To: PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION
From: STEVEN GIANG, SENIOR PLANNER
TITLE
title
A PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING A CEQA EXEMPTION DECLARATION AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS application FOR THE demolition of a POTENTIALLY HISTORIC single-family residential structure, AND SEPARATE CONSIDERATION OF REMOVAL FROM THE POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCEs LIST AT 1811 clark lane, pursuant to Chapter 4, Title 10 of the Redondo Beach Municipal Code.
APPLICANT: Ronald Carl Seydel
ADDRESS: 1811 Clark Lane
APPLICATION NO: 2025-0091
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open public hearing and administer oath;
2. Take testimony from staff, applicant, and interested parties;
3. Close public hearing and deliberate; and
4. Adopt a resolution by title only approving the request to remove the property from the Potential Historic Resources List subject to the findings and conditions contained therein, but if denied; then
5. Adopt a resolution by title only approving the Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the residence at 1811 Clark Lane.
A. A RESOLUTION OF THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF A PROPERTY AT 1811 CLARK LANE FROM THE POTENTIALLY HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 4, TITLE 10 OF THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE.
B. A RESOLUTION OF THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CEQA EXEMPTION DECLARATION AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THE demolition of a POTENTIALLY HISTORIC single-family residential structure AT 1811 Clark lane, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 4, TITLE 10 OF THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE.
end
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The residence located at 1811 Clark Lane is currently on the Potential Historic Resource List with a rating of A. The homeowner wishes to demolish the residence and has commissioned a professional historic resource evaluation, which concludes that the property does not meet the necessary criteria to qualify as a historic resource. Two separate resolutions have been prepared for consideration, one to remove the property from the Potential Historic Resource List and the second for demolition of the residence. The Public Amenities Commission (PAC) has the following two options:
1. Approve the Resolution ‘A’ to delist the property from the Potential Historic Resources List. If approved no further action is required on Resolution ‘B’.
2. Deny Resolution ‘A’ to delist the property from the Potential Historic Resource List. If denied the PAC must then consider and take action on Resolution ‘B’ to demolish a residence on the Potential Historic Resources List
BACKGROUND:
The property at 1811 Clark Lane is located within the North Redondo Beach area of Redondo Beach, California, specifically in the Redondo Villa Tract, recorded in 1905. It is positioned in a residential neighborhood that has significantly evolved since its initial subdivision. Originally subdivided by George Peck, the area was marketed for modest single-family homes rather than agriculture. The property, constructed in 1929, is situated mid-block on an 8,250-square-foot lot and contains a one-story bungalow and a detached garage.
Though originally classified as a Craftsman cottage in the 1996 Historic Resource Survey, the recent comprehensive analysis by Kaplan Chen Kaplan (May 12, 2025) has found that the building lacks significant Craftsman architectural features. This evaluation highlighted alterations including non-original aluminum sliding windows, later-added scalloped edging, and attached shutters, features that do not align with Craftsman or any historic architectural style.
The property was never significantly associated with historic persons, events, agriculture, or the broader historical development patterns of North Redondo Beach. Surrounding development over time has further altered the historic setting, introducing modern, multi-family residential structures that contrast significantly with the original modest single-family residences.
The Public Amenities Commission is considering two mutually exclusive actions for the property at 1811 Clark Lane. The first action is to formally remove the property from the Potential Historic Resource List based on evidence provided in the May 2025 Kaplan Chen Kaplan Historic Resource Evaluation, demonstrating the property lacks historic significance and integrity. If the Commission approves this Resolution no action is required. If the Commission denies the request to delist, then it must consider the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition, based on specific project criteria in the Redondo Beach Municipal Code.
Resolution ‘A’ - Removal of a property from the potentially historic resource list.
The property owner of a property identified by the City as a potential historic resource may request that the property be removed from the list if they provide “specific written and verifiable documentation refuting that the property meets the criteria for designation as a landmark as described herein” (RBMC 10-4.311).
The Kaplan Chen Kaplan report concludes that the property fails to meet any of the landmark designation criteria. There is no evidence of association with significant events or persons, the house lacks defining Craftsman-style features and was neither designed by a master nor serves as a local landmark, and it has been altered to the point that it conveys no historic aesthetic value.
Moreover, the building lacks integrity across all seven “aspects of integrity” its design, materials, workmanship, setting, feeling, and association have been irreversibly compromised thus leaving no essential historic elements to preserve. In light of these findings, staff concludes the structure does not warrant potential-resource status and recommends its removal from the Potential Historic Resource List.
Resolution ’B’ - Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish the single-family residence
To review the proposed demolition, the Commission shall issue a certificate of appropriateness only when it determines one of the conditions below to exist.: In this case, staff has determined that the request meets criteria #5.
#1 The structure and/or site is a hazard to public health or safety and repairs or stabilization are not physically possible; or
Not applicable, the structure is not at risk of structural failure, decay, safety hazards, or stabilization issues.
#2 The site is required for a public use which will be of more benefit to the public than the historic resource, and there is no feasible alternative location for the public use;
Not applicable, the site is not under review to be used as a pubic facility nor are any alternative locations being proposed.
#3 Removal of the resource to another site is not feasible or practical;
The house sits mid-block on a narrow 50 ft-wide lot. Moving the structure would require a multi-phase operation (roof removal, street closures on two one-way lanes, and coordination with five adjacent owners) with a cost that would far outweighing any salvage value for this non-character-defining building. Additionally, relocation of structures general destroys integrity. Given these constraints, relocation is not practical.
#4 For a building in an historic district, the proposed replacement structure will not detract from or adversely affect the character of the historic district;
Not applicable, the subject property is not within an historic district, this criterion cannot be applied.
#5 For a partial demolition or removal, such action will not result in the loss of the essential elements that make the resource significant.
The proposed demolition at 1811 Clark Lane meets the finding because the structure does meet the criteria to qualify as historically significant. As outlined in the historic resource evaluation by Kaplan Chen Kaplan, the property lacks character-defining features of the Craftsman style, has undergone numerous non-original alterations (including replacement windows and decorative additions), and is not associated with any significant historic events, persons, or architectural achievements. The evaluation concluded that the building does not meet local, state, or national criteria for historic designation. Therefore, the demolition will not result in the loss of any significant architectural or historical features, as none are present to preserve.
ATTACHMENTS
a. Draft Resolution ‘A’
b. Draft Resolution ‘B’
c. Kaplan Chen Kaplan Historic Resource Evaluation
d. CEQA Exemption Declaration
e. Application for Certificate of Appropriateness