The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAppendix H1 - Historic Structure AssessmentHISTORIC STRUCTURE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 10622 AND 10642 TAMARIND AVENUE BUILDINGS CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APNs 256-011-03 and -04 Submitted to: City of Fontana 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335 Prepared for: First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.; First Industrial, LP; First Industrial Acquisitions II, LLC One North Wacker Drive, Suite 4200 Chicago, Illinois 60606 Prepared by: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022 Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ i Archaeological Database Information Author(s): J.R.K. Stropes and Brian F. Smith Consulting Firm: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 (858) 679-8218 Report Date: January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022 Report Title: Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California (APNs 256-011-03 and -04) Prepared for: First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc., First Industrial, LP, and First Industrial Acquisitions II, LLC One North Wacker Drive, Suite 4200 Chicago, Illinois 60606 Submitted to: City of Fontana 5353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335 USGS Quadrangle: Fontana, California (7.5 minute) Study Area: 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Key Words: USGS Fontana, California topographic quadrangle; City of Fontana; historic structure evaluation; not historically significant; no mitigation or preservation required. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ii Table of Contents Page I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 Report Organization ........................................................................................... 1 Project Area ....................................................................................................... 2 Project Personnel ............................................................................................... 2 III. PROJECT SETTING ............................................................................................. 2 Physical Project Setting ..................................................................................... 2 Historical Overview ........................................................................................... 2 General History of the City of Fontana .............................................................. 5 History of the Property: Ownership and Development .................................... 10 10622 Tamarind Avenue .......................................................................... 10 10642 Tamarind Avenue .......................................................................... 11 IV. METHODS AND RESULTS .............................................................................. 11 Archival Research ............................................................................................ 11 Field Survey ..................................................................................................... 11 Description of Surveyed Resources ................................................................. 12 10622 Tamarind Avenue .......................................................................... 12 10642 Tamarind Avenue .......................................................................... 12 V. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATIONS ...................................................................... 12 CRHR Evaluation ............................................................................................. 30 City of Fontana Historical Resources Designation Evaluation ....................... 34 VI. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... 35 VII. CERTIFICATION ................................................................................................ 36 VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 36 IX. APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 39 Appendix A: Maps Appendix B: DPR Forms Appendix C: Preparers’ Qualifications Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ iii Plates Page Plate 1 Pearl Trout in 1959 ............................................................................................... 10 Plate 2 East Façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing West ................... 13 Plate 3 West Façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing Northeast .......... 14 Plate 4 West Façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing East ................... 15 Plate 5 North Façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing Southwest ........ 16 Plate 6 South Façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing North ............... 17 Plate 7 East Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing West ................... 18 Plate 8 South Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing Northwest ........ 19 Plate 9 North Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing West ................. 20 Plate 10 West Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing East ................... 21 Plate 11 East Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Detached Garage, Facing West ..... 22 Plate 12 South Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Detached Garage, Facing East .... 23 Plate 13 West Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Detached Garage, Facing East ..... 24 Plate 14 North Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Detached Garage, Facing Southeast ............................................................................................................... 25 Plate 15 View of the Pergola on the West Façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue Building, Facing East ............................................................................................ 26 Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc., First Industrial, LP, and First Industrial Acquisitions II, LLC is proposing to redevelop the property located at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Historic aerial photographs and Assessor’s records indicate that the 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence was constructed in 1964 and the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence was constructed in 1948. Because the buildings are 50 years of age or older, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) conducted a historic survey of the single- family residences on the property. The project proposes to demolish the existing buildings and grade the entire 4.2-acre property (identified as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 256-011-03 and -04) for the construction of a commercial warehouse building with associated parking and hardscape. Land improvements to the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue property will require approval from the City of Fontana in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); therefore, BFSA was contracted to evaluate the residences and analyze the potential for substantial adverse changes to Historical Resources as defined by CEQA, if any. The focus of the historic study is the 1948 and 1964 single-family residences and the evaluation consisted of the effect of any property improvements to the two structures. BFSA was contracted to complete a historic evaluation of the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue buildings as part of the planning process for the proposed redevelopment project. The purpose of this evaluation was to: (1) determine if the historic structures constitute potentially significant historic resources as defined by CEQA and City of Fontana guidelines, and (2) determine whether or not removal of the structures would result in a substantial adverse change to any Historical Resources. BFSA evaluated the potential architectural and historic significance of the historic residences located 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue in conformance with CEQA (Section 15064.5) and City of Fontana guidelines. The evaluation resulted in a finding that the buildings are not historically or architecturally significant under any California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or City of Fontana eligibility criteria. Because the buildings have been evaluated as not significant, they are not Historical Resources as defined by CEQA and the City may make a finding of No Impact regarding historic-period built environment resources within the project. II. INTRODUCTION Report Organization The purpose of this study is to complete a historic structure inventory and evaluate the potential significance of two historic structures located at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California, in compliance with CEQA. Because their proposed removal as part of the redevelopment of the property will affect the buildings, this study has been prepared as part of the environmental review process for the proposed project. This report Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2 has been prepared for submittal to the City of Fontana to present the results of the historic survey and the significance evaluations of the buildings. Project Area The resources evaluated in this study are entirely within APNs 256-011-03 and -04. The resources are located at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The project is situated within the 7.5-minute USGS Fontana, California topographic quadrangle in Section 29, Township 1 South, Range 5 West. The historic structure survey included the two single-family residences on the property. Project Personnel This evaluation was conducted by Jennifer Stropes and Brian Smith (Appendix C). Word processing, editing, and graphics production services were provided by BFSA staff. III. PROJECT SETTING Physical Project Setting The project is generally located in southwestern San Bernardino County in the city of Fontana. The subject property is part of the Chino Basin, located south of the San Gabriel Mountains, north of the Jurupa Mountains, and west of the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Gabriel Mountains extend east from Newhall Pass in Los Angeles County to the Cajon Pass in San Bernardino County. These mountains are part of the Transverse Ranges with peaks exceeding 9,000 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The project is situated on an alluvial fan at the western margin and southern end of Lytle Creek. The general project area is characterized by relatively flat land (with an average elevation of 1,075 feet AMSL) that was previously used as farmland. The property has been previously impacted by cultivation, rural residential development, and commercial enterprises. Historical Overview The historic background of the project area began with the Spanish colonization of Alta California. The first Spanish colonizing expedition reached southern California in 1769 with the intention of converting and civilizing the indigenous populations, as well as expanding the knowledge of and access to new resources in the region (Brigandi 1998). As a result, by the late eighteenth century, a large portion of southern California was overseen by Mission San Luis Rey (San Diego County), Mission San Juan Capistrano (Orange County), and Mission San Gabriel (Los Angeles County), who began colonization the region and surrounding areas (Chapman 1921). Up until this time, the only known way to feasibly travel from Sonora to Alta California was by sea. In 1774, Juan Bautista de Anza, an army captain at Tubac, requested and was given permission by the governor of the Mexican State of Sonora to establish an overland route from Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 Sonora to Monterey (Chapman 1921). In doing so, Juan Bautista de Anza passed through what is now Riverside County and described the area in writing for the first time (Caughey 1970; Chapman 1921). In 1797, Father Presidente Lausen (of Mission San Diego de Alcalá), Father Norberto de Santiago, and Corporal Pedro Lisalde (of Mission San Juan Capistrano) led an expedition through southwestern Riverside County in search of a new mission site to establish a presence between San Diego and San Juan Capistrano (Engelhardt 1921). Their efforts ultimately resulted in the establishment of Mission San Luis Rey in Oceanside, California. Each mission gained power through the support of a large, subjugated Native American workforce. As the missions grew, livestock holdings increased and became more vulnerable to theft. In order to protect their interests, the southern California missions began to expand inland to try and provide additional security (Beattie and Beattie 1939; Caughey 1970). In order to meet their needs, the Spaniards embarked on a formal expedition in 1806 to find potential locations within what is now the San Bernardino Valley. As a result, by 1810, Father Francisco Dumetz of Mission San Gabriel had succeeded in establishing a religious site, or capilla, at a Cahuilla rancheria called Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). San Bernardino Valley received its name from this site, which was dedicated to San Bernardino de Siena by Father Dumetz. The Guachama rancheria was located in present-day Bryn Mawr in San Bernardino County. These early colonization efforts were followed by the establishment of estancias at Puente (circa 1816) and San Bernardino (circa 1819) near Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). These efforts were soon mirrored by the Spaniards from Mission San Luis Rey, who in turn established a presence in what is now Lake Elsinore, Temecula, and Murrieta (Chapman 1921). The indigenous groups who occupied these lands were recruited by missionaries, converted, and put to work in the missions (Pourade 1961). Throughout this period, the Native American populations were decimated by introduced diseases, a drastic shift in diet resulting in poor nutrition, and social conflicts due to the introduction of an entirely new social order (Cook 1976). Mexico achieved independence from Spain in 1822 and became a federal republic in 1824. As a result, both Baja and Alta California were classified as territories (Rolle 1969). Shortly thereafter, the Mexican Republic sought to grant large tracts of private land to its citizens to begin to encourage immigration to California and to establish its presence in the region. Part of the establishment of power and control included the desecularization of the missions circa 1832. These same missions were also located on some of the most fertile land in California and were considered highly valuable as a result. The resulting land grants, known as “ranchos,” covered expansive portions of California and by 1846, more than 600 land grants had been issued by the Mexican government. Rancho Jurupa was the first rancho to be established and was issued to Juan Bandini in 1838. Although Bandini primarily resided in San Diego, Rancho Jurupa was located in what is now Riverside County (Pourade 1963). The treatment of Native Americans grew worse during the Rancho Period. Most of the Native Americans were forced off of their land or put to work on the now privately-owned ranchos, most often as slave labor. In light of the brutal ranchos, the degree to which Native Americans Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4 had become dependent upon the mission system is evident when, in 1838, a group of Native Americans from Mission San Luis Rey petitioned government officials in San Diego to relieve suffering at the hands of the rancheros: We have suffered incalculable losses, for some of which we are in part to be blamed for because many of us have abandoned the Mission … We plead and beseech you … to grant us a Rev. Father for this place. We have been accustomed to the Rev. Fathers and to their manner of managing the duties. We labored under their intelligent directions, and we were obedient to the Fathers according to the regulations, because we considered it as good for us. (Brigandi 1998:21) Native American culture had been disrupted to the point where they could no longer rely upon prehistoric subsistence and social patterns. Not only does this illustrate how dependent the Native Americans had become upon the missionaries, but it also indicates a marked contrast in the way the Spanish treated the Native Americans compared to the Mexican and United States ranchers. Spanish colonialism (missions) is based upon utilizing human resources while integrating them into their society. The Mexican and American ranchers did not accept Native Americans into their social order and used them specifically for the extraction of labor, resources, and profit. Rather than being incorporated, they were either subjugated or exterminated (Cook 1976). By 1846, tensions between the United States and Mexico had escalated to the point of war (Rolle 1969). In order to reach a peaceful agreement, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was put into effect in 1848, which resulted in the annexation of California to the United States. Once California opened to the United States, waves of settlers moved in searching for gold mines, business opportunities, political opportunities, religious freedom, and adventure (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). By 1850, California had become a state and was eventually divided into 27 separate counties. While a much larger population was now settling in California, this was primarily in the central valley, San Francisco, and the Gold Rush region of the Sierra Nevada mountain range (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). During this time, southern California grew at a much slower pace than northern California and was still dominated by the cattle industry established during the earlier rancho period. During the same decade, circa 1852, the Native Americans of southern Riverside County, including the Luiseño and the Cahuilla, thought they had signed a treaty resulting in their ownership of all lands from Temecula to Aguanga east to the desert, including the San Jacinto Valley and the San Gorgonio Pass. The Temecula Treaty also included food and clothing provisions for the Native Americans. However, Congress never ratified these treaties, and the promise of one large reservation was rescinded (Brigandi 1998). With the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1869, southern California saw its first major population expansion. The population boom continued circa 1874 with the completion Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 of connections between the Southern Pacific Railroad in Sacramento to the transcontinental Central Pacific Railroad in Los Angeles (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). The population influx brought farmers, land speculators, and prospective developers to the region. General History of the City of Fontana In 1869, Andrew Jackson Pope, cofounder of the Pope & Talbot Company, a lumber dealer based out of San Francisco (Ancestry.com 2009a, 2009b; University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections 2018), purchased 3,840 acres of land in San Bernardino County as part of the Land Act of 1820. “During the ensuing years, Andrew Pope and W.C. Talbot acquired other properties in the West, chiefly in California. By 1874, they owned a real estate empire, including almost 80,000 acres of ranch lands” (World Forestry Center 2017). Pope passed away in 1878 amid water rights conflicts between grant owners (himself) and settlers surrounding his Fontana-area lands. As a result of the water rights conflict, in which the United States Supreme Court sided with the grant owners, the Lytle Creek Water Company was formed in 1881. The purpose of the Lytle Creek Water Company was to: [U]nify the interests of appropriators to the stream, to fight the grant owners. These latter had the law on their side, but the settlers had the water, and were holding and using it. An injunction was issued in favor of the grant owners, restraining the settlers from using the water, but it was never enforced. The conflict was a long and bitter one. In the meantime, the grant owners, and others operating with them, quietly bought up the stock of the Lytle Creek Water Company, until enough to control it was secured, and sold out these rights to the projectors of the Semi-tropic Land and Water Company, with the riparian lands, which movement seems to have quieted the conflict. (Hall 1888) The Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company was incorporated in 1887. That year, the company platted the settlement of Rosena, but no structures were erected. By 1888, the company had acquired “something more than twenty-eight thousand five hundred acres of land, embracing the channel of Lytle creek for ten miles” (Hall 1888). In the early 1900s: The use of the automobile had grown considerably … and there was a need for better roads, the The National Old Trails (N.O.T.) Association was organized to promote a highway between Los Angeles and New York; which was aligned close to the tracks of the AT & Santa Fe railroad through California and Arizona, passing through Fontana. (Whittall 2020) Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6 In 1903, San Bernardino contractor and agriculturist A.B. Miller and “his pioneer Fontana Development Company purchased Rosena and by 1905, had begun the building of a farming complex that included an assortment of barns, dining rooms, a 200-man bunk house, a kitchen, a company store, as well as the ranch house used by the foreman” (Anicic 1982). By 1906, Miller had also taken over the remainder of the Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company assets and created the Fontana Farms Company and the Fontana Land Company. Afterward, Miller oversaw the construction of an irrigation system that utilized the water from Lytle Creek, as well as the planting of “half a million eucalyptus saplings as windbreaks” (Cornford 1995). In 1913, the town of Fontana was platted between Foothill Boulevard and the Santa Fe railroad tracks. That year, Foothill Boulevard was improved “and the Automobile Club of Southern California’s map of 1912 shows the N.O.T. highway running on the north side of the Santa Fe Railroad, passing through Rialto and heading straight, west until reaching Cucamonga” (Whittall 2020). Much of the land to the south of the Fontana townsite was utilized as a hog farm, while the remainder of the Fontana Farms Company land was subdivided into small farms. The smaller “starter farms” were approximately 2.5 acres and the new owner was able to choose between grapevines or walnut trees, all supplied by the Fontana Farms nursery. “In 1926, the N.O.T. alignment became part of the newly created U.S. Highway 66. And it was gradually improved and widened after that date” (Whittall 2020). “By 1930 the Fontana Company had subdivided more than three thousand homesteads, half occupied by full-time settlers, some of them immigrants from Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Italy” (Cornford 1995). Kaiser Steel was founded in Fontana in the 1940s and became one of the main producers of steel west of the Mississippi River. The facility was financed and built by the wartime government agency known as the Defense Plant Corporation (DPC) and was one of two steel plants in the west (Graves 2009). To provide for his workers’ health needs, Henry J. Kaiser constructed the Fontana Kaiser Permanente medical facility, which is now the largest managed care organization in the United States. According to Cornford (1995): For hundreds of Dustbowl refugees from the Southwest, still working in the orchards at the beginning of World War Two, Kaiser Steel was the happy ending to the Grapes of Wrath. Construction of the mill drained the San Bernardino Valley of workers, creating an agricultural labor shortage that was not relieved until the coming of the braceros in 1943. Kaiser originally believed that he could apply his Richmond methods to shaping the Fontana workforce: leaving the construction crews in place and “training them in ten days to make steel” under the guidance of experts hired from the East. But he underestimated the craft knowledge and folklore, communicated only through hereditary communities of steelworkers, that were essential to making steel. Urgent appeals, therefore, were circulated through the steel valleys of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia, recruiting draft-exempt steel specialists for Fontana.[61] Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 The impact of five thousand steelworkers and their families on local rusticity was predictably shattering. The available housing stock in Fontana and western San Bernardino County (also coveted by incoming military families) was quickly saturated. With few zoning ordinances to control the anarchy, temporary and substandard shelters of every kind sprouted up in Fontana and neighboring districts like Rialto, Bloomington, and Cucamonga. Most of the original blast furnace crew was housed in a gerrybuilt trailer park known affectionately as “Kaiserville.” Later arrivals were often forced to live out of their cars. The old Fontana Farms colonists came under great pressure to sell to developers and speculators. Others converted their chicken coops to shacks and rented them to single workers—a primitive housing form that was still common through the 1950s.[62] Although areas of Fontana retained their Millerian charm, especially the redtiled village center along Sierra with its art-deco theater and prosperous stores, boisterous, often rowdy, juke joints and roadhouses created a different ambience along Arrow Highway and Foothill Boulevard. Neighboring Rialto—presumably the location of Eddie Mars’s casino in Chandler’s The Big Sleep —acquired a notorious reputation as a wide-open gambling center and L.A. mob hangout (a reputation which it has recovered in the 1990s as the capital of the Inland Empire’s crack gangs). Meanwhile the ceaseless truck traffic from the mill, together with the town’s adjacency to Route 66 (and, today, to Interstates 10 and 15), made Fontana a major regional trucking center, with bustling twenty-four-hour fuel stops and cafes on its outskirts … Boomtown Fontana of the 1940s ceased to be a coherent community or cultural fabric. Instead it was a colorful but dissonant bricolage of Sunkist growers, Slovene chicken ranchers, gamblers, mobsters, over-the-road truckers, industrialized Okies, braceros, the Army Air Corps (at nearby bases), and transplanted steelworkers and their families. Wallis (2018) elaborates: Towards the tail end of the war, Kaiser would propose a massive steel deal in an attempt to rejuvenate the Kaiser steel company. This deal would expand the company because Kaiser foresaw a spike in postwar steel production. “At one point he became expansive in the outlining of Los Angeles’ probable role in the immense industrial development of Southern California. [3] Kaiser had a feeling that not only would items like washing machines and stove production spike after the war but rail and automobile production would spike as well. “…overall steel production Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8 of 1,800,000 a year of steel products ranging from ships, washing machines, housing structural shapes, utensils, roofing and stoves to rails and sheet metal for tinplate and most size pipes.” [4] Kaisers deal and his bold productions would see the companies steel production increase greatly after the war to a point where it actually is said to have broken steel production records. “Henry J. Kaiser said in a year-end statement today that a record breaking 853,000 tons of steel ingots were produced at the Fontana plant in 1948. Following the war: … the [Kaiser] Health Plan in Fontana went public, and with the strong support of labor unions like the Retail Clerks International Union and the International Longshoremen and Warehousemen Union it began to grow throughout the region. The first facility outside of Fontana was established in Harbor City in 1950 when the entire West Coast ILWU signed up for the plan. (Cushing 2013) At that time, Henry Kaiser expanded his efforts beyond the steel mill itself and into experimental aviation and mass-produced housing. Although his “venture into experimental aviation was short- lived,” he had “substantial success” in the field of mass-produced housing. “For two decades he had been building homes for his dam and shipyard workers, even master planning entire communities” (Cornford 1995). “Shortly after V-J Day Kaiser dramatically announced a ‘housing revolution’” consisting of “‘a nearly 100 mile plant-to-site assembly line’ in Southern California (where he predicted that immigration would reach a million per year in the immediate postwar period)” (Cornford 1995). This assembly line consisted of the “construction of ten thousand prefabricated homes in the Westchester, North Hollywood, and Panorama City areas” (Cornford 1995): After the turbulent, sometimes violent, transitions of the 1940s, Fontana settled down into the routines of a young milltown. The Korean War boom enlarged the Kaiser workforce by almost 50 per cent and stimulated a new immigration from the East that reinforced the social weight of traditional steelworker families. The company devoted new resources to organizing the leisure time of its employees, while the union took a more active role in the community. The complex craft subcultures of the plant intersected with ethnic self-organization to generate competing cliques and differential pathways for mobility. At the same time, the familiar sociology of plant-community interaction was overlaid by lifestyles peculiar to Fontana’s Millerian heritage and its location on the borders of metropolitan Los Angeles and the Mojave Desert. Although locals continued to Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 joke that Fontana was just Aliquippa with sunshine, it was evolving into a sui generis working-class community. (Cornford 1995). The increased immigration to the area during and after the war created a housing boom equivalent to that seen in other areas focused upon wartime production, such as San Diego (City of San Diego 2007) and Seattle (Stropes et al. 2019). One of the most common architectural styles during the Post-war boom was the Minimal Traditional style. Between 1935 and 1950, the Minimal Traditional home was one of the few designs approved by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). “In an explosion of building at the war’s end, 5.1 million homes were built between 1946 and 1949. Minimal Traditionals made up a significant portion of these” (McAlester 2015). “By 1950 the Minimal Traditional was being replaced by Ranch homes. Postwar prosperity meant that larger homes could be built and financed, and the Ranch was a perfect fit for the tastes of a new decade” (McAlester 2015). The city of Fontana was incorporated on June 25, 1952 “and shortly after, the freeway system in LA would start to divert traffic away from Route 66” (Whittall 2020). However, despite traffic being diverted away from the Fontana area: In the 1950s and ’60s, Fontana was home to a drag racing strip that was a venue in the NHRA circuit. Mickey Thompson’s Fontana International Dragway was also referred to as Fontana Drag City or Fontana Drag Strip. The original Fontana strip is long since defunct, but the owners of NASCAR’s new Auto Club Speedway opened a new NHRA-sanctioned drag strip in Fontana in mid-2006 to resurrect Fontana’s drag-racing heritage. (Kiddle Encyclopedia 2022) “In 1964, Route 66 was replaced by the freeway and two years later, Fontana joined the city of Duarte trying to have a large sign posted in San Bernardino to announce that Route 66 remained a through route into Los Angeles, they failed” (Whittall 2020). Kaiser Steel was eventually closed in the 1980s; however, the city has since become a transportation hub for trucking due to the number of highways that intersect in the area (Anicic 2005; City of Fontana 2018). Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10 History of the Property: Ownership and Development 10622 Tamarind Avenue Historic aerial photographs and Assessor’s records indicate that the residence was constructed in 1964. Assessor’s records indicate that the property was originally purchased in 1956 by Pearl Cox Trout (Plate 1) and Howard Trout; however, the first occupants of the home were Pearl’s daughter Robbie Lee Skelton and Robbie Lee’s husband Frank Maxwell Tucker, Jr. (Ancestry.com 2017). When Tucker and Skelton were married in 1939, Pearl Trout’s name was listed as Pearl Cox Skelton; however, no documents regarding her marriage to anyone named Skelton could be located. Pearl and Howard Trout were married in 1940 and at that time, Pearl’s last name was listed as Wampler (Cincinnati Enquirer 1940). Again, no documentation could be located regarding her marriage to anyone named Wampler, nor does her obituary mention any of her marriages (San Bernardino County Sun 1995). Howard Trout passed away in 1974 and Pearl Trout in 1995. Howard Trout’s obituary lists Robbie Lee as his daughter; however, it is more likely that she was his stepdaughter (San Bernardino County Sun 1974). Frank Tucker was born in Alabama in 1915 and graduated from Miami Edison High in Miami, Florida (The Miami Herald 1939). In 1939, he married Robbie Lee Skelton in Broward, Florida (Ancestry.com 2016). Skelton was born in Ohio but graduated from high school in Blue Ridge, Georgia (The Miami Herald 1939). Following their marriage, Frank Tucker worked as an ordinance man on the air base in Miami (Ancestry.com 2012a), then served in World War II where he was wounded (Ancestry.com 2012b). The Tuckers moved to California in 1956 and in 1962, Frank began working as a custodian for the Fontana Unified School District. The family moved into the home at 10622 Tamarind Avenue in 1964 and Frank Tucker passed away in 1971 (San Bernardino County Sun 1971). Following Tucker’s death, Robbie Lee married divorcee Charles E. McClean in 1972 and the couple lived in the home at 10622 Tamarind Avenue (Ancestry.com 2007, 2010). McClean was born in Boston and moved to San Bernardino County in 1948. He was “a World War II veteran and served in the European-African Theater. He received three Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart with 13 Oak Leaf Clusters” (San Bernardino County Sun 1990). McClean passed away in 1990. No occupation information could be located for Robbie Lee or Charles McClean. After Charles’s passing, Robbie Lee’s mother added her to the deed for the 10622 Tamarind Avenue property. Pearl Trout passed away in 1995 (San Bernardino County Sun 1995) and following her death, the property was transferred to Robbie Lee McClean. Two years later, McClean sold the property to the Kendal L. Angell Trust and it was immediately transferred to Cesar Romero, the current owner of the property. Despite selling the property in the 1990s, city directories indicate Plate 1: Pearl Trout in 1959. (Photograph courtesy of the San Bernardino County Sun) Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 11 that McClean continued to live in the home until at least 2001, and possibly until her death in 2008 (Ancestry.com 2014). 10642 Tamarind Avenue Assessor’s records indicate that the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence was built in 1948 with an address of 728 South Tamarind Avenue (Ancestry.com 2017). Howard and Pearl Trout lived in the residence and by 1961, the address was changed to 10642 Tamarind Avenue (San Bernardino County Sun 1961). Howard Trout was born in Ohio in 1901 and Pearl Cox Skelton Wampler Trout in Blue Ridge, Georgia in 1903. In 1940, they were married in Ohio, where Howard Trout was working as a manager for Singer Sewing Machines and Pearl as a stylist (Cincinnati Enquirer 1940; Ancestry.com 2012a). In 1948, the couple moved to Bloomington, California and Howard Trout worked as the personnel manager for the Sherwin Williams Paint Company in San Bernardino and Pearl Trout worked as a teacher for the Fontana Unified School District (San Bernardino County Sun 1974, 1995). The Trouts lived at the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence until Howard’s death in 1974 (San Bernardino County Sun 1974). Following his death, Pearl Trout lived in the home until her death in 1995. Like the 10622 Tamarind Avenue property, ownership of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue property transferred to Robbie Lee McClean following Pearl Trout’s death. McClean retained ownership of the property until her death in 2008. In 2010, the Estate of Robbie McClean sold the property to Wei Wei Zou. IV. METHODS AND RESULTS Archival Research Records relating to the ownership and developmental history of the property were sought to identify any associated potential historic or architectural significance. Records located at the BFSA research library, the San Bernardino County Assessor/Recorder/County Clerk, and the Fontana Historical Society were accessed for information regarding the structures. Appendix C contains maps of the property, including a general location map, historic USGS project location maps, a current USGS project location map, a current Assessor’s parcel map, and the 1891 subdivision map (Figures 1 to 8). Field Survey BFSA conducted a historic structure survey on September 9, 2021. The purpose of the survey was to locate and document any potentially historic structures situated within the property that would be potentially affected by any renovation program. Preparation of architectural descriptions was conducted in the field and supplemented using the photographic documentation. Additional information was drawn from supplemental research efforts and incorporated into this report. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12 Description of Surveyed Resources 10622 Tamarind Avenue The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1964 as a cross-gabled, Ranch- style, single-family residence. The building features an “L”-shaped footprint with an attached, two-car garage in the front-gabled portion (Plate 2). The garage door is not original and consists of an aluminum, segmented, automatic door. Exterior cladding on the building primarily consists of stucco with a brick masonry wainscot along the side-gabled portion of the primary (east) façade (see Plate 2). A sunroom addition is present on the west façade of the building (Plates 3 and 4), which had been constructed by 1966. Fenestration throughout the building primarily consists of non-original, aluminum-framed, horizontal-sliding windows (see Plates 2 to 6). The windows are clearly replacements, with one window on the west façade located in a smaller opening than the original. One window on the south façade is glass block (see Plate 6). 10642 Tamarind Avenue The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1948 as a side-gabled, Ranch- style, single-family residence with a full-length front porch (Plate 7). The building is clad in stucco and features non-original, aluminum-framed, multi-lite windows throughout (see Plates 7 to 10). At least two windows on the primary (east) façade were infilled at unknown dates (see Plate 7). Between 1948 and 1959, a front-gabled rear addition was constructed onto the west façade of the residence, adding nearly one-third of the current square footage to the building. Also between 1948 and 1959, a small detached garage or shed was constructed southwest of the residence and a large agricultural building was constructed west of the residence. The garage or shed was later expanded into the current detached garage between 1959 and 1966 (Plate 11). The western half of the detached garage is clad in wide horizontal wood siding and the eastern half is clad in stucco (Plates 12 to 14). Between 1967 and 1980, the large agricultural building was demolished. A large pergola was installed onto the west façade of the 1948 to 1959 addition at an unknown date (Plate 15). V. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATIONS Because removal or alteration of the historic structures located at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue would require approval from the City of Fontana, CEQA and City of Fontana guidelines were used to evaluate them as potentially significant historic buildings. Therefore, criteria for listing on the CRHR and as historic resources under City of Fontana criteria were used to measure the significance of the resources. When evaluating a historic resource, integrity is the authenticity of the resource’s physical identity clearly indicated by the retention of characteristics that existed during its period of significance. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 27 It is important to note that integrity is not the same as condition; integrity directly relates to the presence or absence of historic materials and character-defining features, while condition relates to the relative state of physical deterioration of the resource. In most instances, integrity is more relevant to the significance of a resource than condition; however, if a resource is in such poor condition that original materials and features may no longer be salvageable, then the resource’s integrity may be adversely impacted. CEQA guidelines (Section 15064.5) address archaeological and historic resources, noting that physical changes that would demolish or materially alter in an adverse manner those characteristics that convey the historic significance of the resource and justify its listing on inventories of historic resources, are typically considered significant impacts. The buildings were evaluated to determine whether they are eligible for listing on the CRHR. Furthermore, BFSA based the review upon the recommended criteria listed in the National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). This review is based upon the evaluation of integrity of the buildings followed by the assessment of distinctive characteristics. 1. Integrity of Location [refers to] the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of location was assessed by reviewing historical records and aerial photographs in order to determine if the buildings had always existed at their present locations or if they had been moved, rebuilt, or their footprints significantly altered. Historical research revealed that the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue buildings were constructed in their current locations between 1948 and 1964, and therefore, retain integrity of location. 2. Integrity of Design [refers to] the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of design was assessed by evaluating the spatial arrangement of the buildings and any architectural features present. a. 10622 Tamarind Avenue: The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1964 as a cross-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence. Modifications made to the building since its initial construction include the replacement of the original garage door, replacement of all original windows with aluminum-framed sliding versions, and the alteration of original openings of some of the replacement windows. Although these modifications replaced original materials with non-historic, modern versions, this did not alter the overall architectural style of the building. Therefore, the 10622 Tamarind Avenue building retains integrity of design. b. 10642 Tamarind Avenue: The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1948 as a side-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence with Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 a full-length front porch. Modifications made to the building since its initial construction include the construction of a front-gabled rear addition between 1948 and 1959, construction of a large pergola onto the west façade of the 1948 to 1959 addition at an unknown date, infilling of at least two original window openings on the primary (east) façade at an unknown date, and replacement of all original windows at an unknown date. As these modifications resulted in the alteration of the form, plan, space, and structure of the building, they also negatively impacted the building’s original architectural style. Therefore, the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building does not retain integrity of design. 3. Integrity of Setting [refers to] the physical environment of a historic property. Setting includes elements such as topographic features, open space, viewshed, landscape, vegetation, and artificial features (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of setting was assessed by inspecting the elements of the property, which include topographic features, open space, views, landscape, vegetation, man-made features, and relationships between buildings and other features. The historic buildings located at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue were constructed between 1948 and 1964. During that time, the surrounding area consisted of small, rural ranches. Aerial photographs indicate that the surrounding neighborhood began to change circa the 1950s, when a large agricultural building was constructed to the west of the residences and the garage or shed-turned-detached garage was constructed southwest of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building. Even at that time, however, the surrounding area primarily consisted of farmland. Beginning in the 1980s, single-family residences were constructed to the east of the property, which continued into the 2000s and 2010s. In the early 2000s, the farmland to the west of the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue residences was developed with large warehouses. Currently, the surrounding area consists of a scatter of original residences, modern residences, and large warehouses. Because the area is no longer recognizable as a rural farming community and no longer retains the same open space, viewshed, landscape, vegetation, or general built environment, the buildings do not retain integrity of setting. 4. Integrity of Materials [refers to] the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of materials was assessed by determining the presence or absence of original building materials, as well as the possible introduction of materials that may have altered the architectural design of the buildings. Both the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue buildings have been modified since their original construction, primarily due to the replacement of windows and infilling of original window openings. While the 10642 Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Tamarind Avenue building has also undergone more substantial alterations that have impacted its original footprint and overall plan, both buildings have undergone enough original material replacements that neither building retains integrity of materials. 5. Integrity of Workmanship [refers to] the physical evidence of the labor and skill of a particular culture or people during any given period in history (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of workmanship was assessed by evaluating the quality of the architectural features present in the buildings. The original workmanship demonstrated by the construction of the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue buildings is average. Both buildings have also been substantially modified since their initial construction and the modifications were conducted using a lesser level of workmanship. In addition, neither building possesses elements or details that would make them representative of the labor or skill of a particular culture or people. Therefore, neither building possesses integrity of workmanship. 6. Integrity of Feeling [refers to] a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of feeling was assessed by evaluating whether or not the resources’ features, in combination with their setting, conveyed a historic sense of the property during the period of significance. As noted previously, the integrity of setting for both Tamarind Avenue buildings has been lost. In addition, the modifications made to the buildings and surroundings since their original construction have negatively impacted their ability to convey their historic dates of construction. Therefore, neither building retains integrity of feeling. 7. Integrity of Association [refers to] the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property (Andrus and Shrimpton 2002). Integrity of association was assessed by evaluating the resources’ data or information and their ability to answer any research questions relevant to the history of the Fontana area or the state of California. Historical research indicates that neither building is associated with any significant persons or events. None of the individuals who owned or lived in the buildings were found to be significant and no known important events occurred at the property. Therefore, the buildings have never possessed integrity of association. Of the seven aspects of integrity, the 10622 Tamarind Avenue building was determined to retain only integrity of location and design. The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was determined to retain only integrity of location. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 30 CRHR Evaluation For a property to be eligible for listing on the CRHR, the resource must be found significant at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following criteria: • CRHR Criterion 1: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage. Historical research revealed that neither building is associated with any events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history or cultural heritage. Further, while the buildings were constructed during the post-World War II development boom, which is a significant historic event, no documentation could be located indicating that they were financed through an FHA loan, nor was the Trouts moving to the property directly related to the Kaiser steel industry, which was a primary contributor to the boom in Fontana due to the employment opportunities afforded by the steel mill. Instead, Howard Trout worked as the manager of a paint store and Pearl Trout as a schoolteacher. As such, although built during the post-World War II development boom, the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building is not associated with prefabricated housing built by Henry Kaiser during the 1940s, the Kaiser steel industry, or the Kaiser Permanente health plan going public after the war. The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed on land owned by the Trouts for their daughter, Robbie Lee Skelton, and her husband Frank Tucker. Although Frank Tucker served in World War II, this residence was constructed nearly 20 years after the war had ended. Tucker also did not move to the area to pursue employment with any of the industries that had an impact on the city during the 1960s such as the steel mill, construction of the freeway, or drag racing. Instead, he worked as a custodian at the school district. As such, the 10622 Tamarind Avenue building is not associated with any of these aspects of the city’s history. As neither building can be associated with any specific events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage and neither building retains a high degree of integrity, neither building qualifies for the listing on the CRHR under Criterion 1. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31 • CRHR Criterion 2: It is associated with the lives of persons important to the history of California or its communities. Historical research revealed that neither building is associated with the lives of any persons important to the history of California or its communities. Therefore, neither building is eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion 2. • CRHR Criterion 3: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, California region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual or possesses high artistic values. a. 10622 Tamarind Avenue: The 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence was constructed in 1964 in the Ranch style during the circa 1935 to 1975 period during which the Ranch style was most popular: The Ranch style originated in southern California in the mid- 1930s, after a few earlier precursors … During the decades of the 1950s and 1960s it became by far the most popular house style built throughout the country. Often located in large subdivisions, post-World War II Ranch-house suburbs form a dominant part of many American cities – particularly those that grew in the postwar Sunbelt Boom of the 1950s and 1960s, such as Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Atlanta. (McAlester 2015) Identifying features of the Ranch style, as provided by McAlester (2015) include: Broad one-story shape; usually built low to ground; low-pitched roof without dormers; commonly with moderate-to-wide roof overhang; front entry usually located off-center and sheltered under main roof of house; garage typically attached to main façade (faces front, side, or rear); large picture window generally present; asymmetrical façade. (McAlester 2015:597) The 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence possesses all seven features listed above: broad, one-story shape; built low to the ground; low-pitched roof Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 32 without dormers and a moderate roof overhang; front entry usually located off- center and sheltered under the main roof of house; garage attached to the main façade; large picture window; and asymmetrical façade. In addition to the identifying features listed above, McAlester (2015) also distinguishes between four principal subtypes of the Ranch architectural style, including Hipped Roof, Cross-Hipped Roof, Side-Gabled Roof, and Cross- Gabled Roof. The 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence is best classified as the Cross-Gabled Roof subtype. McAlester (2015:598) states that “about 40 percent of one-story Ranch houses have a broad side-gabled form, with a long roof ridge parallel to the street, and a single-prominent, front facing gable extension.” Although the 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence possesses all seven characteristics of the Ranch style, the Ranch style is extremely common in southern California and, as such, examples of the style that are eligible for listing on the CRHR should retain a high degree of integrity. As the 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence no longer possesses integrity of setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association, the building does not embody distinctive characteristics of a Ranch-style residence and does not rise to a level beyond the ordinary. Therefore, the 10622 Tamarind Avenue building is not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 3. b. 10642 Tamarind Avenue: The 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence was constructed in 1948 in the Ranch style during the circa 1935 to 1975 period during which the Ranch style was most popular: The Ranch style originated in southern California in the mid- 1930s, after a few earlier precursors … During the decades of the 1950s and 1960s it became by far the most popular house style built throughout the country. Often located in large subdivisions, post-World War II Ranch-house suburbs form a dominant part of many American cities – particularly those that grew in the postwar Sunbelt Boom of the 1950s and 1960s, such as Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Atlanta. (McAlester 2015) Identifying features of the Ranch style, as provided by McAlester (2015) include: Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Broad one-story shape; usually built low to ground; low-pitched roof without dormers; commonly with moderate-to-wide roof overhang; front entry usually located off-center and sheltered under main roof of house; garage typically attached to main façade (faces front, side, or rear); large picture window generally present; asymmetrical façade. (McAlester 2015:597) The 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence possesses six of the seven features listed above: broad, one-story shape; built low to the ground; low-pitched roof without dormers and a moderate roof overhang; front entry usually located off- center and sheltered under the main roof of house; large picture window; and asymmetrical façade. In addition to the identifying features listed above, McAlester (2015) also distinguishes between four principal subtypes of the Ranch architectural style, including Hipped Roof, Cross-Hipped Roof, Side-Gabled Roof, and Cross- Gabled Roof. The 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence is best classified as the Side-Gabled Roof subtype. McAlester (2015:598) states: … about 10 percent of one-story Ranch houses have side-gabled roofs with a long roof ridge parallel to the front façade. These are more common in rural areas and in neighborhoods of smaller houses. Some high-style examples have slight angles in the front (or other) façade, giving the appearance of wide-spread welcoming arms. Although the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence possesses six out of the seven characteristics of the Ranch style, the Ranch style is extremely common in southern California and, as such, examples of the style that are eligible for listing on the CRHR should retain a high degree of integrity. As the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence no longer possesses integrity of design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association, the building does not embody distinctive characteristics of a Ranch-style residence and does not rise to a level beyond the ordinary. Therefore, the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building is not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 3. • CRHR Criterion 4: It has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in the state of California, or national prehistory or history. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 34 The 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue buildings are not associated with any significant individuals or events, and it is unlikely that either building would yield additional information about the history of the state of California or the nation. Therefore, the buildings are not eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion 4. City of Fontana Historical Resources Designation Evaluation According to Section 5-355 of the City of Fontana Code of Ordinances, “The city council, upon recommendation of the commission may designate any improvement, natural feature or site as an historical resource and any area within the city as an historic overlay district if it meets the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the following”: • City of Fontana Criterion 1: It has a special historical, archaeological, cultural, architectural, community or aesthetic value. As is discussed above under CRHR Criterion 1, historical research revealed that neither building has a special historical, archaeological, cultural, architectural, community, or aesthetic value. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 1. • City of Fontana Criterion 2: It is identified with persons, a business use or events significant in local, state or national history. As is discussed above under CRHR Criterion 2, historical research revealed that neither building is identified with persons, a business use, or events significant in local, state or national history. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 2. • City of Fontana Criterion 3: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As is discussed above under CRHR Criterion 3, neither building embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 3. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 35 • City of Fontana Criterion 4: It has a unique location or singular physical characteristic that represents an established and familiar visible feature of a neighborhood or community or the city. Historical research revealed that neither building has a unique location or singular physical characteristic that represents an established and familiar visible feature of a neighborhood or community or the city. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 4. • City of Fontana Criterion 5: Its integrity as a natural environment or feature strongly contributes to the well-being of residents or a neighborhood of the city. Historical research revealed that neither building is a natural environment or feature strongly contributes to the well-being of residents or a neighborhood of the city. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 5. • City of Fontana Criterion 6: It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures or objects that are unified by past events or are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development. Historical research revealed that the buildings are not located in a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures or objects that are unified by past events or are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development. Therefore, neither building qualifies under City of Fontana Criterion 65. VI. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The two historic residences at 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue have been evaluated as not historically or architecturally significant under any of the CRHR or City of Fontana criteria due to a lack of association with any significant persons or events and not being representative examples of any specific architectural style, period, or region. Because neither building is a Historical Resource as defined by CEQA, the City may make a finding of No Impact with regard to historic-period built environment resources in the project. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 36 VII. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this historic structure assessment. This assessment is based upon the professional opinion of Consulting Historian Brian F. Smith. Any conclusions or recommendations included herein may be changed or challenged by the City of Fontana during the environmental review process. April 18, 2022 Brian F. Smith, M.A. Date Consulting Historian VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ancestry.com 2007 California, U.S., Marriage Index, 1960-1985 (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2009a 1860 United States Federal Census (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2009b 1870 United States Federal Census (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2010 U.S. Public Records Index, 1950-1993, Volume 1 (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2012a 1940 United States Federal Census (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2012b U.S., Navy Casualties Books, 1776-1941 (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2014 U.S., Social Security Death Index, 1935-2014 (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2016 Florida, U.S., County Marriage Records, 1823-1982 (database online). Lehi, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. 2017 California, U.S., Voter Registrations, 1900-1968 (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 37 Andrus, Patrick W. and Rebecca H. Shrimpton 2002 National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Anicic, John Charles, Jr. 1982 National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form, Fontana Farms Company Ranch House, Camp #1 (Pepper Street House). Fontana Historical Society. Form on file at the United States Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. 2005 Images of America: Fontana. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina; Chicago, Illinois; Portsmouth, New Hampshire; and San Francisco, California. Beattie, George W. and Helen P. Beattie 1939 Heritage of the Valley: San Bernardino’s First Century. Biobooks, Oakland, California. Brigandi, Phil 1998 Temecula: At the Crossroads of History. Heritage Media Corporation, Encinitas, California. Caughey, John W. 1970 California, A Remarkable State’s Life History. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Chapman, Charles E. 1921 A History of California: The Spanish Period. The Macmillan Company, New York. Cincinnati Enquirer 1940 Marriage Licenses. 16 July:19. Cincinnati, Ohio. City of Fontana 2018 About the City of Fontana. Electronic document, https://www.fontana.org/255/About -The-City-of-Fontana, accessed June 11, 2018. City of San Diego 2007 San Diego Modernism Historic Context Statement. Submitted to the State of California Office of Historic Preservation and on file at the City of San Diego, San Diego, California. Cornford, Danial (editor) 1995 Working People of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford, California. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 38 Cook, Sherburne F. 1976 The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. Cushing, Lincoln 2013 The roots of Southern California Kaiser Permanente. Electronic document, https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/our-story/our-history/the-roots-of-southern- california-kaiser-permanente, accessed April 18, 2022. Engelhardt, Zephyrin 1921 San Luis Rey Mission, The King of the Missions. James M. Barry Company, San Francisco, California. Graves, Steven M. 2010 Geography 417, California for Educators: World War II and the late 20th Century. Electronic document, https://www.csun.edu/~sg4002/courses/417/417_lectures/ 417_post_war.htm, accessed April 18, 2022. Hall, William Hammond 1888 The Field, Water-Supply, and Works, Organization and Operation in San Diego, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties: The Second Part of the Report of the State Engineer of California on Irrigation and the Irrigation Question. State Office, J.D. Young, Supt. State Printing, Sacramento. Kiddle Encyclopedia 2022 Auto Club Speedway facts for kids. Electronic document, https://kids.kiddle.co/Auto_Club_Speedway, accessed April 18, 2022. McAlester, Virginia Savage 2015 A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America’s Domestic Architecture. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. Miami Herald 1939 Frank Tucker, Jr., Weds Ohio Girl. 4 July:5. Miami, Florida. Pourade, Richard F. 1961 Time of the Bells. In The History of San Diego 2. Union-Tribune Publishing Company, San Diego, California. 1963 The Silver Dons. In The History of San Diego 3. Union-Tribune Publishing Company, San Diego, California. Rolle, Andrew F. 1969 California: A History. 2nd ed. Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 39 San Bernardino County Sun 1961 Fact, Figures Group Gets Petition Ready. 12 October:33. San Bernardino, California. 1971 Frank Tucker Jr., Bloomington. 5 August:23. San Bernardino, California. 1974 Howard Trout, Bloomington. 26 April:17. San Bernardino, California. 1990 Charles E. McClean, Bloomington resident. 3 October:18. San Bernardino, California. 1995 Pearl W. Trout. 16 May:12. San Bernardino, California. Stropes, Tracy A., J.R.K. Stropes, and Brian F. Smith 2019 A Cultural Resources Assessment for the 8801 East Marginal Way Project, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Unpublished report on file at the City of Tukwila, Tukwila, Washington. University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections 2018 Pope & Talbot records, circa 1849-1975. Electronic file, http://archiveswest.orbis cascade.org/ark:/80444/xv14450/pdf, accessed February 26, 2019. Wallis, Eileen V. 2018 World War II in California’s Inland Empire. Electronic document, https://scalar.usc.edu/works/world-war-ii-in-californias-inland-empire/kaiser-steel, accessed April 18, 2022. Whittall, Austin 2020 The History of Route 66. Electronic document, https://www.theroute- 66.com/history.html, accessed April 18, 2022. World Forestry Center 2017 Andrew Jackson Pope (1820-1978). Electronic document, https://www.worldforestry .org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/POPE-ANDREW-JACKSON.pdf, accessed February 26, 2019. IX. APPENDICES Appendix A – Maps Appendix B – DPR Forms Appendix C – Preparers’ Qualifications Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX A Maps Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX B DPR Forms State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Z Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 3 *Resource Name or #: 10622 Tamarind Avenue P1. Other Identifier: *P2. Location: n Not for Publication o Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Fontana, California Date: 1975 T 1 S R 5 W (projected); M.D. B.M. San Bernardino c. Address: 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue City: Fontana Zip: 92316 d. UTM: Zone: mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building is located within Assessor’s Parcel Number 256-011-03. The building is located southwest of the intersection of Slover and Tamarind avenues in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1964 as a cross-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence. The building features an “L”-shaped footprint with an attached, two-car garage in the front-gabled portion. The garage door is not original and consists of an aluminum, segmented, automatic door. Exterior cladding on the building primarily consists of stucco with a brick masonry wainscot along the side-gabled portion of the primary (east) façade. A sunroom addition is present on the west façade of the building, which had been constructed by 1966. Fenestration throughout the building primarily consists of non-original, aluminum-framed, horizontal-sliding windows. The windows are clearly replacements, with one window on the west façade located in a smaller opening than the original. One window on the south façade is glass block. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2. Single-family property *P4. Resources Present: nBuilding oStructure oObject oSite oDistrict oElement of District oOther (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) East façade of the 10622 Tamarind Avenue residence, 2021 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: 1964/historic aerial photographs and Assessor’s records nHistoric oPrehistoric oBoth *P7. Owner and Address: Wei Wei Xu/Wei Wei Zou 10622 Tamarind Avenue Bloomington, California 92316 *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Elena C. Goralogia Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/27/21 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Historic Structure Evaluation *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter “none”) Jennifer R.K. Stropes and Brian F. Smith, Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California (APNs 256-011-02 to -04), Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., report in progress, 2021 *Attachments: oNONE nLocation Map oSketch Map nContinuation Sheet nBuilding, Structure, and Object Record oArchaeological Record oDistrict Record oLinear Feature Record oMilling Station Record oRock Art Record oArtifact Record Photograph Record o Other (List): DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information P5a. Photo or Drawing State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 3 *NRHP Status Code: 6Z *Resource Name or #: 10642 Tamarind Avenue B1. Historic Name: N/A B2. Common Name: N/A B3. Original Use: Single-family residential B4. Present Use: Single-family residential *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Constructed in 1948; front-gabled rear addition constructed between 1948 and 1959; large pergola constructed onto the west façade of the 1948 to 1959 addition at an unknown date; at least two original window openings on the primary (east) façade infilled at an unknown date; all original windows replaced at an unknown date. *B7. Moved? nNo oYes oUnknown Date: N/A Original Location: N/A *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown *B10. Significance Theme: Post-World War II residential development Area: Fontana Period of Significance: 1948 Property Type: Single-family residential Applicable Criteria: None (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1948 as a cross-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence. Of the seven aspects of integrity, the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was determined to retain only integrity of location. The building was evaluated as ineligible for designation under California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Criteria 1 and 2 due to a lack of association with any significant persons or events. The building is not considered a good example of the Ranch style, is not architecturally significant, was not constructed using indigenous materials, is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and therefore, is not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 3. Further, the building is evaluated as not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 4 as it likely cannot yield any additional information about the history of Fontana or the state of California. Further, the building was evaluated as not eligible for designation under any City of Fontana Historical Resources Designation criteria. See Stropes and Smith (2021) for further historic context and evaluation information. B11. Additional Resource Attributes (List attributes and codes): None *B12. References: See Stropes and Smith (2021) for additional references B13. Remarks: None *B14. Evaluator: Elena C. Goralogia *Date of Evaluation: 10/27/21 DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # LOCATION MAP Trinomial Page 3 of 3 *Resource Name or #: 10642 Tamarind Avenue *Map Name: USGS Fontana, California Quadrangle (7.5-minute series) *Scale: 1:24,000 *Date of Map: NA (Digital) DPR 523J (1/95) *Required information State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Z Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 3 *Resource Name or #: 10642 Tamarind Avenue P1. Other Identifier: *P2. Location: n Not for Publication o Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Fontana, California Date: 1975 T 1 S R 5 W (projected); M.D. B.M. San Bernardino c. Address: 10642 Tamarind Avenue City: Fontana Zip: 92316 d. UTM: Zone: mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) The 10622 Tamarind Avenue building is located within Assessor’s Parcel Number 256-011-04. The building is located southwest of the intersection of Slover and Tamarind avenues in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1948 as a side-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence with a full-length front porch. The building is clad in stucco and features non-original, aluminum-framed, multi-lite windows throughout. At least two windows on the primary (east) façade were infilled at unknown dates. Between 1948 and 1959, a front-gabled rear addition was constructed onto the west façade of the residence, adding nearly one-third of the current square footage to the building. Also between 1948 and 1959, a small detached garage or shed was constructed southwest of the residence and a large agricultural building was constructed west of the residence. The garage or shed was later expanded into the current detached garage between 1959 and 1966. The western half of the detached garage is clad in wide horizontal wood siding and the eastern half is clad in stucco. Between 1967 and 1980, the large agricultural building was demolished. A large pergola was installed onto the west façade of the 1948 to 1959 addition at an unknown date. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2. Single-family property *P4. Resources Present: nBuilding oStructure oObject oSite oDistrict oElement of District oOther (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) East façade of the 10642 Tamarind Avenue residence, 2021 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: 1948/historic aerial photographs and Assessor’s records nHistoric oPrehistoric oBoth *P7. Owner and Address: Fabiola Hernandez/Cesar Romero 10642 Tamarind Avenue Bloomington, California 92316 *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Elena C. Goralogia Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/27/21 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Historic Structure Evaluation *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter “none”) Jennifer R.K. Stropes and Brian F. Smith, Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California (APNs 256-011-02 to -04), Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., report in progress, 2021 *Attachments: oNONE nLocation Map oSketch Map nContinuation Sheet nBuilding, Structure, and Object Record oArchaeological Record oDistrict Record oLinear Feature Record oMilling Station Record oRock Art Record oArtifact Record Photograph Record o Other (List): DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information P5a. Photo or Drawing State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 3 *NRHP Status Code: 6Z *Resource Name or #: 10642 Tamarind Avenue B1. Historic Name: N/A B2. Common Name: N/A B3. Original Use: Single-family residential B4. Present Use: Single-family residential *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Constructed in 1964; sunroom constructed on the west façade between 1964 and 1966; original garage door replaced, all original windows replaced with aluminum-framed sliding versions, and original openings of some of the replacement windows altered at unknown dates. *B7. Moved? nNo oYes oUnknown Date: N/A Original Location: N/A *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown *B10. Significance Theme: Post-World War II residential development Area: Fontana Period of Significance: 1964 Property Type: Single-family residential Applicable Criteria: None (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was constructed in 1964 as a cross-gabled, Ranch-style, single-family residence. Of the seven aspects of integrity, the 10642 Tamarind Avenue building was determined to retain only integrity of location and design. The building was evaluated as ineligible for designation under California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Criteria 1 and 2 due to a lack of association with any significant persons or events. The building is not considered a good example of the Ranch style, is not architecturally significant, was not constructed using indigenous materials, is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and therefore, is not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 3. Further, the building is evaluated as not eligible for designation under CRHR Criterion 4 as it likely cannot yield any additional information about the history of Fontana or the state of California. Further, the building was evaluated as not eligible for designation under any City of Fontana Historical Resources Designation criteria. See Stropes and Smith (2021) for further historic context and evaluation information. B11. Additional Resource Attributes (List attributes and codes): None *B12. References: See Stropes and Smith (2021) for additional references B13. Remarks: None *B14. Evaluator: Elena C. Goralogia *Date of Evaluation: 10/27/21 DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information State of California ¾ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # LOCATION MAP Trinomial Page 3 of 3 *Resource Name or #: 10642 Tamarind Avenue *Map Name: USGS Fontana, California Quadrangle (7.5-minute series) *Scale: 1:24,000 *Date of Map: NA (Digital) DPR 523J (1/95) *Required information Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX C Preparers’ Qualifications Brian F. Smith, MA Owner, Principal Investigator Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road Suite A Phone: (858) 679-8218 Fax: (858) 679-9896 E-Mail: bsmith@bfsa-ca.com Education Master of Arts, History, University of San Diego, California 1982 Bachelor of Arts, History, and Anthropology, University of San Diego, California 1975 Professional Memberships Society for California Archaeology Experience Principal Investigator 1977–Present Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Poway, California Brian F. Smith is the owner and principal historical and archaeological consultant for Brian F. Smith and Associates. Over the past 32 years, he has conducted over 2,500 cultural resource studies in California, Arizona, Nevada, Montana, and Texas. These studies include every possible aspect of archaeology from literature searches and large-scale surveys to intensive data recovery excavations. Reports prepared by Mr. Smith have been submitted to all facets of local, state, and federal review agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security. In addition, Mr. Smith has conducted studies for utility companies (Sempra Energy) and state highway departments (CalTrans). Professional Accomplishments These selected major professional accomplishments represent research efforts that have added significantly to the body of knowledge concerning the prehistoric life ways of cultures once present in the Southern California area and historic settlement since the late 18th century. Mr. Smith has been principal investigator on the following select projects, except where noted. Downtown San Diego Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Programs: Large numbers of downtown San Diego mitigation and monitoring projects, some of which included Broadway Block (2019), 915 Grape Street (2019), 1919 Pacific Highway (2018), Moxy Hotel (2018), Makers Quarter Block D (2017), Ballpark Village (2017), 460 16th Street (2017), Kettner and Ash (2017), Bayside Fire Station (2017), Pinnacle on the Park (2017), IDEA1 (2016), Blue Sky San Diego (2016), Pacific Gate (2016), Pendry Hotel (2015), Cisterra Sempra Office Tower (2014), 15th and Island (2014), Park and G (2014), Comm 22 (2014), 7th and F Street Parking (2013), Ariel Suites (2013), 13th and Marker (2012), Strata (2008), Hotel Indigo (2008), Lofts at 707 10th Avenue Project (2007), Breeza (2007), Bayside at the Embarcadero (2007), Aria (2007), Icon (2007), Vantage Pointe (2007), Aperture (2007), Sapphire Tower (2007), Lofts at 655 Sixth Avenue (2007), Metrowork (2007), The Legend (2006), The Mark (2006), Smart Corner (2006), Lofts at 677 7th Avenue (2005), Aloft on Cortez Hill (2005), Front and Beech Apartments (2003), Bella Via Condominiums (2003), Acqua Vista Residential Tower (2003), Northblock Lofts (2003), Westin Park Place Hotel (2001), Parkloft Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2 Apartment Complex (2001), Renaissance Park (2001), and Laurel Bay Apartments (2001). 1900 and 1912 Spindrift Drive: An extensive data recovery and mitigation monitoring program at the Spindrift Site, an important prehistoric archaeological habitation site stretching across the La Jolla area. The project resulted in the discovery of over 20,000 artifacts and nearly 100,000 grams of bulk faunal remains and marine shell, indicating a substantial occupation area (2013-2014). San Diego Airport Development Project: An extensive historic assessment of multiple buildings at the San Diego International Airport and included the preparation of Historic American Buildings Survey documentation to preserve significant elements of the airport prior to demolition (2017-2018). Citracado Parkway Extension: A still-ongoing project in the city of Escondido to mitigate impacts to an important archaeological occupation site. Various archaeological studies have been conducted by BFSA resulting in the identification of a significant cultural deposit within the project area. Westin Hotel and Timeshare (Grand Pacific Resorts): Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of Carlsbad consisted of the excavation of 176 one-square-meter archaeological data recovery units which produced thousands of prehistoric artifacts and ecofacts, and resulted in the preservation of a significant prehistoric habitation site. The artifacts recovered from the site presented important new data about the prehistory of the region and Native American occupation in the area (2017). The Everly Subdivision Project: Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of El Cajon resulted in the identification of a significant prehistoric occupation site from both the Late Prehistoric and Archaic Periods, as well as producing historic artifacts that correspond to the use of the property since 1886. The project produced an unprecedented quantity of artifacts in comparison to the area encompassed by the site, but lacked characteristics that typically reflect intense occupation, indicating that the site was used intensively for food processing (2014-2015). Ballpark Village: A mitigation and monitoring program within three city blocks in the East Village area of San Diego resulting in the discovery of a significant historic deposit. Nearly 5,000 historic artifacts and over 500,000 grams of bulk historic building fragments, food waste, and other materials representing an occupation period between 1880 and 1917 were recovered (2015-2017). Archaeology at the Padres Ballpark: Involved the analysis of historic resources within a seven-block area of the “East Village” area of San Diego, where occupation spanned a period from the 1870s to the 1940s. Over a period of two years, BFSA recovered over 200,000 artifacts and hundreds of pounds of metal, construction debris, unidentified broken glass, and wood. Collectively, the Ballpark Project and the other downtown mitigation and monitoring projects represent the largest historical archaeological program anywhere in the country in the past decade (2000-2007). 4S Ranch Archaeological and Historical Cultural Resources Study: Data recovery program consisted of the excavation of over 2,000 square meters of archaeological deposits that produced over one million artifacts, containing primarily prehistoric materials. The archaeological program at 4S Ranch is the largest archaeological study ever undertaken in the San Diego County area and has produced data that has exceeded expectations regarding the resolution of long-standing research questions and regional prehistoric settlement patterns. Charles H. Brown Site: Attracted international attention to the discovery of evidence of the antiquity of man in North America. Site located in Mission Valley, in the city of San Diego. Del Mar Man Site: Study of the now famous Early Man Site in Del Mar, California, for the San Diego Science Foundation and the San Diego Museum of Man, under the direction of Dr. Spencer Rogers and Dr. James R. Moriarty. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 3 Old Town State Park Projects: Consulting Historical Archaeologist. Projects completed in the Old Town State Park involved development of individual lots for commercial enterprises. The projects completed in Old Town include Archaeological and Historical Site Assessment for the Great Wall Cafe (1992), Archaeological Study for the Old Town Commercial Project (1991), and Cultural Resources Site Survey at the Old San Diego Inn (1988). Site W-20, Del Mar, California: A two-year-long investigation of a major prehistoric site in the Del Mar area of the city of San Diego. This research effort documented the earliest practice of religious/ceremonial activities in San Diego County (circa 6,000 years ago), facilitated the projection of major non-material aspects of the La Jolla Complex, and revealed the pattern of civilization at this site over a continuous period of 5,000 years. The report for the investigation included over 600 pages, with nearly 500,000 words of text, illustrations, maps, and photographs documenting this major study. City of San Diego Reclaimed Water Distribution System: A cultural resource study of nearly 400 miles of pipeline in the city and county of San Diego. Master Environmental Assessment Project, City of Poway: Conducted for the City of Poway to produce a complete inventory of all recorded historic and prehistoric properties within the city. The information was used in conjunction with the City’s General Plan Update to produce a map matrix of the city showing areas of high, moderate, and low potential for the presence of cultural resources. The effort also included the development of the City’s Cultural Resource Guidelines, which were adopted as City policy. Draft of the City of Carlsbad Historical and Archaeological Guidelines: Contracted by the City of Carlsbad to produce the draft of the City’s historical and archaeological guidelines for use by the Planning Department of the City. The Mid-Bayfront Project for the City of Chula Vista: Involved a large expanse of undeveloped agricultural land situated between the railroad and San Diego Bay in the northwestern portion of the city. The study included the analysis of some potentially historic features and numerous prehistoric Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Audie Murphy Ranch, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,113.4 acres and 43 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination; direction of field crews; evaluation of sites for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; assessment of cupule, pictograph, and rock shelter sites, co-authoring of cultural resources project report. February- September 2002. Cultural Resources Evaluation of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Otay Ranch Village 13 Project, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,947 acres and 76 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on County of San Diego and CEQA guidelines; co- authoring of cultural resources project report. May-November 2002. Cultural Resources Survey for the Remote Video Surveillance Project, El Centro Sector, Imperial County: Project manager/director for a survey of 29 individual sites near the U.S./Mexico Border for proposed video surveillance camera locations associated with the San Diego Border barrier Project—project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; site identification and recordation; assessment of potential impacts to cultural resources; meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Border Patrol, and other government agencies involved; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. January, February, and July 2002. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee West GPA, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of nine sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; assessment of sites Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 4 for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. January-March 2002. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed French Valley Specific Plan/EIR, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of two prehistoric and three historic sites—included project coordination and budgeting; survey of project area; Native American consultation; direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; cultural resources project report in prep. July-August 2000. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee Ranch, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of one prehistoric and five historic sites—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature recordation; historic structure assessments; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. February-June 2000. Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of the San Diego Presidio Identified During Water Pipe Construction for the City of San Diego, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project report in prep. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Tyrian 3 Project, La Jolla, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Lamont 5 Project, Pacific Beach, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Reiss Residence Project, La Jolla, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. March-April 2000. Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of Site SDM-W-95 (CA-SDI-211) for the Poinsettia Shores Santalina Development Project and Caltrans, Carlsbad, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project report in prep. December 1999-January 2000. Survey and Testing of Two Prehistoric Cultural Resources for the Airway Truck Parking Project, Otay Mesa, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. December 1999-January 2000. Cultural Resources Phase I and II Investigations for the Tin Can Hill Segment of the Immigration and Naturalization Services Triple Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director for a survey and testing of a prehistoric quarry site along the border—NRHP eligibility assessment; project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature recordation; meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. December 1999-January 2000. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 5 Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Westview High School Project for the City of San Diego, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program including collection of material for specialized faunal and botanical analyses; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; co-authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. October 1999-January 2000. Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Otay Ranch SPA-One West Project for the City of Chula Vista, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. September 1999-January 2000. Monitoring of Grading for the Herschel Place Project, La Jolla, California: Project archaeologist/ monitor— included monitoring of grading activities associated with the development of a single- dwelling parcel. September 1999. Survey and Testing of a Historic Resource for the Osterkamp Development Project, Valley Center, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; budget development; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999. Survey and Testing of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Proposed College Boulevard Alignment Project, Carlsbad, California: Project manager/director —included direction of field crews; development and completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. July-August 1999. Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources for the Palomar Christian Conference Center Project, Palomar Mountain, California: Project archaeologist—included direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999. Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources at the Village 2 High School Site, Otay Ranch, City of Chula Vista, California: Project manager/director —management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July 1999. Cultural Resources Phase I, II, and III Investigations for the Immigration and Naturalization Services Triple Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director for the survey, testing, and mitigation of sites along border—supervision of multiple field crews, NRHP eligibility assessments, Native American consultation, contribution to Environmental Assessment document, lithic and marine shell analysis, authoring of cultural resources project report. August 1997- January 2000. Phase I, II, and II Investigations for the Scripps Poway Parkway East Project, Poway California: Project archaeologist/project director—included recordation and assessment of multicomponent prehistoric and historic sites; direction of Phase II and III investigations; direction of laboratory analyses including prehistoric and historic collections; curation of collections; data synthesis; coauthorship of final cultural resources report. February 1994; March-September 1994; September-December 1995. Jennifer R.K. Stropes, MS, RPA Senior Archaeologist/Historian/Faunal Analyst Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road Suite A Phone: (858) 484-0915 Fax: (858) 679-9896 E-Mail: jenni@bfsa-ca.com Education Master of Science, Cultural Resource Management Archaeology 2016 St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota Bachelor of Arts, Anthropology 2004 University of California, Santa Cruz Specialized Education/Training Archaeological Field School 2014 Pimu Catalina Island Archaeology Project Research Interests California Coastal / Inland Archaeology Zooarchaeology Historic Structure Significance Eligibility Historical Archaeology Human Behavioral Ecology Taphonomic Studies Experience Senior Archaeologist/Historian/Faunal Analyst Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. November 2006–Present Writing, editing, and producing cultural resource reports for both California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act compliance; recording and evaluating historic resources, including historic structure significance eligibility evaluations, Historical Resource Research Reports, Historical Resource Technical Reports, and Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record preparation; faunal, prehistoric, and historic laboratory analysis; construction monitoring management; coordinating field surveys and excavations; and laboratory management. UC Santa Cruz Monterey Bay Archaeology Archives Supervisor Santa Cruz, California December 2003–March 2004 Supervising intern for archaeological collections housed at UC Santa Cruz. Supervised undergraduate interns and maintained curated archaeological materials recovered from the greater Monterey Bay region. Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 2 Faunal Analyst, Research Assistant University of California, Santa Cruz June 2003–December 2003 Intern assisting in laboratory analysis and cataloging for faunal remains collected from CA-MNT-234. Analysis included detailed zoological identification and taphonomic analysis of prehistoric marine and terrestrial mammals, birds, and fish inhabiting the greater Monterey Bay region. Archaeological Technician, Office Manager Archaeological Resource Management January 2000-December 2001 Conducted construction monitoring, field survey, excavation, report editing, report production, monitoring coordination and office management. Certifications City of San Diego Certified Archaeological and Paleontological Monitor 40-Hour Hazardous Waste/Emergency Response OSHA 29 CFR 1910.120 (e) Scholarly Works Big Game, Small Game: A Comprehensive Analysis of Faunal Remains Recovered from CA-SDI-11,521, 2016, Master’s thesis on file at St. Cloud University, St. Cloud, Minnesota. Technical Reports Kraft, Jennifer R. 2012 Cultural Resources Monitoring Report for the Pottery Court Project (TPM 36193) City of Lake Elsinore. Prepared for BRIDGE Housing Corporation. Report on file at the California Eastern Information Center. Kraft, Jennifer R. and Brian F. Smith 2016 Cultural Resources Survey and Archaeological Test Plan for the 1492 K Street Project City of San Diego. Prepared for Trestle Development, LLC. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2016 Focused Historic Structure Assessment for the Fredericka Manor Retirement Community City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California APN 566-240-27. Prepared for Front Porch Communities and Services – Fredericka Manor, LLC. Report on file at the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. 2016 Historic Structure Assessment for 8585 La Mesa Boulevard City of La Mesa, San Diego County, California. APN 494-300-11. Prepared for Silvergate Development. Report on file at the City of La Mesa Planning Department. Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 3 2016 Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for the 9036 La Jolla Shores Lane Project City of San Diego Project No. 471873 APN 344-030-20. Prepared for Eliza and Stuart Stedman. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2016 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Beacon Apartments Project City of San Diego Civic San Diego Development Permit #2016-19 APN 534-210-12. Prepared for Wakeland Housing & Development Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2016 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the State/Columbia/Ash/A Block Project San Diego, California. Prepared for Bomel San Diego Equities, LLC. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sewer and Water Group 687B Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Ortiz Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Cultural Resource Testing Results for the Broadway and Pacific Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for BOSA Development California, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Historic Structure Assessment for the StorQuest Project, City of La Mesa, (APN 494-101-14-00). Prepared for Real Estate Development and Entitlement. Report on file at the City of La Mesa. 2015 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the 1905 Spindrift Remodel Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Brian Malk and Nancy Heitel. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Cisterra Sempra Office Tower Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for SDG-Left Field, LLC. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Results of a Cultural Resources Testing Program for the 15th and Island Project City of San Diego. Prepared for Lennar Multifamily Communities. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Cesar Chavez Community College Project. Prepared for San Diego Community College District. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Grantville Trunk Sewer Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Cass Construction, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Pacific Beach Row Homes Project, San Diego, California. Prepared for Armstrong Builders, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sewer and Water Group 761 Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Burtech Pipeline. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sewer and Water Group 770 Project (Part of Group Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 4 3014), City of San Diego. Prepared for Ortiz Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Historic Structure Assessment, 11950 El Hermano Road, Riverside County. Prepared for Forestar Toscana, LLC. Report on file at the California Eastern Information Center. 2014 Historic Structure Assessment, 161 West San Ysidro Boulevard, San Diego, California (Project No. 342196; APN 666-030-09). Prepared for Blue Key Realty. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Historic Structure Assessment for 8055 La Mesa Boulevard, City of La Mesa (APN 470-582-11-00). Prepared for Lee Machado. Report on file at the City of La Mesa. 2014 Historic Structure Inventory and Assessment Program for the Watson Corporate Center, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Watson Land Company. Report on file at the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center. 2014 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Celadon (9th and Broadway) Project. Prepared for BRIDGE Housing Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Comm 22 Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for BRIDGE Housing Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Pinnacle 15th & Island Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Pinnacle International Development, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Altman Residence Project, 9696 La Jolla Farms Road, La Jolla, California 92037. Prepared for Steve Altman. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Alvarado Trunk Sewer Phase III Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Ortiz Corporation General Engineering Contractors. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Alvarado Trunk Sewer Phase IIIA Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for TC Construction, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the F Street Emergency Water Main Replacement Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Orion Construction. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Harbor Drive Trunk Sewer Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Burtech Pipeline. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Old Town Community Church Project, 2444 Congress Street, San Diego, California 92110. Prepared for Soltek Pacific, Inc. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Historic Structure Assessment, 2603 Dove Street, San Diego, California (APN) 452-674-32). Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 5 Prepared for Barzal and Scotti Real Estate Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Historic Structure Assessment at the Western Christian School, 3105 Padua Avenue, Claremont, California 91711 (APN 8671-005-053). Prepared for Western Christian School. Report on file at the City of Claremont. 2013 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the 7th and F Street Parking Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for DZI Construction. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2013 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the 1919 Spindrift Drive Project. Prepared for V.J. and Uma Joshi. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. Smith, Brian F. and Jennifer R. Kraft 2016 Historical Resource Research Report for the 2314 Rue Adriane Building, San Diego, California Project No. 460562. Prepared for the Brown Studio. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2016 Historical Resource Research Report for the 4921 Voltaire Street Building, San Diego, California Project No. 471161. Prepared for Sean Gogarty. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2016 Historical Resource Research Report for the 5147 Hilltop Drive Building, San Diego, California Project No. 451707. Prepared for JORGA Home Design. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2016 Historical Resource Research Report for the Midway Drive Postal Service Processing and Distribution Center 2535 Midway Drive San Diego, California 92138 Project No. 507152. Prepared for Steelwave, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2016 Historic Resource Technical Report for 9036 La Jolla Shores Lane La Jolla, California Project No. 471873. Prepared for Eliza and Stuart Stedman. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2015 Cultural Resource Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Urban Discovery Academy Project. Prepared for Davis Reed Construction, Inc. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2015 Cultural Resource Survey and Archaeological Test Plan for the 520 West Ash Street Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Lennar Multifamily Communities. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2015 Cultural Resource Survey and Archaeological Test Plan for the 1919 Pacific Highway Project City of San Diego City Preliminary Review PTS #451689 Grading and Shoring PTS #465292. Prepared for Wood Partners. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2015 Historical Resource Research Report for 16929 West Bernardo Drive, San Diego, California. Prepared for Rancho Bernardo LHP, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2015 Historical Resource Research Report for the 2002-2004 El Cajon Boulevard Building, San Diego, Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 6 California 92014. Prepared for T.R. Hale, LLC. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Historical Resource Research Report for the 4319-4321 Florida Street Building, San Diego, California 92104. Prepared for T.R. Hale, LLC. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Historic Resource Technical Report for 726 Jersey Court San Diego, California Project No. 455127. Prepared for Chad Irwin. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Islenair Historic Sidewalk Stamp Program for Sewer and Water Group 3014, City of San Diego. Prepared for Ortiz Corporation. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2014 Historical Resource Research Report for 2850 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, California (Project No. 392445). Prepared for Zephyr Partners – RE, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. Smith, Brian F., Tracy A. Stropes, Tracy M. Buday, and Jennifer R. Kraft 2015 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 1900 Spindrift Drive – Cabana and Landscape Improvements Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Darwin Deason. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2015 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 1912 Spindrift Drive – Landscape Improvements Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Darwin Deason. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. Stropes, J.R.K. and Brian F. Smith 2020 Historical Resource Research Report for the 4143 Park Boulevard Building, San Diego, California 92103. Prepared for Bernardini Investments, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego. 2020 Historical Resource Research Report for the 6375 Avenida Cresta Building, San Diego, California 92037. Prepared for Jeffrey and Anne Blackburn. Report on file at the City of San Diego. 2019 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the 915 Grape Street Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for Bayview SD, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego Development Services Department. 2019 Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Grove Residences Project, Rancho Santa Fe, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Beach City Builders, Inc. Report on file at the County of San Diego. 2019 Historical Resource Analysis Report for the 169 and 171 Fifth Avenue Buildings, City of Chula Vista, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Turner Impact Capital. Report on file at the City of Chula Vista. 2019 Historic Structure Assessment for the 1409 South El Camino Real Building, San Clemente, California. Prepared for Shoreline Dental Studio. Report on file at the City of San Clemente. 2019 Historical Resource Research Report for the 212 West Hawthorn Street Building, San Diego, California 92101. Prepared for Jacob Schwartz. Report on file at the City of San Diego. Jennifer R.K. Stropes Page 7 2019 Historical Resource Research Report for the 1142-1142 ½ Prospect Street Building, San Diego, California 92037. Prepared for LLJ Ventures. Report on file at the City of San Diego. 2019 Historical Resource Research Report for the 3000-3016 University Avenue/3901-3915 30th Street Building, San Diego, California 92037. Prepared for Cirque Hospitality. Report on file at the City of San Diego. 2019 Historic Structure Assessment for the 125 Mozart Avenue Building, Cardiff, California. Prepared for Brett Farrow. Report on file at the City of Encinitas. 2019 Cultural Resources Study for the Fontana Santa Ana Industrial Center Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc. Report on file at the California South Central Coastal Information Center. 2019 Historical Resource Technical Report for 817-821 Coast Boulevard South, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Design Line Interiors. Report on file at the City of San Diego. 2019 Historical Resource Research Report for the 3829 Texas Street Building, San Diego, California 92014. Prepared for Blue Centurion Homes. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2018 Historical Resource Research Report for the 3925-3927 Illinois Street Building, San Diego, California 92104. Prepared for Park Pacifica, LLC. Report on file at the City of San Diego. Contributing Author /Analyst 2015 Faunal Analysis and Report Section for Cultural Resource Data Recovery and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Site SDI-10,237 Locus F, Everly Subdivision Project, El Cajon, California by Tracy A. Stropes and Brian F. Smith. Prepared for Shea Homes. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2011 Faunal Analysis and Report Section for A Cultural Resource Data Recovery Program for SDI-4606 Locus B for St. Gabriel’s Catholic Church, Poway, California by Brian F. Smith and Tracy A. Stropes. Prepared for St. Gabriel’s Catholic Church. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2010 Faunal Analysis and Report Section for An Archaeological Study for the 1912 Spindrift Drive Project, La Jolla, California by Brian F. Smith and Tracy A. Stropes. Prepared for Island Architects. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2010 Faunal Analysis and Report Section for Results of a Cultural Mitigation and Monitoring Program for Robertson Ranch: Archaic and Late Prehistoric Camps near the Agua Hedionda Lagoon by Brian F. Smith. Prepared for McMillan Land Development. Report on file at the California South Coastal Information Center. 2009 Faunal Identification for “An Earlier Extirpation of Fur Seals in the Monterey Bay Region: Recent Findings and Social Implications” by Diane Gifford-Gonzalez and Charlotte K. Sunseri. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology, Vol. 21, 2009