Architect’s appointment to ARB a ‘compromise’
Elected officials want to reign in one of its citizen boards, fearing its members are out of line when reviewing building plans.
A contentious appointment to the Architectural Review Board has revealed some council members are concerned the city-appointed board may be over-stepping its bounds.
Several council members, including the mayor, said at their Tuesday meeting that it’s time ARB members get some legal training from the city attorney’s office on what they are supposed to being doing.
“I think it needs direction,” said Councilman Herb Katz, who also is an architect. “I find they are nit-picking things too much and then rejecting it. They get down to, I wouldn’t say doornobs, but it’s getting darn close.”
The ARB was created in 1974 to review architectural design, appearance and landscaping on projects.
But some have complained the group has strayed from its intended purpose and has denied projects for reasons outside of its jurisdiction. Developers and even small property owners are then forced to appeal ARB decisions to the city’s planning commission.
A deputy city attorney advises the group at its monthly meetings, to let members know when they step out of bounds.
However, some on the council feel it’s long overdue that the city council and the ARB have a joint meeting to work out concerns being expressed by developers and architects.
“A study session is probably in order,” said Councilwoman Pam O’Connor. “We need to re-assess and get on the same page.”
City Attorney Marsha Moutrie recommended council members refrain from talking about a meeting with the ARB until it has been listed on an agenda.
“The role of the ARB is set forth in law in Santa Monica,” she said. “And you might want to refrain from (talking about) how you can influence the ARB to another time.”
But the council significantly altered the make-up of the body by appointing a fourth architect to the board. While only two seats are required to be held by architects, the council has now given them the majority.
William Adams — an architect living in Venice Beach who has ties to Santa Monica — was appointed to the board in a 4-3 vote. After the vote was taken Councilman Richard Bloom changed his vote for Adams, making it 5-2.
Architects with local business interests have often had to recuse themselves from voting on projects that come before the board because they had professional conflicts.
While city officials want residents on the board as well as those with professional building experience, many professionals that go before the board complain the majority of its members don’t know how to read blueprints.
Councilman Ken Genser said technical training shouldn’t be a requirement for board members, who he said should either live or work in Santa Monica, even though the city doesn’t require it.
“We shouldn’t be importing people from outside the community to make judgments about how this community should be developed,” he said. “We shouldn’t have more architects on the board.”
Adams’ appointment is seen by some as a compromise. He is trained as an architect but was formerly the chair of the department of architecture at Cal Poly, Pomona.
“He is not involved in the day-to-day search for work,” said Mayor Mike Feinstein. “Mr. Adams is the best solution to the schism that we have at this point.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 14, 2002. Read the original PDF.