M E M O R A N D U M

PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA PLANNING DIVISION

DATE: June 11, 2012

TO: Honorable Members of the Landmarks Commission

FROM: Planning Staff

SUBJECT: 1554 5th Street, LC-12LM-003 Public Hearing to Consider a Landmark Designation Application for the commercial building at 1550 5th Street, 1554-1558 5th Street and 417 Colorado Avenue.

PROPERTY OWNER: 1550 5th Street, LLC APPLICANT: City of Santa Monica Landmarks Commission

INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

The subject building, the Goodrum and Vincent Building, was originally constructed in 1928. The building currently houses a Midas muffler repair shop, although a Buick automobile dealership with a appurtenant repair shop, was the original tenant. The Buick dealership vacated the premises in 1935. Midas has been the major tenant in the building since at least 1960.

Designed in a Spanish Colonial Revival style with Churriguresque detailing on its exterior and interior, the building has been altered as its use and tenancy has changed over time. Overall, the majority of the building has lost important components of its original architectural integrity, including the removal of storefront windows, the covering of openings, and the removal of its signature band course. Furthermore, the addition of a shotcrete material diminishes what’s left of the plasterwork and compromises the building’s original architectural distinction. Most of the changes and alterations are considered irreversible.

Research has shown that the building has an association with the inventor and aviator . He first leased the subject property for his company, Waterman Arrowplane Corporation, in 1935. While in tenancy, the building was used in the production of the Arrowbile, although registered in the state as motorcycles, it was a roadable version of his Arrowplane invention. In 1938, due to limited commercial success and personal health concerns, the Corporation was closed. Realizing the value of the building to other tenants, Waterman subsequently purchased the subject property

- 1 - in 1940 where he acted as a leasing agent to the building and owned it until his death in 1976.

In September 2007, the Landmarks Commission originally considered a Demolition Permit for the subject building. Initially, the Commission felt that additional research was warranted as there appeared to be sufficient evidence associated with aviator Waldo Waterman and his “Whatsit” invention. The item returned to the Commission in October 2007, where it was noted that although the buildings were noted as being contributors to a potential Downtown historic district, their architectural integrity had been significantly diminished as a result of changes made to the building since the original construction date. The importance of Waldo Waterman was also found to not be strong enough to the import of this building. The Commission took no action, which “green lighted” its demolition. A Demolition Permit was issued, but the owner at the time chose to not follow-through, and the permit soon expired and the building remained.

On October 10, 2011, the Landmarks Commission re-discussed the commercial building at the subject addresses, based upon new information uncovered concerning Waldo Waterman and some of his “inventions”. The Commission discussed the new information and thought more research was necessary to specifically consider any affiliation with Douglas Aircraft and the Aerophysics Development Corp, as tenants of the building, on the cultural significance of Waldo Waterman as an aviator, and the building’s history and significance related to automobile uses. The discussion was continued to a later date to allow follow-up research.

On February 13, 2012, the Commission again held a discussion on the subject property to determine if a landmark designation application should be filed. During the discussion, Commissioners considered the historic status of the property, a potential contributor to the potential Central Business District Historic District, but further noted that he structures have borderline integrity architecturally and the history of Waldo Waterman and his association was unclear. Members of the Commission also felt that additional fact-finding by the City’s historic consultant would be helpful to further answer questions that arose during deliberation. After hearing from several members of the public, most in support of the filing, and considering a preliminary historic consultant report, which concluded that the subject property does not meet any of the required criteria for local designation, the Commission acted to file a landmark designation application. As part of its action, the Commission requested research on the following topics to determine any significance in association with the subject property:

•More information on the significance of Aerophysics Development Corporation;

•Any comparative history of the former Buick dealership with other local auto dealerships extant at the time;

•Research as to whether the building housed one of the first car-style assembly lines for aviation?

- 2 - •Any information on the Waterman Research Corporation that operated out of Ocean Park; and

•Does Amelia Earhart add any significance?

In follow-up correspondence to City staff, a member of the Commission also inquired as to any significance that the building may have with Formula One race car driver Phil Hill and also any association with a classic car business run by Ken Vaughn, which ran from the 1970s through the 1990s.

Historic Status

The subject property has been identified and assessed under the City’s ongoing survey process on multiple occasions. The property located at 417 Colorado Boulevard and 1558 5th Street was originally identified in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory in 1983 during Phase 1; and 1550 5th Street was surveyed in Phase 3 of the City’s Historic Resources Survey. The individual units were determined to be contributors to a potential historic district called the “Central Business District.” At that time, the subject properties were assigned a National Register status code of “5D1," individually eligible for local listing as a contributor to a local district or eligible for local listing. . The 1994 Northridge Earthquake caused major cracking to the unreinforced brick walls onthe two 5th Street units, and therefore, the building was green tagged by the City of Santa Monica. Green tagged buildings were deemed structures damaged by the earthquake that presented no apparent hazard, but repairs were needed. According to the Historic Resources Inventory Update for the City of Santa Monica dated September 30, 1995, the building was damaged and there was major cracking to the unreinforced brick walls. The repairs following the earthquake included steel reinforcing bars and gunnite finished with painted plaster on the exterior walls and columns and new barrel clay tile roofing. The majority of the Spanish Colonial decoration on the facade was retained.

Since the property was a contributor to the Central Business District, the retrofitting was required to meet the historic property design criteria for the repair and reconstruction of earthquake damaged properties as set forth in the “Earthquake Recovery Act.” It appears the Architectural Review Board approved the retrofit as an acceptable change to a district contributor and that the retrofit did not compromise the integrity of the district as a whole. In 1995, as part of the City’s assessment to determine the earthquake’s overall effects to those properties listed in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, the property was resurveyed and determined eligible as a district contributor and given a 5D1 status code. At the time of the survey, the property had already been retrofitted. Roughly one year later, in 1996, the subject property was surveyed again as part of the Inventory update. The same survey team that had one year earlier determined the property, asa whole, remained a district contributor, now assigned 1550 5th Street (Royalty Auto Body)

- 3 - eligible as a contributor to the potential Central Business District and individually eligible for local listing, while keeping 1554-1558 5th Street (the Midas Building) only eligible as a district contributor. The status code for 1550 5th Street was changed to the National Register Code 5B1, which states that the building is both individually eligible for local designation and a contributor to a local district. Meanwhile, 1554-1558 5th street retained its 5D1 status code, which states the building is eligible only as a district contributor. No changes to the property had occurred between the 1995 survey and the 1996 survey.

Finally, during the 2006-07 Citywide Historic Resources Inventory Update, the subject property was resurveyed and status code was changed to the California Historical Resources Status Code 5B, which states that the building is both individually eligible for local designation and a contributor to a local district.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Notice of the public hearing was provided as follows: Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.36.120, notice of the public hearing was mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property within a 300-foot radius of the project and was published in the Santa Monica Daily Press at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is included as Attachment B.

ANALYSIS

Architectural Description

Completed in 1928, the subject property was designed by H. Vernon George and P. Whitehall, and constructed by contractor, H. M. Roth Construction as commissioned by Goodrum and Vincent, Incorporated, for the operation of a Buick automobile dealership. The building’s architectural styling is Spanish Colonial Revival and was ornately designed and detailed on both the interior and exterior in a Churriguresque manner as part of the pitch to market cars. The building was multi-functional as a new and used car showroom and as a repair facility, with certain portions specifically designed and dedicated for such purposes. The building as it exists today has varying degrees of architectural integrity.

The primary corner portion (1554-1558 5th Street), which originally housed the new car showroom, has been altered significantly and does not appear to retain enough integrity to articulate its original design intent, which relied on the highly ornate exterior and wide storefront display windows to draw customers in. Some of the showroom windows have been removed and replaced in a manner that is not reversible. The entire exterior was also coated with an incompatible layer of shotcrete and stucco which destroyed the diversity of surface textures and materials. The decorative band was removed and replaced with a corrugated metal covering.

- 4 - The Colorado Avenue portion (417 Colorado Avenue), which housed the used car showroom, also has experienced changes to the façade that have impacted its integrity. The existing doors are wood paneled, with a decorative paneled casing and door surround. The entire system appear to be recycled from another building of a different architectural style. The original storefront windows have been removed and replaced with more contemporary aluminum and block glass materials. Element of the façade that once consisted of glazed surfaces have been infilled with stucco. These changes appear to be irreversible.

The 1515 5th Street portion of the building, that section that originally housed the auto repair functions, retains the highest level of architectural integrity and most of its character defining features including the concrete pilasters which form four bays in elevation, decorative band course, and the metal windows and window frames. The only altered section affects one of the bays where two ground floor windows enclosed and two upper windows altered.

Discussion

As is normal protocol for considering a designation applications, staff has requested that its historic consultant analyze the proposal and render an opinion. The City’s consultant, PCR Services, had prepared a preliminary assessment of the Goodrum and Vincent Building which was considered as part of the earlier discussions. Although this report concluded that the building did not appear to rise to the level of a City Landmark, its contents still left some questions in the eyes of the Commission which needed further analysis. A revised report was prepared. It addresses these outstanding questions and has concluded the following:

•Aerophysics Development Corporation – Although this company is a notable tenant that occupied the building between 1953 and 1956, it was not a major employer or economically important company in postwar Santa Monica.

•Importance of Buick dealership in comparison to other local auto dealerships extant at the time - As an individual resource, the integrity of the subject property is presently low and the building has lost the necessary primary character- defining features to be eligible for an association with the automobile dealership of the era. Currently the City is host to better example with higher integrity (1501 Santa Monica Boulevard).

•Any association with the first car-style assembly lines for aviation – Although Waldo Waterman envisioned the use of a similar assembly-line construction as the auto industry, it appears to have never materialized at the subject property. Any Arrowbiles constructed to fulfill the order with the Studebaker company were custom built.

•Importance of Waterman Research Corporation – It appears as though additional information concerning this company was not located.

- 5 -

•Amelia Earhart connection – Waldo Waterman’s association with Amelia Earhart was primarily social, and appears to have capitalized on her popularity to draw attention to his by inviting Earhart to test drive it at events.

Formula One driver Phil Hill and classic car business owner Ken Vaughn – Hill was the first American to win the Formula One World Championship race in 1961 and after retirement went into a custom car restoration business with business partner Vaughn. This business, or any of the individuals, had no affiliation with the subject property.

As previously discussed, the subject property has an association with Waldo Waterman, who was a well-known aviator and inventor of unique aircraft. The City’s consultant has evaluated the importance of this individual in relation to the subject property and has concluded that Waldo Waterman’s notoriety and importance in aviation is primarily connected with places and events that occurred at other locations, such as Van Nuys Airport, the Santa Monica (Cloverfield) Airport, and his residences outside of the City.

In addition to the historic analysis prepared by the City’s Historic Consultant, the property owner also commissioned the services of an historic consultant to evaluate the subject property relative to its importance to a potential Central Business District historic district, its role in the history of automobile dealerships in the City, its architectural history, any association with Waldo Waterman or his aircraft designs, and the overall history of personal aircraft. The conclusion drawn is that the building lacks architectural integrity and its association with Waldo Waterman and his contributions to the aviation industry do not appear to be significant. The report notes that was a minor component in the development of light aircraft, one that does not appear to be particularly significant to the history of aviation technology. Waterman is sometimes credited with development of steerable and controls, but he was not the first or most successful aircraft engineer to use these design components, and it is unclear to what extent he contributed to improvements of the designs.

Landmarks Ordinance/Findings

The Landmarks Ordinance requires the Commission to review the subject building’s eligibility as a landmark based on the six criteria below. The Commission may designate a building as a Landmark if it meets one or more of these criteria. As indicated below, staff concurs with the conclusion of both historic consultants indicating that the property does not meet any of the specified criteria for designation. The following draft findings are made to support this conclusion:

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

As an individual resource, the architecture of the Goodrum and Vincent building would exemplify, symbolize or manifest significant associations with the social, economic, and

- 6 - cultural history of Santa Monica if it still retained its elaborate original architectural appearance and stunningly beautiful showroom. The subject property was designed as an elaborate automobile dealership in 1928 and was used as such for seven years. However, the integrity of the subject property is presently low and the building has lost the necessary primary character-defining features to be eligible for this historical association. The Cummings-Wright Buick, 1501 Santa Monica Boulevard, is presently a better example of this property type.

After 1935, the subject property was occupied by a number of different light industrial tenants predominantly for aviation, aeronautics, and automobile repair. Waldo Waterman occupied the building between 1935 and 1938 where he manufactured six Arrowbiles; and later in 1940, he purchased the subject property, subdivided it and leased the building to other businesses until his death in 1976. Two notable tenants were the Douglas Aircraft Company, located in the building during the 1940s, and the Aerophysics Development Company, located in the building between 1953 and 1956. The Douglas Aircraft Company used the space for storage, not a notable use in comparison to their larger manufacturing facilities at the Clover Field airport in Santa Monica. Additionally, the Aerophysics Development Corporation was not a major employer or economically important in postwar Santa Monica; other aeronautics businesses, including Douglas Aircraft Company, RAND, and Propulsion Research Company, employed greater numbers and occupied greater square footage.

The property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. The subject property does not retain sufficient integrity to exemplify its original association with automotive sales. The property does retain enough integrity to convey its subsequent association with the production of the Arrowbile planes and/or aeronautic fabrication, research and development, but these activities were not significant in the economic history of the city. The property does not possess sufficient architectural integrity or significance for designation as an individual landmark as an exemplary representative of its style and/or property type. Thus, the subject property does not individually rise to the necessary threshold of architectural, historical, social and cultural importance within the automobile, aviation, or aerospace history of Santa Monica to qualify as a City Landmark.

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

The subject property does not have aesthetic or artistic interest or value. The resource does not meet this criterion.

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

The subject property is not clearly identified with productive life of Waldo Waterman. While Waterman’s connection to the flying car movement is important, the subject property is one of several places associated with his productive life. Waterman began

- 7 - designing airplanes and developing airplane technology at his Venice location beginning in 1919 until the mid-1920s. The original design of the Whatsit occurred at what is now the Van Nuys Airport in the early 1930s. Between 1933 and 1935 Waterman worked on the flying car at both the Van Nuys Airport and at 15th and Santa Monica Boulevard in Santa Monica. It was only for three years, between 1935 and 1938, that Waterman actually worked on the design and manufacturing of the Arrowbile flying car at the subject property, where he produced six Arrowbiles. However, he also stored an Arrowbile at his home in Santa Monica Canyon at 460 Mesa Road and would drive the aircraft to the Santa Monica Airport, as featured in Life Magazine.133 After WWII, Waterman lived at 345 Amalfi in the Santa Monica Canyon in the City of Los Angeles where he continued to work on the Arrowbile in his home workshop until he moved to San Diego. The productive life of Waldo Waterman’s work on the design, fabrication, and manufacturing of the flying car occurred in several locations over many years. The Arrowbile, which was associated with the subject property, was never economically successful. The Whatsit and the Arrowplane, designed at the Van Nuys Airport, won a national competition and was important in introducing the idea of the “flivver” movement to the public. Waterman was Amelia Earhart’s friend and their association was primarily social; while Waterman may have tried to garner attention for his flying car by inviting Earhart to test drive it, even with this type of publicity, the Arrowbile was unsuccessful. Although the subject property is associated with a socially notable individual who made his name in connection with the promotion of aviation, Waterman’s notoriety and importance in aviation is primarily connected with places and events that occurred at other locations, such as the Metropolitan (Van Nuys) Airport, the Cloverfield Airport, and his homes in the Santa Monica Canyon. The architecture of the building reflects its connection to automobile culture in Santa Monica, not the manufacturing of flying cars. The subject property was designed and constructed to function as a car dealership. The ornate Churriguresque detailing, the high showroom windows, and the tower rising on the corner were meant to attract customers and showcase the cars. The subject property does not embody or symbolize the manufacturing of the flying car, nor did it function as an aid or directly inform the development of the Arrowbile, which occurred in a variety of locations.

William Bollay, the founder and president of the Aerophysics Development Corporation, was an important scientist in the research and development of aerospace technology. Before he started the Aerophysics Development Corporation, he supervised the Aerophysics Laboratory at North American Aviation. Even though he is an important scientist, he is not clearly identified with the Goodrum and Vincent Building, as the corporation also had two other offices in the Pacific Palisades and Santa Monica. The headquarters was located near William Bollay’s home at 15304 Sunset Boulevard in the Pacific Palisades office, the engineering office in the Santa Monica office was at 1452 4th Street (the building is no longer extant), and the laboratory/fabrication shop was in Santa Monica at 1558 5th Street. The corporation rented the industrial space in the Goodrum and Vincent Building for a little over three years. Most likely the ideas for the research and development projects were conceived at the headquarters and engineering offices, and minor testing and models making took place at the subject property, while major testing was carried out at facilities such as Ames, Caltech, and

- 8 - Army bases. During this time period the Aerophysics Development Company worked on the unsuccessful Dart anti-tank missile and other research and development projects for the U.S. Army. By July 1956 the Aerophysics Development Company outgrew their three offices in Santa Monica and the Pacific Palisades and moved to a temporary office in Santa Barbara until the constructed of their new headquarters was completed in 1958. While William Bollay was the president and important figurehead of the Aerophysics Development Company, the height of his career was establishing the Aerophysics Labortatory at National American Aviation and later the sale of his corporation to the Curtiss-Wright Company that lead to the consolidation of his offices in Santa Monica and the Pacific Palisades into an ultra-modern and high-tech facility in Santa Barbara.

In sum, as the location of a series of activities in twentieth-century aviation and aerophysics in Santa Monica, including the manufacture of Waterman’s Arrowbile, Douglas Aircraft’s use of the building for temporary storage during WWII, and Bollay’s use of the building for various research projects for the Air Force and development of the Dart anti-tank missile for his Aerohphysic’s Development Corporation, it may be possible to argue conservatively that the property is important as one of several sites in the City relating to early aviation and aerophysics in Santa Monica. The link which may explain the coincidence of this string of activities all occurring in the same building, is most likely Waldo Waterman’s ownership of the property and his interest in leasing the property to entities within the field of aviation.

The subject property does not appear to meet this criterion.

(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 satisfy this criterion. The subject property lacks sufficient integrity to convey its original highly ornate architecture or its original architectural intent. The three primary character-defining features of the property were the Churrigueresque detailing, the showroom windows, and the corner tower. Only the corner tower retains residual integrity. The subject property does not meet criterion 4.

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

The subject property is not eligible under this criterion. Architects H. Vernon George and P. Whitehall appear to have been regional practitioners of Period Revival Architecture in Beverly Hills. However, they do not appear particularly notable in the architectural history of Santa Monica or Los Angeles. Contractor, H. M. Roth Construction appears to

- 9 - have been a competent builder in the Spanish Colonial Revival style, judging by the historic appearance of the subject property and others of his several attributed works in the City. However, the subject property does not retain sufficient integrity to convey any potential local significance in association with either its architects or builder. The subject property does not meet criterion 5.

(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 subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. Although the subject property’s tower is a readily identifiable on the edge of the Central Business District, the tower is not in a unique location and does not have singular physical characteristics worthy of designation under this criterion.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that the Landmarks Commission deny the Landmark Designation application for the commercial building located at 1550 5th Street, 1554-1558 5th Street and 417 Colorado Avenue as the property appears to not meet any of the designation criteria established in SMMC 9.36.100.

Pursuant to SMMC 9.36.180, the Landmarks Commission’s determination regarding this application may be appealed to the City Council if the appeal is filed with the City Planning Division within ten (10) consecutive days commencing from the date that the decision is made by the Landmarks Commission.

Attachments:

A. PCR Services Landmark Assessment Report (April 2012) B. Public Hearing Notice C. 1554 5th Street, Santa Monica, CA Historic Resource Assessment, Chattel Architecture, March 29, 2012 (property owner’s consultant) D. DPR Sheet

- 10 -