> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# This old house is causing new problems
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/this-old-house-is-causing-new-problems/
- Published: 2007-07-11T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-25T00:20:54.000Z
- Author: Melody Hanatani
- Tags: Education, Ocean Park, #archive-import

OCEAN PARK One homeowner’s dream to build and stuff a modern-style building behind a turn-of-the 20th century bungalow has drawn the ire of residents of the city’s largest historic district.

More than 145 people, some of whom live in the Third Street Historic District, have signed a letter addressed to the Landmarks Commission, urging it to shoot down a proposal to construct a two-story addition to an existing building located behind the 102-year-old bungalow.

Bounded by Ocean Park Boulevard and Hill Street and including the west side of Second Street and the east side of Third Street, the Third Street Historic District was formally adopted in 1990, establishing procedures and criteria regulating the type of alterations and construction that can occur within its parameters. Construction projects within the district require approval from the Landmarks Commission.

Unique to the district is its high concentration of turn-of-the 20th century bungalows.

At the center of the controversy brewing in the district is a project slated to take place at 2617 1/2 Third Street, owned by Mark Woollen since around 2001.

Residents of the historic district contend that the design that Woollen is proposing is out of scale, incompatible and not in tune with the character of the homes in the district. They claim the size and mass of the project will detract from the main bungalow, which is one of the seminal structures making up the historic district.

“It’s an inappropriate design for the district,” said Bea Nemlaha, who lives across the street from the site.

Nemlaha added that the proposed addition would be visible from the street.

The property has been somewhat of a sore spot for residents in this district for some time. Late last year, several residents expressed their discontent with Woollen’s proposal to move the main house a few feet closer to the street to better utilize the rear yard.

In January, project architect Michael Folonis said the homeowner was trying to restore and enhance the bungalow to create close to 1,000 square feet of livable space. The front house is currently inhabitable with no kitchen or heat, causing Woollen to live in a one-bedroom unit in the back of the house, Folonis said at the time.

WHAT’S THE PLAN?

The proposed project includes a 1,272 square-foot addition to an existing two-story structure located behind the bungalow. The existing two-story structure, which was constructed in 1946, is considered to be a “non-contributing” feature to the historic nature of the district.

Representing the homeowner, Folonis presented the project before the Landmarks Commission in June, the majority of commissioners expressing overall satisfaction with the design concept but directing the architect to reevaluate certain aspects such as the height and color to better blend the structure into the neighborhood.

Folonis returned with revised plans on Monday, saying that he addressed all the commissioner’s concerns, reducing the second floor of the proposed addition by about 74 square-feet, moving a roof deck from the south portion of the building to the north, and staining the natural wood siding to a dark gray.

The revised plans still generated an hour’s worth of public comments, many of which were in opposition to the project.

“This district is changing just like my neighborhood is changing,” said Adam Finkel, who used to live next to the subject property but now resides on Hart Avenue. “This is a district which affords a level of preservation you don’t have anywhere else in the city.”

The attorney representing Woollen, Ken Kutcher warned the commission of the message it will be sending to the public if it denies the project, adding that the homeowner is planning to spend more than $500,000 restoring the front house.

“This is not a popularity contest,” Kutcher said. “You are dealing with people’s lives, money and time.”

But in the end, many of the commissioners were displeased with the alterations, afraid that the back house would overpower the front bungalow. After more than two hours of discussion, the commissioners decided to continue the item during a future meeting, giving the architect another shot.

Chairwoman Nina Fresco said a modern-style building can peacefully coexist behind the bungalow, but that it needs to be designed in a way to fit in with the neighborhood, suggesting that it incorporate an architectural feature that would pay homage to the district, such as the eaves.

“It’s not a reduction of mass, which is what I was asking,” Fresco said. “I thought I was clear, I guess not.”

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 11, 2007.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/071107.pdf?ref=smdp.com)