‘Conflicted’ S.D. board doesn’t designate La Jolla property as historic

The question of whether to historically designate a property in La Jolla’s Country Club area spurred a nearly hour-long debate at the July 24 meeting of the San Diego Historical Resources Board, which ended with a proposal to place it on the city’s Register of Historic Resources falling short.

The property at 7747 Whitefield Place contains a 1979 organic geometric-style two-story, single-family house with a basement near the end of a cul-de-sac in a neighborhood of similar-scale homes. The house was designed by late La Jolla architect James Rodney Youngson, who, if the property were designated, would get the title of master architect.

Owner Michael Miller’s desire to have the site designated as a historical resource was brought forward under HRB Criterion C (indicating the property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction or is a valuable example of the use of natural materials or craftsmanship) and Criterion D (indicating the property is representative of a notable work of a master builder, designer, architect, engineer, landscape architect, interior designer, artist or craftsman).

However, city staff contended the building is not eligible for designation “under any HRB criteria.”

A staff report determined the property had been modified too much since its original construction to retain sufficient character-defining features and integrity. Modifications included replacing the garage door, painting an unpainted exterior siding and building a new detached shed in the rear yard.

However, applicant representative Jenni Stropes of BFSA Environmental Services argued the house is “an excellent example of organic geometric style, is a notable work of proposed master architect James Rodney Youngson and retains all [required] aspects of integrity.”

Referring to the painted siding, she said the “exterior of the building still reflects the appearance of a building constructed using natural materials.”

Stropes listed remaining unchanged features that match the style, such as polygonal shapes throughout the building and the use of wood and glass. She also  showcased other organic geometric-style properties that were painted but still designated historic.

“Modifications made to the residence do not remove or negatively impact any of the character-defining features of the organic geometric style, nor did they remove any noteworthy elements of the Youngson design,” she said.

Miller also spoke in favor of the designation, arguing that the home meets the “ethos” of the style and features its hallmarks, despite the modifications. The board received 12 additional public comments before the hearing, all in support of designation.

During board member comments, Vice Chairman Michael Taylor questioned how significant it was to have the exterior painted.

City staff member Alvin Lin said “One of the character-defining features of the organic geometric style … is exposed structures or materials. The idea is that, in this style, you can see what kind of material we are talking about. So wood siding would need to be recognized as wood … and if you paint over them, the color and texture would be altered.”

Others asked whether the paint could be removed.

Lin responded that “board members should consider the property in its current condition” and not consider hypothetical changes.

HRB Chairwoman Kristi Byers agreed that “materials that were historically unpainted have to remain unpainted … on a designated resource.”

Board member Michael Provence noted that the darker gray color doesn’t give the appearance of wood, whereas other organic geometric properties with brownish painted exteriors still had the appearance of wood.

There was additional discussion about whether to bestow the title of master architect to Youngson as part of this project.

City staff argued the Whitefield Place property is not a notable example of his work.

“Not all examples of a master’s work are eligible [for designation], so it must be represented as a notable work as demonstrated by the nomination,” Lin said. “We did not find this to be an eligible property.”

Byers said she was “conflicted” about how to proceed, saying “there are a couple of things there that give newer vibes and don’t look like they are from the ’70s, but I don’t know if that would be enough for me to not vote for the property [to be designated].”

A motion to designate the property only under Criterion C got four votes — from Byers, Rammy Cortez, Joy Miller and Melissa Sophia — but six are needed to designate, and it therefore failed.