Note: There are references in this report that are not included in this paper. A complete copy is available at the Hermosa Beach Library or at the Police Station.

SUBJECT: ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY

SEISMIC RETROFIT PLAN REVIEW & ASSESSMENT -

BIJOU THEATER BUILDING - 1227-1235 HERMOSA AVENUE

Recommendation:

That the City Council direct staff as deemed appropriate relative to:

1. Historic designation of the Bijou Building.
2. Proposed tenant improvements and building use.
3. Seismic retrofit of the Bijou Building and consultant review of final plans
4. Adoption of the Secretary of Interior Standards for Building Rehabilitation in connection with the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance

Background:

On October 20, 1998 the City Council adopted Historic Preservation Ordinance No. 98-1186 designating certain buildings candidates for historic designation including the Bijou Theater Building. Prior to adoption of the Historic Preservation Ordinance these buildings were also subject to Moratorium Ordinance No. 97-1169U which prohibited plan review or issuance of a building permit which could threaten the historic integrity of these buildings including seismic retrofit. On November 10, 1998, the City Council approved a resolution granting relief from Section 5 of the Moratorium Ordinance No. 96-1168U to allow the seismic retrofit of the Bijou Building pursuant to the scope of work submitted on September 17, 1998 plans. The Council also directed staff to prepare an architectural resources survey of the buildings identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance and to review of the seismic retrofit plans for the Bijou Building. The firm of Planning Consultants Research (PCR) was retained to both conduct the survey and retrofit plan review.

An Architectural Resources Survey Report was delivered on January 7, 1999 indicating that the Bijou Building should be considered for historic designation and on January 20, 1998 a Seismic Retrofit Plan Review and Assessment Report was submitted for City Council consideration. (Please See Attachment 2).

Analysis:

I. Architectural Resources Survey Report:

The report analyzes designation criteria under federal, State and local landmark programs in order to determine significance. To be eligible for National Register of Historic Places listing a resource must be significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture. The criteria for eligibility for the California Register are based upon National Register criteria and also includes California Register Regulations. The California Office of Historic Preservation utilizes an evaluation and classification to determine eligibility and the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance adopted October 1998 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 of a neighborhood, community or the City.

The Report indicates that the Bijou Building appears eligible for listing in the National Register based on Criterion C and as a resource of significance and as a prime example of the Neo-classical style and also as an example of the work of local architect Richard Douglas King.

The Bijou Building is eligible for listing in the California Register by virtue of the statute automatically including buildings determined eligible for National Register listing and by virtue that the building is identified locally significant. The Bijou is eligible for designation as a City Landmark under Criterion A,C, and D for its association with early social and economic history of Hermosa Beach as a prime example of the Neo-classical architectural style and an example of the work of Hermosa beach resident and southland architect Richard Douglas King.

Both the interior and exterior of the Bijou Building contain "character defining features" which should be preserved pursuant to Criterion C above. The Survey notes that:

Both the exterior and some portions of the interior of the building

retain enough historic fabric to convey the building's historic significance and architectural value .

In addition, because of the notable work on the Bijou Theater architect within the City and throughout the southland, Criterion C above is satisfied and because of the unique and prominent location of the Bijou Building in the heart of the old downtown, the Bijou is an established and long familiar visual downtown landmark in the community and the City thereby safisfying Criterion E above.

The character defining features include:

Exterior: brick exterior walls clad with stucco walls, ornate terra cotta façade, electric trolley hooks, cast terra cotta ornamentation, including spandrels, pilasters, entry surrounds, and decorative cornice, roof forms and materials, including parapets, roofline balustrade and fly tower at the west end of the auditiorium roof, symmetrical composition and massing, original wood-framed windows, where they are extant, fenestration patterns, recessed foyer and multi-door entry.

Interior: Lobby - Plaster detailing in theater lobby space including textured walls, cove ceilings, wood baseboards, large plaster casted scallop shells, Solomonic columns and ornate cove mouldings.

Auditorium - auditorium space, size and configuration, raked floor and seating arrangement, ornamentation including double Solominic columns with ornate capitals, decorative frieze molding, main entryway shapes, stage, stage wings, and proscenium arch, backstage dressing rooms, exposed brick interior walls at back of noteworthy patterning (common bond), ornate interior of 1235 Hermosa Avenue including classically inspired motifs set in the columns, ceiling walls, and balustrade.

II. Seismic Retrofit Plan Review and Assessment Report

PCR reviewed the Bijou retrofit plans based upon the Architectural Survey criteria and the guidelines established in the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. The plans consist of site plans and specs, ground floor mezzanine plan, second and third floor plans, east-west sections, auditorium sections, east elevations, north elevations and project details. Generally, PCR notes that most of the work proposed in the project plans will not compromise the building's character defining features, however some of the work appears to potentially impact these features and the building's historic significance. The key areas of concern relate to permanent changes to the building's "character defining features" as described below and the need to minimize disruption to these features.

Discussion of Retrofit Plans:

The retrofit project involves the construction of grade beams and installation of moment frame bracing systems at three locations on the first floor level which could damage interior plaster ornamentation such as molding, capitals, columns and ceilings. PCR recommendations are summarized as follows :

East Wall (See Page 26 and 27 Retrofit Report)

• Entire moment frame in north bay should be relocated to south bay since there are no character defining features in that area. Move the horizontal member in the center bay (foyer) and do not alter wall profiles
• Two horizontal moment frame members running along the first floor will penetrate the ceiling of the first floor and should be installed only to connect the vertical bracing
• Horizontal moment frame members running along the first floor should be installed from the second floor joint and penetration in the ceiling of the first floor should be done only to connect to the vertical brace frame and a second horizontal member running parallel along bottom transom window frame should be installed out of view from the building exterior or positioned behind a diffused light panel in the transom window.
• Vertical and horizontal moment frame bracing should be placed away from the plaster ornamentation to avoid damage to character defining features (both interior and exterior) and place frame members adjacent existing door openings and behind pilasters. The bracing will be visible in the building's interior but not impact the significance of the building.
• 
  

North Wall (See Page 28 Retrofit Report)

• Relocate moment frame bracing system one bay west and out of the northeast corner of that commercial space to minimize damage to character defining features along wall and corner and avoid altering wall profiles.
• Install horizontal moment frame members from the second floor joint and penetration in the ceiling of the first floor only to connect the vertical brace frame
• Place vertical and horizontal moment frame bracing away from the plaster ornamentation to avoid further damage of features. Place frame members adjacent existing door openings and behind pilasters.
• Prepare a mold of any area which may be subject to damage during this procedure to reproduce any lost ornamentation.
• 
  

Interior North Wall of Auditorium (See Page 28-30)

• Relocate moment frame bracing system one bay west where there are no character defining features
• Place vertical and horizontal moment frame bracing away from wall approximately two inches to avoid further damage of features and permanent visual impacts.
• 
  

Removal of Display Panels Between Columns Along North Wall of Auditorium (See Page 30)

This is not a seismic retrofit component but called out on the plans and may have possible interior and exterior impacts. These improvement are intended to provide widow display area and will preclude using the building for a theater, but could be replaced.

• Avoid identified character defining features during removal of these panels and indirect impacts and damage to the interior plaster ornamentation in the auditorium.
• Removal of panels will not affect overall rhythm due to retention of columns. The north elevation of the auditorium is not considered a primary elevation.
• 
  

Bracing of Interior West Wall of Stage Area (See Page 30-33)

Bracing will alter the traditional and original use of the building as a live theater. The height and utilization of the fly tower would become obsolete and set designs could no longer be utilized and stored off-stage using the tower.

• This type of bracing is considered reversible and other techniques for bracing could avoid impacts to the fly tower and wall should be investigated where practical.

Infill and Covering of Auditorium Floor

This is not a seismic retrofit component but is shown on the plans. The proposed work calls for filling the theater floor with gravel to level and pouring a four inch concrete slab.

• Minimize affect to original raking floor, interior walls, and stage which are all character defining features by installing a half inch seismic joint along perimeter of concrete slab floor to allow for expansion of floor and preservation of character defining features .

Please refer to Pages 26 - 36 Seismic Retrofit Plan Review and Assessment Report for location of work and details.

III. Discussion of Next Steps:

Relief was granted to the building owner under Resolution No. 98-5940 for only that work depicted on the plans submitted September 17, 1998 and permits for building and structural alterations must be consistent with approved plans and the designation of the building as a landmark pursuant to the Resolution. The project plans will need to be revised to clarify some of the proposed changes and provide missing detail. A meeting was conducted on January 12, 1999 between City staff, the building owner and the consultant in order to clarify the design intent and construction issues relative to the retrofit project.

The consultant has provided a long list of recommendations to incorporate in the seismic retrofit plans and these extensive recommendations should be submitted for staff and consultant review prior to issuance of a building permit. Final plan review by the consultant should be required to ensure that all recommended changes have been made and that the project is consistent with the recommendations outlined in the Plan Review and Assessment Report. All future work and tenant improvements must be reviewed subject to the conditions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance which require that a Certificate of Appropriateness must be issued by City Council for all but minor improvements to the building.

PCR has recommended that the City adopt the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation in order to establish a uniform standard for future review of historic resources in the City and prior to issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the remainder of the Bijou project. The Standards for Rehabilitation provide a standardized review procedures used to evaluate historic resources throughout the State and the country and take into account the existing and future use of a structure based upon economic viability.

CIM has requested that the City clarify it's intent relative future use of the Bijou Building beyond seismic retrofit. (See attached letter) The City Attorney has advised that there is considerable doubt that the City can regulate the use of the property through the Historic Preservation Ordinance without a compelling reason.

Environmental Review:

Section 15331 - Categorical Exemption for Projects Restoring Or Rehabilitating Historical Structures under CEQA guidelines provides that a seismic retrofit project such as proposed for the Bijou Building is Categorically Exempt from environmental review if the work is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. Future building rehabilitation associated with tenant improvements and issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness must involve environmental review for all nonexempt work.

Agendas / Minutes Menu | Back to Agenda | Top of Page