HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES-12-6793 (BIJOU BUILDING ALTERATION)S'.
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
to
n
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO.12-6793
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
FOR AN ALTERATION TO THE BIJOU BUILDING, A DESIGNATED
HISTORIC LANDMARK, TO ACCOMMODATE "CHASE BANK", FORMERLY
COLDSTONE AND GALLERY C, LOCATED AT 1221-1225 HERMOSA
AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOTS 14-18, BLOCK 13,
HERMOSA BEACH TRACT, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
SECTION 1. On September 28, 2011, Dan Popa, Stantec Architecture, Inc., applied for
a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a tenant improvement for "Chase Bank" within the
"Bijou Building," a designated Historic Landmark, located at 1221 Hermosa Avenue.
SECTION 2. On March 27, 2012, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to
consider said appeal at which time testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to
and considered by the Council.
SECTION 3. Based on the Staff Report and evidence received, both oral and written, the
I City Council makes the following factual findings:
1. On September 28, 2011, Dan Popa, Stantec Architecture, Inc., applied for a Certificate
I of Appropriateness pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 17.53.150 to construct a
tenant improvement for "Chase Bank" at the Bijou Building, a designated Historic Landmark,
located at 1221-1225 Hermosa Avenue.
2. The City retained PCR Services Corp. on October 25, 2011 to conduct the Certificate of
Appropriateness review. A site investigation was conducted on November 3, 2011, and
applicant's plans were reviewed by PCR for conformance with the City's Historic Preservation
Ordinance and the Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Structures". A letter was issued by PCR dated November 28, 2011 finding
significant impacts would result and the findings to approve a certificate of appropriateness were
not substantiated. The applicant submitted revised plans on February 8, 2012. Alterations
generally include alteration of the existing non-loadbearing wall in the southeast commercial space
to facilitate access between the southeast floor area to the immediate north of the demising wall,
Page 1 of 5
12-6793
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
infill of openings in the south wall of the vestibule, insertion of custom doors in the west wall of
the vestibule, enclosure of a non -historic opening on the north and south wall of the comfort zone,
insertion of an opening on the non -historic south wall of the comfort zone, restoration of the
original tile floor in the foyer, construction of the new partitions the construction of a new vault,
installation of new bank equipment and finishes, and modification of mechanical, plumbing, and
electrical services. PCR conducted a second review dated March 1, 2012 making
recommendations incorporated into project conditions, finding the proposed alteration maintains
the character -defining elements of the building, the impact is mitigated to a level of less than a
significant impact on the historical resource, and the alteration can be allowed as a
"rehabilitation."
SECTION 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the City Council makes the
I following findings pursuant to H.B.M.C. Sections 17.53.160 as set forth in the review performed by
PCR Services Corp., dated March 1, 2012, attached hereto as Exhibit "A":
1. The proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards adopted by the Council;
2. The proposed work will not detrimentally alter, destroy or adversely affect any exterior
improvement or exterior architectural feature; and
3. The proposed work will retain the essential elements that make the resource significant.
SECTION 5. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby approves the requested
Certificate of Appropriateness for modifications at 1221 Hermosa Avenue, subject to the
following Conditions of Approval:
1. Construction shall be consistent with the project plans dated February 8, 2012 reviewed
by the City Council on March 27, 2012. Building plans/drawings submitted for building permit
issuance shall be reviewed for consistency with the plans approved by the Planning Commission
and the conditions of this resolution, and approved by the Community Development Director prior
to the issuance of any Building Permit. Plans shall be modified to incorporate the
recommendations set forth in the March 1, 2012 review by PCR to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director.
Page 2 of 5
12-6793
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Where any deterioration or damage to historic material is exposed during the
course of the work, they should be repaired where practical or selectively replaced in -kind using
the gentlest means practical to protect the integrity and significance of this landmark property. For I
example, when proceeding with any repair to the plaster work Preservation Brief 23: Preserving
Historical Ornamental Plaster should be consulted.
B. Infill of previously removed historic fabric that will be replaced under the I
Iproposed project should be replaced in -kind, as the Standards recommend, so that the historic
character of the interior is protected.
C. With regard to the bank vestibule, the plane of the new infill wall surface shall
match the original wall placement, and the plaster finishes shall be matched to the original and
recreated in -kind, and plaster baseboard moldings and pilaster base moldings shall be restored.
2. A pre -construction on -site start-up meeting with a qualified preservation consultant and
developer's contractors actually performing the work shall be required; on -call monitoring by a
qualified preservation consultant during construction, at relevant milestones, and at the substantial
completion stage to ensure general conformity with the approved drawings and conformance of
the executed work with the required standards shall be required as deemed necessary by the
Community Development Director.
3. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Municipal Code, obtain all
required building, encroachment, sign and other required permits, and comply with all
requirements of the Building, Public Works and Fire Departments. Project construction shall
conform to the Noise Control Ordinance requirements in Section 8.24.050.
4. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.53.200 the owner, occupant or other person in
actual charge of a landmark building structure or improvement, shall keep in good repair the
exterior portions of all such buildings, structures, or improvements, and all interior portions
thereof whose maintenance is necessary to prevent deterioration and decay of any exterior
improvement or exterior architectural feature.
5. Approval of this Certificate of Appropriateness shall lapse and become void eighteen
(18) months from the date of final approval, unless a building permit (if required) has been issued
and the work authorized by the Certificate has commenced prior to such expiration date and is
diligently pursued to completion. Upon request of the property owner, including the reason
Page 3 of 5
12-6793
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2s
therefore, at least 60 days prior to the expiration date, the Certificate of Appropriateness may be I
extended by the Council for an additional period of up to twelve (12) months. The Council may I
approve, approve with conditions, or deny any request for extension.
SECTION 7. The proposal is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act pursuant to Section 15064.5b(3) because the project follows the Secretary of the
Interior's "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings" and
involves a minor alteration that does not increase intensity of use and retains the essential elements
I and historic integrity of a historic building within an existing urbanized site with availability of
i services.
SECTION 8. This grant shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the
I owners of the property involved have filed at the office of the Planning Division of the
I Community Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agree to
accept, all of the conditions of this grant. The Certificate of Appropriateness shall be recorded and
proof of recordation shall be submitted to the City of Hermosa Beach.
Each of the above conditions is separately enforceable and, if one of the conditions is
found unenforceable by a court of law, all other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable.
The Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Hermosa Beach and
its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its
agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul this Certificate of Appropriateness.
The City shall promptly notify the Permittee of any claim, action or proceeding and the City shall
fully cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Permittee of any claim,
action or proceeding, or the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the Permittee shall not
thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the City.
Page 4 of 5
12-6793
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The Permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees that the City may
be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this grant.
Although the Permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion,
participate at its own expense in the defense of the action but such participation shall not relieve
the Permittee of any obligation under this Certificate of Appropriateness.
SECTION 9. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge
to the decision City Council must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City
Council.
SECTION 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution
and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.
I ATTEST:
Clerk
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 2012.
and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California
APPROVED AS
FORM:
�— L
Page 5 of 5
12-6793
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
I, Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk of the City of Herrnosa Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.12-6793 was duly and regularly passed,
approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hennosa Beach at a Regular
Meeting of said Council at the regular place thereof on March 27, 2012.
The vote was as follows:
AYES:
Bobko, DiVirgilio, Duclos, Tucker, Mayor Fishman
NOES:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
ABSENT:
None
Dated: April 11, 2012
4ainhoerflin`g, City rk
Exhibit A
March 1. 2012
Pamela Townsend, Senior Planner
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
Community Development Department
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, California 90254
P.GR
Re: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REVIEW, 1221 HERMOSA BEACH
AVENUE, HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254
Dear Ms. Townsend:
PCR Services Corporation (PCR) has reviewed the revised plans for the proposed tenant
improvements for the commercial property at 1221 Hermosa Avenue, Hermosa Beach, California.
Under the proposed plans prepared by Stantec Architecture, Inc., the Project consists of tenant
improvements to the interior and exterior of the commercial space at 1221 Hermosa Beach Avenue
to accommodate the new tenant, JP Morgan Chase. The proposed plans forwarded to PCR on
February 21, 2012 for review consisted of the following: Site Plan A0.1; Demolition Floor Plan
A1.0, Demolition Ceiling Plan A1.0.1; Floor Plan ALL, Finish Plan A1.2; Furniture Plan A1.3;
Reflected Ceiling Plan AIA; Door Window Schedule A2.1; Door Window Details A2.2; Existing
Elevations A3.1; Interior Elevations A4.1 — A4.3; Details A4.4; all dated October 13, 2011. .
In accordance with the terms of the Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between
the City and PCR, we are submitting a final plan review based on the information contained in the
application submitted to the Community Development Department on February 7, 2012.
PCR's Principal Historic Preservation Planner Murray Miller, M. Arch, conducted a site
meeting on January 12, 2012 with Stantec Architecture; representatives from JP Morgan Chase; and
Federal Realty to clarify PCR's previous plan review dated November 30, 2011. Based on the
clarifications provided by PCR at the site meeting, Stantec proceeded to amend the previous design,
which is the subject of this present plan review. The revised design for the proposed tenant
improvements have now been reviewed for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation (Department of Interior regulations, 36 CFR 57). We submit the
following comments to you in support of the revised plans prepared by Stantec as submitted to the
City of Hermosa Beach on February 7, 2012.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
In 1998, the Bijou Building was surveyed, evaluated and assigned a California Historical
Resources Status Code of 3S. The property was recommended eligible for the National Register as
One Venture, Suite 150, Irvine, CA 92618 WERNET w .pornet.com Tee 949.753.7001 Fm 949.753.7002
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 2
'PCR
an individual property through survey evaluation.' The property was found eligible for the National
Register under criteria A and C, and also as a City Landmark under criteria A, C, and D.
Constructed in 1923, the Neoclassical Revival -style Bijou Theater exemplifies the early social and
economic history of Hermosa Beach, it is a distinctive example of the Neoclassical Revival
architectural style, and it is a representative example of a notable southern California architect's
work, Richard Douglas King, a Hermosa Beach resident. The period of significance is 1923, the
time of its construction.
On April 27, 1999 the City of Hermosa Beach designated the Bijou Building as a Historic
Landmark and adopted a Resolution Nos. 99-5980 and 99-5981 designating the Bijou Building a
historic landmark pursuant to Section 15.53.070 of the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance and
approving the use of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation to guide future
change to the building.
According to the 1998 DPR survey form, the exterior character -defining features of the Neo-
classical Bijou Theater Building are: symmetrical composition, massing, fenestration patterns, brick
exterior walls with stucco siding, terra cotta pilasters capped with Ionic capitals and acanthus leaves,
spandrels dividing the first and second floors, cornice, and storefronts (Figures I to10).
The 1998 DPR survey form described the exterior and interior at 1221 Hermosa Avenue, the
space originally occupied by a theater, as:
The theatre plan consists of three sections: the foyer, lobby, and auditorium. The
foyer is currently located off the primary elevation along Hermosa Avenue. It is a single -
story space, recessed under the marquee and office above. Large rectangular shaped
display windows hang from each side of the foyer. These display windows held the
posters that advertised the movie features of the week. The foyer is paved with small
unglazed clay tile blocks and is unadorned of detailing.
Jan Ostashay, PCR Services, Department of Parks and Recreation Form, Bijou Theater Building, December 22,
1998.
The National Register criteria are: (A) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history; (B) It is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; (C) It embodies the
distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that
possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack
individual distinction; (D) It yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
The City of Hermosa Beach Historic Preservation Ordinance defines a landmark as: (A) A resource exemplifying
special cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history; (B) A resource identified
with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history; (C) A resource embodying distinctive
characteristics of style, type, period, or method of construction or a valuable example of the use of indigenous
materials or craftsmanship; (D) A resource representative of notable work of a builder, designer, or architect; (E) A
resource with unique location, singular physical characteristics, representing an established and familiar visual
feature or landmark ofa neighborhood, community or the City.
i
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 3
The lobby space of the theatre, located adjacent to the foyer and accessed via
three pairs of double glass paned doors, is a large single -story space, semi -circular in
plan, with ornate classical detailing. This detailing includes textured walls, cove ceilings,
wood baseboards, large plaster casted scallops with feline figures at each base; tall, thin
Solomonic columns capped with the Greek fountain, a telephone alcove and a small
ticket office. The men's' and women's public restrooms are adjacent to the lobby to the
south.'
The DPR survey form also described the exterior and interior of the southeast commercial
space as:
The southeast storefront is a small single -story space (approximately 726 square
feet), rectangular in plan, and three bays wide. The interior space has a high ceiling and
contains a mezzanine with staircase, a restroom, and limited storage space. The interior
commercial space is devoid of ornamental detailing and furnishings.'
The 1998 DPR form described some of the alterations to the exterior and interior of the
theater as follows: "the removal and replacement of the original vertical marquee and the projecting
neon light marquee from the 1930s with a modern metal and plastic marquee [Figure 3], the addition
and removal of a foyer ticket booth [Figure 9]... the large dividing wall down the center of the
auditorium, removal of the $20,000 Robert Morgan organ, removal and damage to some original
ornamental decorations in the lobby and auditorium area, removal of original lighting fixtures and
snack bar in lobby, replacement of etched window panes in glass paneled entry doors in the foyer,
modifications to the configuration of the public restrooms (some time in the 1930s); the re -
upholstery of the original leather auditorium seats with vinyl/cloth material."'
Based upon PCR's previous review of the existing conditions, property history, and historic
photographs, we can confirm that there have been many alterations to the theater space since its
initial construction. In 1983, the theater was converted into a movie theater; the auditorium was split
into two, and the property was renamed the Bijou Twin Cinema.' In 1997, the CIM Group, a real
estate development company, purchased the vacant Bijou building, and began the process of
rehabilitating the theater into a retail space. Two years later the building was structurally retrofitted
and in 2003 the interior of the theater was redesigned for gallery space (Figures 12 to 15).'
Since the time of the 1998 survey many changes have occurred to the interior of 1221
Hermosa Avenue. The foyer was removed, and altered as follows, the three set of double doors on
the west foyer wall leading into the lobby were removed and the wall was opened, the foyer was
3 Jan Ostashay, PCR Services, Department of Parks and Recreation Form, Bgou Theater Building, December 22, 1998.
Ibid.
Ibid.
6 "Cove Theater Trying Again, as Art House, " Los Angeles Times October 6, 1983, p. SB_A].
7
"You have to C it, " Daily Breeze, March 11, 2003.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 4
i
PCR
enclosed with new doors at Hermosa Avenue, the foyer tile floor was covered with wood floor and
an exposed segment was kept in front of the entrance doors, the south foyer wall was opened
underneath the decorative arches and the columns were retained, the opening on the north wall was
enclosed, and the foyer ceiling was dropped. Additionally, two openings were inserted into the
south wall of the barrel vaulted lobby area. The classical detailing in the semi -circular lobby area
was retained and a large opening was inserted into the west wall. The classical molding and
columns were retained on the north wall of the auditorium seating area and new storefronts were
inserted. The auditorium seating area was removed. A mezzanine level was constructed on along
the south wall of the auditorium seating area and the classical detailing was preserved. The entire
space was painted white. The auditorium stage and back of stage area was blocked off from the
space with a wall.
PCR also noted that the fenestration along the primary (east) elevation had been previously
altered. According to historic photographs circa 1923 and 1924, the first southern bay was a single
pane window with a transom window above and the next two bays had doors leading into
commercial spaces with sidelights and transom windows above (Figure 1). At an unknown date, the
fenestration of the first southern bay was replaced a single -pane window with a transom window
above and the central window was replaced with a door and sidelights, and the third window was
replaced with single -pane glass with transom window above. The existing exterior windows on the
northern bays were replaced at an unknown date. Originally there were no transom windows above
the first floor windows on the northern bays, which were originally fixed single pane windows.
However, even though the fenestration and doors have been altered from the buildings initial
construction, the overall design of the storefront remains significant and character defining,
including the transparency associated with large glazed openings forming part of the storefront bays
and the design character of the windows and recessed door openings.
PROPOSED PROJECT
The scope of the proposed work is confined to the former foyer and lobby of the theater, and
the southeast storefront of the Bijou Building at 1221 Hermosa Avenue.
Interior improvements include: the alteration of the existing non-loadbearing wall in the
southeast commercial space to facilitate access between the southeast floor area and the floor area to
the immediate north of the demising wall; the infill of openings in the south wall of the vestibule; the
insertion of custom doors in the west wall of the vestibule; the enclosure of a non -historic opening
on the north and south wall of the comfort zone; the insertion of an opening on the non -historic
south wall of the comfort zone; the restoration of the original tile floor in the foyer; the construction
of new partitions; the construction of a new vault; the installation of new bank equipment and
finishes; and the modification of mechanical, plumbing, and electrical services.
Exterior modifications include recovering existing awnings; installing one new awning;
replacing existing non -original doors with a new double entrance door and sidelights on the east
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 5
PCR
elevation; and the installation of a new storefront and ATM on the non -historic single -story north
elevation.
IMPACTS ANALYSIS
1. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project involves a "substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource" when one or more of the following
occurs:
• Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means physical
demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate
surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially
impaired.
• The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project:
a. Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of
a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its
inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical
Resources; or
b. Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics
that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to
Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in a historical
resources survey meeting- the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public
Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project
establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or
culturally significant; or
c. Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of
a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its
eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as
determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards) are codified at
36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 67.7. In most circumstances, the Standards are
relevant in assessing whether there is a substantial adverse change under CEQA. Section
15064.5b(3) of the CEQA Guidelines states in part that "... a project that follows the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,
Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and
Ms. Pamela Townsend Nc�
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 6
Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historic
resource," and therefore may be considered categorically exempt.
2. Analysis of Project Impacts
The proposed project alters the existing interior commercial space at 1221 Hermosa Avenue
in a manner so as to accommodate the new use while retaining the existing distinctive materials,
spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the Bijou Building. The proposed changes to the
exterior of the building would ensure that the integrity of the character -defining fenestration pattern
on the east elevation from the 1923 period of significance would be sustained.
As noted above, generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing, Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as
mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the Historical Resource! Thus, it is
acknowledged that the proposed project is consistent with the spirit of "rehabilitation."
The proposed project was reviewed by a qualified historic preservation specialist who
satisfies the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for Historic Architecture
and Preservation Planning, pursuant to 36 CFR 61, in order to determine the significance of potential
impacts of the proposed work on the Bijou Building. A discussion of how the proposed project
conforms to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards follows. These review comments are intended
to assist the City in the project review process.
In accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards,
Standard 1: A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires
minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
The property will be used as a bank. The property was historically used as theater;
however, the space was converted into a commercial space in the early twenty-first
century. The southeast space was originally used a commercial space. The proposed
alterations to the demising wall of the southeast space are considered to be the
minimum change required in order to achieve optimum use of the two spaces into one
space. The proposed scope of alteration forms part of the rehabilitation of the
building. The minimal change to the spatial characteristics that defines the southeast
commercial space will be retained to a substantive degree therefore complying with
Standard 1.
a California Environmental Quality Act, 15064.5 (3).
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 7
PCR
Standard 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of
distinctive materials or alteration offeatures, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize
a property will be avoided.
• The proposed work alters the interior of the commercial space for a bank, and thus
reconfigures the interior by removing and constructing new interior partition walls for
offices and other bank functions. The character -defining features of the existing
space are the semi -circular wall with large cast plaster scallop shells, pilasters, tall
and thin Solomonic columns, arches, crown molding, wood baseboards, textured
walls, and restoration of the original glazed tile in the vestibule (see Figures 7 to 9, 17
to 20). These features will be retained, protected and preserved by the proposed
rehabilitation of the existing spaces.
• With regard to the proposed alteration of the existing wall abutting the southeast
commercial space occupied by the existing ice-cream parlor to create one larger
space, this work would substantially retain the spatial relationships that characterize
the separate and distinct historic uses of the building.
• In the proposed project, the character -defining spatial relationship and spaces (the
foyer and lobby entrance into the main theater) along with the above -noted character -
defining features will be substantially retained. Two of the openings in the south wall
of the proposed bank vestibule will be in -filled. This intervention will assist in the
reinstatement of historic character as the openings were originally filled (see Figure
9). The installation of ATM's in the two in -filled walls, while practically reversible,
will alter the visual characteristics of the entrance lobby that the infilling of the
existing openings intended to reinstate.
• The transparency that is characteristic of large glazed openings along the east, north
and the south return elevation along with the perception of depth into the interior
space and the ability to see inside the building through large glazed openings at
street -level is considered to be a character -defining feature, which would be largely
sustained by the proposed changes. This characteristic, however, is diminished by the
proximity of the new south and east stud walls that form part of the space numbered
123 at the southeast corner. The positioning of the shorter stud wall flush to the jamb
of the existing window opening is incongruous with the character of the property.
Similarly, the location of the new south wall is too close to the existing window.
Together, these two walls, given their proximity and detail interface with the existing
window opening will result in a visual change that is uncharacteristic of the property.
This change is also considered to be minor in the context of the rehabilitation of the
property and can be considered practically reversible.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 8
On balance, it is therefore considered that the above aspects of the scope of work would
comply with Standard 2.
Standard 3: Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or
elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
• This revised rehabilitation design recognizes the historic character and existing
conditions of the property and the addition of conjectural features has been eliminated
from the proposed design. The proposed work therefore complies with Standard 3,
Standard 4: Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be
retained and preserved.
• There are no changes or additions that appear to have acquired historic significance in
their own right that should be retained or preserved. This Standard does not apply to
the proposed project.
Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
• The design, symmetry, rhythm and pattern of the fenestration are character -defining
features of the exterior. The proposed interior space numbered 123 at the southeast
corner of the property would alter the visual characteristics of the storefront to a
minor degree when viewed from the exterior.
• It is proposed that new interior doors with sidelights will be installed within the same
opening as the original entrance lobby doors to the theater. The proposed work is
intended to retain the distinctive materials, finishes, and construction techniques that
characterize the north and south walls of the vestibule.
• The proposed project involves the removal of non -character -defining interior walls
and the construction of new walls that are intended to minimize the impact on
distinctive materials, features and finishes that characterize the property. On balance,
it is considered that the proposed project would comply with the intent of Standard 5.
Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity
of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in
design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be
substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
• The site investigation undertaken on November 3, 2011, revealed that the masonry
walls with plaster detailing shows signs of deterioration, however, repairs to existing
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 9
C=
deteriorated historic features are not within the scope of the proposed project. It is
understood from previous on -site discussions with the applicant, that if any
conditions are exposed during the execution of the proposed project involving
deteriorated historic features, they shall be repaired where practical or selectively
replaced in_kind using the gentlest means practical_ When proceeding with any repair
to the plaster work Preservation Brief 23: Preserving Historical Ornamental Plaster
should be consulted.' It is considered that the proposed project therefore conforms to
Standard 6.
Standard 7: Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest
means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
• The proposed scope of work does not specify the need for chemical treatments.
Physical treatments that are required to rehabilitate the property as proposed will
conform to Standard 7.
Standard 8: Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources
must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
• There are no known archaeological resources at the project site and no ground
disturbing activities are expected within the scope of the proposed project.
Standard 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale,
and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
• The addition of new doors at the central east entrance and the north secondary
entrance will not destroy historic materials because these doors are already
replacement doors. The design of the proposed new doors appears to be compatible
with the historic property.
• The proposed alteration of the south wall that divides the existing commercial space
occupied by the ice-cream parlor from the main entrance foyer would alter the
demising wall that contributes to the character of the spaces and the spatial qualities
associated with each. This alteration will, however, substantially retain the sense of
space and will not significantly alter the perception of the expanded space from the
main entrance foyer when looking to the south.
9 National Park Service, Preservation Brief 23: Preserving Historical Ornamental Plaster
hitp:/hvww.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/briej23.htm, accessed November 15, 2011.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 10
PCR
• The construction of the vault in a manner so as to eliminate the function of an original
arched single doorway on the south exterior elevation would not destroy one of the
three existing access doors that contribute to the characterization of the south
elevation, because the exterior form and features would not be altered by the
proposed work. The existing door is not original; however the door opening is
original and character defining.
• The removal of the existing non -historic wood floor will reveal the original glazed
tile floor in the vestibule and in front of the primary entrance doors; the extent and
condition of which is to be determined. The proposed careful removal of the existing
wood floor is specified so as not to destroy historic materials, however, should any
damage to historic materials and finishes occur, their preservation will comply with
Standard 7 and monitoring is expected to ensure conformance with the Standards.
The above -noted new construction and alterations would therefore comply with Standard
9.
Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a
manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its
environment would be unimpaired.
• The extension of the office space numbered 123 in the southeast corner of the
building; the installation of the ATM machines into the proposed infill walls; and the
construction of the vault immediately behind the existing single arched doorway on
the south elevation are considered practically reversible and, if these elements of the
new construction were removed in the future, the essential character of the south
elevation and the entrance lobby would be unimpaired.
The above -noted new construction would therefore comply with Standard 10.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed changes to the existing Landmark are intended to alter the interior and exterior
of the commercial space at 1221 Hermosa Avenue to accommodate a new use for JP Morgan Chase.
The proposed exterior alterations are limited to non -character -defining features on the north
elevation and the proposed interior alterations are substantially compliant with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards, as discussed above. In accordance with Section 15064.5b (3) of the CEQA
Guidelines, the proposed rehabilitation project follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing Historic Buildings and the physical and visual effects identified in the discussion
above are considered to have an impact on the historic resource that are less than significant.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 1 1
Recommendations
r l
''Ill
rcx
Where any deterioration or damage to historic material is exposed during the course
of the work, they should be repaired where practical or selectively replaced in -kind using
the gentlest means practical to protect the integrity and significance of this landmark
property. For example, when proceeding with any repair to the plaster work
Preservation Brief 23. Preserving Historical Ornamental Plaster should be consulted.10
2. Infill of previously removed historic fabric that will be replaced under the proposed
project should be replaced in -kind, as the Standards recommend, so that the historic
character of the interior is protected.
With regard to the bank vestibule, it is recommended that the plane of the new infill wall
surface match the original wall placement, and that the plaster finishes be matched to the
original and recreated in -kind, and that plaster baseboard moldings and pilaster base
moldings be restored.
PCR hereby submits the results of its final plan review of the revised project plans prepared
by Stantec Architecture, dated October 13, 2011 as amended by revisions received by the City of
Hermosa Beach on February 7, 2012. Additional plan reviews or other preservation consulting
services not stipulated in the Amendment to Professional Services Agreement between the City and
PCR will be considered out -of -scope. PCR is available to provide additional preservation design
and treatment consulting services, if desired, for an additional cost. If you have any questions please
do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 753-7001, ext. 2111.
Sincerely,
PCR SERVICES CORPORATION
Murray G. Miller, M. Arch., MEDS (Cons.), Assoc. AIA, MCIP
Principal Historic Preservation Planner
10 National Park Service, Preservation Brief 23: Preserving Historical Ornamental Plaster
hUp:/hvwiv.nps.gov,,hps/tps/briefs/briefl3.him, accessed November 15, 2011.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 12
�,-0-MM aS s+w+'"^. T �i �
Rm.� ij�
`�. VVyy) t I.ylyvlY
�i�i'SNa
i wad€ 'wx%i'�d`•R.iL-1e���ai � ��i ^ai��' i 7I ��� �~ �t
I
Y Ji ry
Y
�r �
lv?f+'•v�i�RKr i%l: x1.14• T-Y ,_
„yi
r +
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 14
Figure 2. South and East Elevations, Bijou Building, circa 1923
(Hermosa Beach Historical Society)
PCR
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 15
Figure 3. South and East Elevation, Bijou Building, circa 1998 (PCR)
Figure 4. North Elevation, Bijou Building, circa 1998 (PCR)
PCR
1p I, - I
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 17
Figure 7. Theater Lobby, view to southeast, circa early 1920s
(Hermosa Beach Historical Society)
PC:R
Figure 8. Theater Lobby, view to southeast, circa early 1920s
(Hermosa Beach Historical Society)
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 20
Figure 10. Theater, view to west, circa early 1920s
(Hermosa Beach Historical Society)
i
J� .. )_
PCR
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 21
Alterations
i
lI
Figure 11. Southeast storefront on primary (east) elevation, view to southwest, Bijou Building, 1998 (PCR)
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 22
Figure 12. North elevation, view to southwest, Bijou Building, circa 2003 (PCR)
Figure 13. North elevation, view to southwest, Bijou Building, circa 2003 (PCR)
rr
rz
_
4 � r
t
.H
k�
a
a ,
■
t i
MIN
ot
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 24
Figure 16. Central entrance, primary (east) elevation, view to west, Bijou Building, circa 2003 (PCR)
Figure 17. 1221 Hermosa Avenue Foyer, view to south, Bijou Building, circa 2003 (PCR)
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 26
Figure 18. 1221 Hermosa Avenue Foyer, view to southwest, Bijou Building, circa 2003 (PCR)
MR
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 27
Figure 19. Classical details in lobby of 1221 Hermosa Avenue, Bijou Building, circa 1998 (PCR)
PCR
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 28
Figure 20. Classical details in lobby of 1221 Hermosa Avenue, Bijou Building, circa 1998 (PCR)
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 29
2011 Photographs
Figure 21. East elevation
PCR
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 30
ilm
Figure 22. Partial south elevation showing ground floor window where new offices beyond will be
constructed.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 31
Figure 23. Partial north view
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 32
Figure 24. View of lobby area looldng east to Hermosa Avenue.
PCR:
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 33
Figure 25.Original round -arch door opening on the south side.
rGCcn"-
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 34 %M=
Figure 26. View of altered opening from lobby.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 35
=
Figure 27. Interior demising wall separating the south commercial space from the entrance lobby.
Ms. Pamela Townsend
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
March 1, 2012 - Page 36
Figure 28. Detail of front entrance the and interior wood floor beyond.
PCR