By Ann Jarmusch / SOHO Newsletter March-April 2024
(The following is an edited version of the original.)
At the January 2024 meeting of the City of San Diego Historical Resources Board, members heard public testimony on the proposed Talmadge Park Estates Historic District (1926-1951) before voting 6-2 to approve it in concept.
As other groups have done to allow for the process of creating a historic district, Talmadge residents bypassed local designation because the local process has hopelessly stalled. Instead, they worked with the State Office of Historic Preservation to nominate the district for the National Register of Historic Places. The city’s heritage preservation staff reviewed the report’s methodology and findings, concurred, and recommended that the board give the nomination the green light.
Opponents argued that in the past, the neighborhood was plagued by redlining and racial discrimination, and that segregation contributed to it becoming the affluent community it is today.
Several board members responded that despicable racism and redlining were woven into many formerly segregated San Diego neighborhoods. Some of them are now historic districts praised for their diversity and sense of community, as well as their architectural and social heritage.
HRB member Carla Farley, who is a real estate broker, added that redlining was not only widespread in 20th-century San Diego, it was so prevalent that she called it “normal.” Fellow member and attorney Courtney Ann Coyle said, “I feel the urge to say we’re all sitting on Kumeyaay land, so let’s go back and talk about settler colonialism…” Bruce Coons, SOHO’s Executive Director, observed that Talmadge Park Estates “has been eminently qualified” for historic district status for decades, and that rather than being exclusive, it “has a huge amount of Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing, and always has.”
Kelley Stanco, deputy director of the City of San Diego Planning Department, addressed racism and redlining when she said, “Unfortunately, racially restrictive covenants were not unique to Talmadge Park Estates in San Diego, or California, and were rightfully deemed unenforceable in 1948 by the Supreme Court before being outlawed 20 years later. The designation of properties in districts that held such covenants does not condone or in any way legitimize these deplorable practices, nor does it preclude new homes from being constructed within a historic district.”
The State Historical Resources Commission approved the nomination on February 2, 2024.
In HRB news, staff reported on the status of designation appeals. The City Council upheld the recent designations of the Donald and Gladys Clitsome/Lloyd Ruocco House and the Velma Prichard Spec House #1 on December 5, 2023. The council is tentatively scheduled to hear the appeals of the Lucile Hamilton/Robert Mosher House and the Frank and Rosa Woodford House on February 26, 2024. (See photos above:Left to right Donald and Gladys Clitsome/Lloyd Ruocco House, Velma Prichard Spec House #1 )
Staff member Suzanne Segur also reported progress on the Botanical Building restoration project in Balboa Park: The refurbished cupola was returned to the top of the building’s dome. Planning has begun for Phase 2 of the project, which includes the restoration of exterior fountains and the reconstruction of a historic pergola.
Residents and organizers of the Talmadge Park Estates National Historic District announced its approval by the California State Historical Resources Commission on February 2, 2024. They denounced misinformation published in the media about Talmadge Park and National Historic District “privileges,” statements they said they plan to counter with their own op-ed piece. They created a digital tool for conducting community surveys of potential historic resources that they want to share with other neighborhoods, and suggested that because the tool would save heritage preservation staff time the city might apply for a grant to share it widely.
A member of the Neighborhood Historic Preservation Coalition called attention to a letter the group’s one dozen entities recently sent to the HRB recommending that the city commission a study on the economic impact of historic preservation in San Diego, as other major cities have done.
Good news: The Planning Department is bringing back the Historical Resources Board Preservation Awards, to be announced in May, National Preservation Month. Nominations, which are now open, close April 5, 2024. Click for details and to submit nominations.
Finally, the board designated five houses. See descriptions below.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Tell me you are secretly racist without telling me….”and that segregation contributed to it becoming the affluent community it is today.” – LOL
Let’s cram 10 unit Toddmonstrocities around them.
None of the people using Talmage’s racist past as a talking point to prevent it from becoming a historic district truly care about that fact. It’s simply a tactic they are using achieve their goal. Accusations of racism can be a great tool (even if despicable) to get end results. On the flipside I wouldn’t be surprised if people in other neighborhoods have used accusations of racism to fight density/gentrification?
Yes, there was red-lining all over San Diego long ago and in North Park too. However it’s today and tomorrow, not long ago. I know of two Mexican families that have lived in Talmadge for 4 generations, still live there and in fact own income property in Talmadge. I know 2 Black families and William Jones past Council Dist. 4 councilman lived in Kensington after he termed out. You people are trying to make something out of nothing by throwing a race card out there. You do know all races bleed the same color, and we all are the same color under our skin, right? Move on, race hating is your personal problem, not a community issue. If a house measures up to be considered “historic”, so what???? Personally I wouldn’t want a historic house because it has too many limitations for me. But I do like the appearance of the older architecture.
I read Save Our Heritage Organisation’s article with interest and wish to add that back in the 1920s to 1930s, it was the real estate land developers who sold the houses with racial restrictions, as well as restrictions on how many horses, pigs, and how many unmarried people can live in a house, as well as restricting the use to one single family residence per lot. None of those restrictions were carried over to the following deed. Such restrictions only existed for the first buyer. And most people sold and moved away within a few years. As well, tens of thousands of mortgages defaulted between 1931 and 1934 due to the Great Depression. The money lenders were desperate to sell and totally ignored and deleted racial restrictions when they managed to sell again. Point being that Talmadge Park didn’t have racial restrictions by World War 2 and certainly not now. Therefore, accusing the current home owners of racism is slander because it is factually not true. And here is the great irony of this issue, most of the Talmadge Park houses were working class housing for the families of aircraft workers during World War 2 and Armed Forces veterans and combat wounded soldiers, sailors and Marines.