented and monochromatic. The Streamline Moderne style, inspired by the industrial designs of the time, offered a modern aesthetic and streamlined appearance appropriate to the motor age and automobile culture in Southern California. It was popular in the late 1930s and continued to be applied, primarily to commercial and institutional buildings, through the mid 1940s. Buildings in this style were relatively inexpensive to build due to its lack of ornamentation and use of less labor intensive building materials such as concrete and plaster. Streamline Moderne architecture is characterized by its sleek, aerodynamic forms and horizontal emphasis. Its character defining features include flat roofs with parapets; smooth, ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 12

16 typically stucco wall surfaces; rounded corners; multi light steel casement windows, often arranged in bands and sometimes located at corners; circular accent windows; and horizontal moldings (speedlines). Spanish Colonial Revival One of the most popular Period Revival styles in Southern California, Spanish Colonial Revival architecture gained widespread popularity after the 1915 Panama California Exposition in San Diego. The exposition s buildings, designed by architect Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue, prompted other designers to look directly to Spain for architectural inspiration. The Spanish Colonial Revival style was an attempt to create a native California architectural style that drew upon and romanticized the state s colonial past. 21 The popularity of the Spanish Colonial Revival style coincided with Southern California s population boom of the 1920s; the style remained popular through the early 1940s, with later versions simpler in form and ornamentation. The versatility of the style allowed for use in a wide variety of building types, in scales and ornamentation as lavish or simple as money would permit. Spanish Colonial Revival architecture is characterized by its complex building forms, stucco clad wall surfaces, and clay tile roofs. Its character defining features include asymmetrical façades; low pitched gable or hipped roofs; incorporation of patios, courtyards, loggias, covered porches, and/or balconies; stucco wall surfaces; arches; wood multi light windows (predominantly casement); decorative vents; and use of secondary materials, including wrought iron, cast stone, terra cotta, and polychromatic tile. 4.4 Owners and Occupants of Montana Avenue The mixed use complex at Montana Avenue was constructed by owners Dr. Neal L. Niblack and his wife Frances (Fannie) Niblack. Originally from Lincoln, Nebraska, Neal Niblack was a chiropractor who moved with Fannie and their two children to Southern California in the late 1930s. 22 By 1940, the Niblacks were living in Santa Monica, where Neal worked as a chiropractor at 901 Montana Avenue, the building next to those at Montana Avenue. He owned this building as well; building permits indicate he hired contractor Harry O Donnell to construct it in The 901 Montana Avenue building is Streamline Moderne with Spanish Colonial Revival elements, reflecting a style similar to that of Montana Avenue. Designed by Stephen O Donnell, son of Harry O Donnell, it served as a drugless health center and headquarters for Niblack s multiple offices throughout the West. 24 In December 1940, Niblack applied for a building permit to construct a courtyard apartment building at 909 Montana Avenue; while the original building permit for only one of the two residential buildings has been found, the two were clearly designed as a unified complex and are 21 Virginia and Lee McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984), Lincoln Evening Journal, 17 June Building Permit B637, 2/14/ Building for Central Office of Drugless Health Service Completed in Santa Monica, Santa Monica Evening Outlook, [Month unknown] 3, ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 13

17 presumed to have been constructed at the same time or within a year of each other. A 1939 newspaper photograph caption notes that Niblack had purchased the property along with that for 901 Montana Avenue and planned to construct a bungalow court there. 25 No architect or builder is listed on the permit, but the applicant is Harry O Donnell so he is presumed to have been the builder. O Donnell s granddaughter believes the designer is likely to have been Stephen O Donnell, just as for 901 Montana Avenue. 26 In November 1941, Niblack applied for a permit to construct a 288 square foot commercial building on the property for use as an office; Harry O Donnell is listed as the builder. It is unknown whether Niblack used the office himself. He and his family may have lived in the penthouse at 901 Montana Avenue for a period, though by the early 1950s the elder Niblacks were living elsewhere in the city. 27 Neal Niblack Jr. (also a chiropractor) lived with his wife Patricia L. Niblack in the courtyard apartment at 909 Montana Avenue during this time. 28 By 1960, Neal Sr. and Fannie had moved to Ventura, California. Little additional information could be found about Neal Niblack Sr. or Jr., or any member of the Niblack family. The Santa Monica City Directory notes the name of the complex as the Mont Mar Apartments, with 13 of its 16 residential units occupied. Research into the tenants found no evidence of any of them being significant individuals in the history of Santa Monica. The directory also lists the occupant of the commercial building as Dottie s Malt Shop, a change in use from the office use as listed on the 1941 building permit; the restaurant s operators were John W. and Edith Gillemont. In , the occupant was Mother s Kitchen, a restaurant which added an awning to the primary façade (not the current awning). 29 Neal Niblack was still the owner at that time, and the operator was Marie Hess. Multiple other businesses occupied the commercial building over the next few decades, primarily small retail shops; none of them appear to have been long lived or significant businesses. 4.5 Builder Harry J. O Donnell Henry Harry John O Donnell was born in Canada in 1881 and emigrated to the United States in 1902, becoming naturalized in He was an independent building contractor who lived in Santa Monica with his wife Mary E. O Donnell and their three children from 1921 onward; when they first arrived in the city, they lived in a tent on the beach for a summer while Harry constructed their first house. 30 O Donnell is known to have built at least two properties for Neal Niblack: 901 Montana Avenue and Montana Avenue. His other Santa Monica work included the Red Apple Motel at 2711 Wilshire Boulevard (no longer extant), his family s mid 1920s residence at rd Street (extant), and numerous spec and custom houses in the 25 Ready for Opening Tuesday, Santa Monica Evening Outlook, [Month unknown] 3, Roberta O Donnell, personal communication, 5/9/ Building for Central Office; R.L. Polk & Co s Santa Monica City Directory, (Los Angeles: R.L. Polk & Co of California). 28 Polk City Directory, Building Permit B21567, 4/11/57; R.L. Polk & Co s Santa Monica City Directory, 1958 (Los Angeles: R.L. Polk & Co of California). 30 Roberta O Donnell, personal communication, 5/9/17. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 14

18 Wilshire Montana and North of Montana neighborhoods. 31 Most of them were in the Spanish Colonial Revival style, and many were designed by Harry s young son Stephen O Donnell, who began working with his father at about age 9 and producing architectural drawings by age The specific addresses of these O Donnell built properties are not known at this time. It is not known whether Harry O Donnell worked with any licensed architects, or if anyone other than he or Stephen O Donnell designed the spec and custom houses he constructed; current information suggests that they acted as both designers and builders. Neither O Donnell is listed as the builder or architect for any of the properties currently catalogued in the City of Santa Monica s Historic Resource Inventory. 33 Harry O Donnell died in 1944, and Stephen continued working as a builder. While the O Donnells appear to have constructed multiple buildings in Santa Monica, the relative dearth of historical mentions of them suggests they were not particularly prolific or prominent builders in the city. 31 Ibid. 32 Roberta O Donnell, personal communication, 5/9/ Searchable at Resources Inventory/. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 15

19 5. Regulations and Criteria for Evaluation 5.1 City of Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance Historic preservation in Santa Monica is governed by Chapter 9.56 (Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance) of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. The Ordinance was adopted by the Santa Monica City Council on March 24, 1976 and was amended in 1987 and again in Its current version was adopted in Among the primary objectives achieved by the Ordinance was the creation of a local designation program for buildings, structures, sites, objects, districts, and landscapes in the City that are of historical significance. With regard to individually significant properties, the Ordinance distinguishes between two tiers of designation: Landmarks and Structures of Merit. Landmarks, outlined in , are considered to exhibit the highest level of individual historical or architectural significance; Santa Monica s designated landmarks include well known and highly significant properties like the Rapp Saloon, Santa Monica City Hall, and the John Byers Adobe. Structures of Merit, outlined in , possess a degree of individual significance that is more limited in scope. 35 Protections against demolition and alterations are commensurate with the tier of individual designation assigned to a particular resource. In addition to individual Landmarks and Structures of Merit, the Ordinance establishes statutory criteria and procedures for the designation of Historic Districts, defined in as a geographic area or noncontiguous grouping of thematically related properties that collectively contribute to the historic character of an area within the City. Unlike individual properties, whose designation does not require owner consent and is approved by the City s Landmarks Commission, Historic Districts must win the support of a majority of property owners within the district and be approved by the City Council. 36 Per (A) of the Ordinance, a property merits consideration as a Landmark if it satisfies one or more of the following six statutory criteria: (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 34 City of Santa Monica General Plan, Historic Preservation Element, prepared by PCR Services Corporation and Historic Resources Group (September 2002), City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department, Historic Preservation in Santa Monica, accessed 8 August 2014, Preservation/. 36 Ibid. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 16

20 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. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 17

21 6. Evaluation of Significance 6.1 Previous Evaluations The property at Montana Avenue has been previously evaluated as part of the City s ongoing historic resource survey efforts. It was identified in a 1986 survey and given a status code 5S2, which at the time was defined as Is not eligible for separate listing or designation under an existing local ordinance but is eligible for special consideration in local planning. 37 In the most recent Historic Resources Inventory Update (2010), the property was recommended eligible for designation under Structure of Merit criterion (B)(2), as representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent. 6.2 Evaluation of Local Significance In summary, the three building complex at Montana Avenue appears eligible for local listing as a Landmark. The determination was made by evaluating the property against each of the City s Landmark criteria as follows: (A)(1). It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history of the City. The subject property appears to satisfy this criterion for exemplifying major patterns in Santa Monica s developmental and architectural history. It is a representative, intact, and rare remaining example of a 1940s mixed use property, reflecting both multi family residential and commercial development in the Wilshire Montana and North of Montana neighborhoods. In particular, it embodies the intense period of development in the commercial area of Montana Avenue during the buildup to World War II. This was a time of great change to the built environment in Santa Monica as a whole, and many properties constructed during this period have been altered or demolished. The property s Streamline Moderne/Spanish Colonial Revival style exemplifies the modest, minimal architecture of the 1940s, reflecting the citywide need for rapid construction of multi family properties to house an influx of defense workers. Its unusual incorporation of a small commercial building at the front of a courtyard apartment reflects the need for expedient and economical mixed use development in the Montana Avenue business district during its period of rapid 1940s growth. As a result, Montana Avenue is associated with patterns of commercial and residential development in Santa Monica during the 1940s. It continues to communicate the associative and aesthetic principles, values, and ideas of the period during which it was constructed (A)(2). It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value. 37 Historic Resources Inventory Continuation Sheets for Montana Avenue (courtyard apartment buildings) and 909 ½ Montana Avenue (commercial building), 12 November 1986 (in landmark application materials from City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department). ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 18

22 The subject property is an example of hybrid Streamline Moderne/Spanish Colonial Revival architecture and retains typical character defining features of both styles. However, as a comparably modest and simplified example, its aesthetic or artistic value is not highly significant, unusual, or noteworthy. It does not appear to satisfy this criterion (A)(3). It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history. None of the owners or occupants of Montana Avenue appears to have been highly significant in local, state, or national history. No important events in local, state, or national history took place there. Therefore, this property does not appear to meet this criterion (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 subject property is an unusual and rare example of a low scale 1940s mixed use courtyard apartment and commercial building, with all three buildings in the complex designed in a unified concept and constructed within a year of each other. Courtyard housing types are important to any study of Santa Monica vernacular architecture of the first half of the 20 th century, and this is a particularly notable example for its integration of both residential and commercial uses. The property at Montana Avenue reflects a unique adaptation to the intense development demands of Santa Monica during the 1940s buildup to World War II, providing both rental units and an efficient space for commercial enterprise in a united site plan. The property s architectural style, while minimal and modest, is also an unusual and rare example of a hybrid Streamline Moderne/Spanish Colonial Revival idiom. All three of the property s buildings are intact, with only minimal alterations to the commercial building (side window replacement and addition of an awning and window security bars). The courtyard apartment/commercial building complex at Montana Avenue appears to be the only property of its type in Santa Monica. Given the period during which it was constructed, its high level of physical integrity, and its rarity in terms of both type and style, the subject property embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of 1940s mixed use development. For these reasons, the property appears to satisfy this criterion (A)(5). It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer, or architect. The building permits for Montana Avenue do not list an architect. All three were built by contractor H. J. O Donnell, about which very little is known; his only known buildings are the ones he constructed for owner Neal Niblack at 901 Montana Avenue and Montana Avenue. As research does not indicate that O Donnell was a notable builder, designer, or architect in Santa Monica, the subject property does not appear to meet this criterion (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. ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 19

23 The subject property does not occupy a unique location or have a singular physical characteristic. Its lot size and shape are typical of others in the Montana Avenue business district, and the property conforms to the typical street grid pattern characteristic of this area of Santa Monica. Although its courtyard apartment property type is unusual for this district, Montana Avenue is modest in scale and is one of multiple mixed use properties along a commercial corridor; it is not likely an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. Therefore, the property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. 7. Conclusion Based on documentary research, site analysis, the development of historic contexts, and an evaluation against local eligibility criteria, ARG finds that the 1941 courtyard apartment/commercial building complex at Montana Avenue appears eligible under City of Santa Monica Landmark Criteria (A)(1),and (A)(4). ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 20

24 Bibliography Books, Periodicals, and Other Published Materials City of Santa Monica General Plan, Historic Preservation Element, prepared by PCR Services Corporation and Historic Resources Group (September 2002). Historic Resources Group and Architectural Resources Group. City of Santa Monica Draft Historic Resources Inventory Update: Historic Context Statement. Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning & Community Development Department, 31 January ICF Jones & Stokes. Santa Monica Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update Final Report. Prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes for the City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department, Leslie Heumann and Associates, Final Report: Santa Monica Historic Resources Survey Phase Three. Prepared by Leslie Heumann and Associates for the City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department, Los Angeles Times, various dates. McAlester, Virginia, and Lee McAlester. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., Santa Monica City Directories, various dates and publishers. Scott, Paula. Santa Monica: A History on the Edge. San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, Other Sources United States Bureau of the Census. Census records, 1920, 1930, Accessed online at City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department. Historic Preservation in Santa Monica. Accessed online at Preservation/. City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department. Historic Resources Inventory. Accessed online at Resources Inventory/. City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department. Building and alteration permits for Montana Avenue and 901 Montana Avenue. City of Santa Monica Planning and Community Development Department. Landmark application materials for Montana Avenue, including Historic Resources Inventory Forms. Historic Aerial Images, Accessed online at ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 21

25 Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. Tract Maps. Accessed online at Sanborn Map Company. Fire Insurance Maps, Santa Monica, California, 1918 and Santa Monica Public Library. Historical Maps of Santa Monica. Accessed online at Santa Monica Public Library. Santa Monica Image Archive. Accessed online at Santa Monica Public Library. Santa Monica Newspaper Index. Accessed online at ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 22

26 Attachments: Building Permits ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP 23

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36