Almost one hundred years after the small yellow house on Alma Avenue and 27th Street went up, it’s coming down.
The city council, at its April 21 meeting, decided not to pursue getting an estimate to preserve and move the ninety-five-year-old house, which belonged to one of the founders of Manhattan Beach.
The topic divided the council and members of the city’s historic preservation community.
The greatest source of tension was the question of where to put the house, which was built by George Peck, who developed much of the North end of Manhattan Beach and who lived in the house.
Tim McGuire, a realtor who began the effort to save the house when he learned that a developer was planning on demolishing it to build four condos, enlisted the help of Jan Dennis, the head of the Manhattan Beach Cultural Heritage Conservancy. Dennis recently pushed the council to create a historical preservation ordinance that would prevent developers from demolishing landmarked structures. The ordinance is currently being written. She also convinced the council to adopt the Mills Act, which allows owners of landmarked properties to claim tax credits in exchange for maintaining a building’s authenticity.
McGuire and Dennis brought the house’s plight to the city council in November, saying that they would raise the money to preserve and move it and asking if it could be placed in Bruce’s Beach. Besides being located a few blocks away from the building’s original location, it had symbolic significance. In 1912, when Manhattan Beach was segregated, Peck set aside the land to be bought by African Americans. It was developed to include “the only beach resort in Los Angeles County for all people,” according to the city’s website, and was named after an African American couple who settled there, Willa and Charles Bruce.
However, at least one resident from near Bruce’s Beach opposed having the house moved there, in person and by email. Mason Lewis said the building would obstruct views. In his email, he cautioned against “impinging upon the open grassy space frequented by picnickers, dog companions and all seeking the solitude of a pastoral ocean view respite.”
The city council directed staff to look into long-term locations, including Polliwog Park, and the cost.
McGuire and Dennis said this was where things got off track.
“All we asked was, ‘Could we put it on Bruce’s Beach?’” said Dennis last week. “We were not asking for money. It was a yes or no question. All of a sudden it got pulled away. One council member started talking about Polliwog Park. We keep saying, ‘That’s not what we asked.’ We never got our question answered.”
McGuire said they had gotten commitments of $5,000 in donations, but stopped fundraising when the project’s future appeared in jeopardy.
At last month’s city council meeting, the council was faced with the question of whether to hire a conservationist for $8,200 who would estimate of the cost of preserving and moving the house.
In advance of the meeting, Gary McAulay, president of the Manhattan Beach Historical Society, a nonprofit on whose board Dennis sits, wrote a letter to the council in support of placing the house in Polliwog Park and against putting it in Bruce’s Beach. At the meeting, he lobbied for making it into an addition to the society’s current home, a transplanted historical beach cottage in Polliwog Park that Dennis was instrumental in moving.
“Mr. Peck was important, of course,” he said, “but one of many, many pioneers.” He said that if the house was moved to Bruce’s Beach and only restored on the outside, as the conservancy suggested, it would be “a monument to one of many people.”
“I think a giant monument to this one individual might not be as important as a museum to many,” he concluded.
When her turn came to speak, Dennis railed against McAulay’s letter.
“This building is significant for North Manhattan Beach,” she said. “It has no relation whatsoever to Polliwog Park.”
Speaking of Peck, she said, “This man built the North end, basically.”
Then she announced that she was leaving the board of the Manhattan Beach Historical Society.
Members of Friends of Polliwog Park, the organization in favor of preserving the park as open space, said they were opposed to having the house there.
The council was also divided, with Mayor Wayne Powell and Councilmember David Lesser in favor of hiring the conservationist, and Councilmembers Amy Howorth, Mark Burton and Tony D’Errico opposed. Each member seemed to have his or her own idea of what should be done with the house and where it should go.
Lesser offered an explanation for why the project had generated such controversy.
“The interest in the Peck House is a backlash against how the community approached preservation in the past,” he said.
Howorth said she thought it wasn’t “fiscally responsible” to go forward with the project.
“It’s going to be a lot of money to do this piece of work,” she said. “There’s going to be community pushback either way.”
The impending destruction of the house added an element of pressure to the discussion.
“I’m fearful we’re far away from coming to a decision,” said D’Errico, after everyone else had talked. “We don’t have the ability to hold up the demolition.”
When Howorth seconded Burton’s motion to “respectfully deny the request of the conservancy,” Dennis returned to the podium and said she wanted to withdraw her request.
“Tear it down, dispose of it,” she said. “I would say you five need a good lesson in historical preservation,” she added before walking out.
A couple of weeks later, McGuire, who wasn’t present at the meeting but watched it from home, said he was “glad the vote went the way it did.”
“The whole thing was to put the Peck house in its proper place: Bruce’s Beach,” he said. “It was a good fight but we knew where it was going in the end.”
The house’s developer, Matt Morris, had given him a piece of the house, he said, and he also retrieved a few other items, including a couple of light fixtures and a ukulele which he found in a closet and believed was Peck’s. Carved into the wood was a “G for George and O for Olivia,” who was Peck’s wife, he said.
“It was almost like George left it there for me,” he said.
Although he was “proud of the fact that he tried to save” the house, he admitted that he was“melancholy that it’s going to be torn down.”
“I just hope in the future, with what Jan’s doing with the Mills Act and historical preservation, houses like this won’t come down so often,” he said. ER
