Comments on: ‘Windemere’ site redevelopment moving too fast for La Jolla preservationists

By: Eva T

Eva T — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 08:27:41 +0000

irving gill? how much more historic can it get in southern cal? even i over here in germany know about him.

By: danields

danields — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:51:25 +0000

One needs to wisely choose where to get one's "facts." Here are the real facts. Not the ones fabricated by paid consultant of the property owner. 1. The City prior to this owners purchase of the property had cited this building as a perfect example of La Jolla Beach Cottage that should be designated under a specific clause within Criterion A of the City's Designation guidelines. It is simply shocking the City failed to follow through on this issue which they had previously indicated was a done deal. It should be noted Jerry Sanders didn't want anything in San Diego historically designated. And oh, by the way, the owner of the Windemere site is a neighbor of Jerry Sanders. That is how the City failed to designate Windemere. 2. The State of California on the other hand was moving forward to designated it. The State Office of Historic Preservation stated quiet clearly Windemere was not only historically important to La Jolla and San Diego, but very important to California. And through that important Nationally. That is why Windemere was demolished. The owner saw the writing on the wall, and systematically began weekend piecemeal demolition of the building. The the final short shrift of the system came when the building was knocked down two days before Christmas a year ago. The building was historic because it was designed by Irving Gill, San Diego's most important architect. Before the current owner bought the property, the building had very good integrity. This was completely documented by the prior owner through historic and architectural review before he sought to restore the building, which unfortunately didn't happen. 3. The building was historic because it represented, if not the earliest existent Arts and Crafts structure in California and the U.S., then certainly among two or three of the earliest. That alone, according to the State of California Office of Historic Preservation would reserved its place of the State Registery of Historic Places. Those are the facts.

By: James May

James May — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 09:41:50 +0000

put quite simply, the BUILDING WAS NOT HISTORIC! That is why it was not preserved.

By: Ashley Reeves

Ashley Reeves — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:14:52 +0000

"Crude Wealth in the hands of shallow people" (Quote:Walter Lipmann) It would be great if La Jolla could prevent these people from moving here but this is a (Free) Republic.
Why can't La Jolla preserve its historic buildings? Very Sad

By: Tracy Ann

Tracy Ann — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 10:05:23 +0000

I am ashamed….not of anything in the article at all but the words of the absolute worst of stereotypical La Jolla'ns….how dare your apparently completely ignorant selves attempt to dicatate who and who does not belong in La Jolla. YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED for even typing such a thing and then hiding behind "angry neighbor". Do some research and learn the facts like that the City failed, let me repeat that, FAILED to feel this old house had any merit and did not designate it! Do you know the picture in the article is from 1905 when the house was on Prospect Street NOT it's former location now? Do you know that the building was moved and significantly modified over the years removing any authenticity? Do you know the City of San Diego granted a Demolition Permit LEGALLY and above the board to the Owner? next time before you try and dictate who and who is not welcome in La Jolla, do some research!