ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND HISTORIC EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE JEERAH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, 6231 EAST WIMBLETON COURT, CITY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA (APN 093-150-06-00) Prepared for: Mr. Yasir Kahf P. O. Box 2956 Corona, CA 92878 Prepared by: Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc. 7969 Engineer Road, Suite 208 San Diego, CA 92111 ________________________________ Andrew R. Pigniolo, MA, RPA January 2016
50
Embed
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND HISTORIC EVALUATION REPORT …
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
AND HISTORIC EVALUATION REPORT
FOR THE
JEERAH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,
6231 EAST WIMBLETON COURT, CITY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
(APN 093-150-06-00)
Prepared for:
Mr. Yasir Kahf P. O. Box 2956
Corona, CA 92878
Prepared by:
Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc. 7969 Engineer Road, Suite 208
San Diego, CA 92111
________________________________ Andrew R. Pigniolo, MA, RPA
January 2016
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
AND HISTORIC EVALUATION REPORT
FOR THE
JEERAH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,
6231 EAST WIMBLETON COURT, CITY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA
(APN 093-150-06-00)
Prepared for:
Mr. Yasir Kahf
P. O. Box 2956
Corona, CA 92878
Prepared by:
Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc.
7969 Engineer Road, Suite 208
San Diego, CA 92111
Andrew R. Pigniolo, MA, RPA
January 2016
National Archaeological Data Base Information
Type of Study: Cultural Resource Survey and Historic Resource Evaluation
Sites: None
USGS Quadrangle: Orange 7.5'
Area: 2.08 Acres
Key Words: City of Orange, 6231 East Wimbleton Court, Archaeological Survey, Historic Resource Evaluation,
Redeposited Shell, Historic-age Structure
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iii
I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
A. Project Description...................................................................................................1
B. Project Personnel .....................................................................................................1
C. Structure of the Report .............................................................................................1
II. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SETTING .........................................................................5
A. Natural Setting .........................................................................................................5
B. Cultural Setting ........................................................................................................6
C. Prior Research ........................................................................................................10
III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS .........................................................................11
A. Research Design.....................................................................................................11
B. Survey Methods .....................................................................................................11
IV. SURVEY RESULTS .........................................................................................................12
V. HISTORIC STRUCTURE EVALUATION ......................................................................16
A. Introduction ............................................................................................................16
B. Ownership and Occupation ....................................................................................16
C. Building Descriptions ............................................................................................17
VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................26
VII. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................27
APPENDICES
A. Resume of Principal Investigator
B. Record Search Confirmation
C. Building, Structure, Object Forms
D. Chain of Title Documents
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page ii
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page iii
ABSTRACT Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc. conducted a cultural resource survey and historic structure
evaluation for the proposed Jeerah Single Family Residential Project in the City of Orange. The
survey included the entire project area, and the historic structure evaluation addressed the two
standing structures within the project area. The cultural resource project included a records
search, literature review, examination of historic maps, chain-of-title research, and the cultural
resource survey of the project area.
The current survey program was conducted in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines. The City of Orange will serve as lead agency for the
project and CEQA compliance.
A records search was conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center at California
State University, Fullerton. The record search indicated that five cultural resources have been
recorded within a one-half mile radius of the project area, but no resources are recorded in, or
directly adjacent to the project. The project area has not been previously surveyed for cultural
resources. Nine previous investigations have been conducted within one-half mile but none on
or adjacent to the project area.
A cultural resource survey of the project area was conducted on December 28, 2015 by Mr.
Andrew R. Pigniolo. The survey included a surface walk-over of the entire project area in 5 to
10 m interval transects. The survey was constrained by the presence of fill soil over some areas
while other areas were heavily graded and disturbed. Overall surface visibility averaged 70
percent with limited vegetation cover. Grading associated with past cut and fill activity was
evident throughout the project.
The survey resulted in the identification of moderate to small amounts of non-cultural marine
shell in imported fill. A well whose current makeup is of recent age is also present on the
property. No prehistoric or historic archaeological material was identified within the project
area.
Two structures of historic age (JS-H-1 and JS-H-2) were identified within the project area.
These represent a single family residential structure and an associated garage. These structures
were evaluated for historic significance. Based on a lack of integrity, insignificant design
qualities, and lack of association with events or persons of historical significance, these
structures were not recommended as eligible for the California Register of Historical resources
(California Register) or local registers.
Structures JS-H-1 and JS-H-2 do not qualify as significant under the California Register of
Historical Resources (California Register) Guidelines used for CEQA review because of their
lack of integrity and because they lack other criteria used for evaluating eligibility to the
California Register. Significant impacts to cultural resources will not result from this project.
I. Introduction
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Project Description
The 2.08 acre project area is located in the eastern portion of the City of Orange in Orange County (Figure 1). The project is located east of State Route (SR) 55 and south of Chapman Avenue. The project area is on the north side of Canyon View Avenue at 6231 East Wimbleton Court. It is located in the north east quarter of Section 35 in Township 4 South, Range 9 West. The project area is shown on the Orange USGS 7.5' Quadrangle (Figure 2) The proposed project is a residential development on the 2.08-acre project site. The project involves subdividing the approximately 91,476 sq. ft. parcel into eight (8) numbered lots and two lettered lots. Lot areas range from 6,000 sq. ft. to 16,000 sq. ft. The numbered lots will be developed with eight custom homes ranging in size from 3,000 sq. ft. to 3,800 sq. ft., including garages (Figure 3). Lot A will be developed with the clubhouse and associated common area; Lot B will be developed as a street and cul-de-sac. The project will be developed in two phases. The current survey and historic evaluation program was conducted in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and guidelines. The City of Orange will serve as lead agency for the project and CEQA compliance. The archaeological survey was conducted to determine if any cultural resources eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historic Resources (California Register) or significant under CEQA would be affected by this project. Historic-age structures identified during the survey were evaluated for California Register eligibility. B. Project Personnel The cultural resource survey and historic evaluation program was conducted by Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc. (Laguna Mountain), whose cultural resources staff meets state and local requirements. Mr. Andrew R. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator for the project. He also conducted the survey and prepared this technical report. Mr. Pigniolo meets the Secretary of the Interior's standards for qualified archaeologists and criteria for architectural historian. Mr. Pigniolo has an MA degree in Anthropology from San Diego State University and has more than 35 years experience in the southern California region. His resume is included in Appendix A.
C. Structure of the Report
This report follows the State Historic Preservation Office’s guidelines for Archaeological
Resource Management Reports (ARMR). The report introduction provides a description of the
project and associated personnel. Section II provides background on the project area and
previous research. Section III describes the research design and survey methods while Section
IV describes the survey results. Section V provides the background history and evaluation of the
historic-age structures within the project area. Section VI provides a summary and
recommendations.
0 12.5 25M I L E S
Figure 1Regional Location Map
N
PACIFIC O
CE
AN
Anza BorregoState Park
Joshua TreeNational Park
CAMP PENDLETONCAMP PENDLETON
Salton Sea
reviR odarolo
C
9494
6262
5
5
15
15
10
10
8
7878
7676
7878
7474
MEXICO
ARIZONA
IMPERIALCOUNTY
SAN DIEGOCOUNTY
SAN DIEGOCOUNTY
RIVERSIDECOUNTY
ORANGECOUNTYORANGECOUNTY
LOSANGELESCOUNTY
LOSANGELESCOUNTY
SAN BERNARDINOCOUNTY
Calexico
Mexicali
El Centro
Yuma
Blythe
Escondido
Oceanside
El CajonSan
Diego
Julian
IndioCoachella
PalmSprings
Banning
Victorville
LagunaBeach
San Bernardino
Riverside
Hemet
Anza
SanMarcos
Poway
Tijuana
ChulaVista
Tecate
Ocotillo
PROJECTLOCATION
Source: USGS 7.5' Orange Quadrangle
O0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Figure 2Project Location
Project Area
Figure 3Project PlanN
Source: Hafeez Consulting, Sheet G-01.0 (9/21/15)
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 5
II. NATURAL AND CULTURAL SETTING
The following environmental and cultural background provides a context for the cultural
resource inventory and historic evaluation.
A. Natural Setting
The project area is located in Orange County, near the northwestern end of the Santa Ana
Mountains. The project is located in a canyon area. Based on historic mapping and aerial
photography, most, of this area has been previously disturbed by cut and fill activity. Most of
the property is artificially terraced and covered with non-native vegetation. Project elevations
range from 460 to 520 feet above mean sea level.
The geomorphology of the project area is largely a product of the region's geologic history.
During the Jurassic and late Cretaceous (>100 million years ago) a series of volcanic islands
paralleled the current coastline in the region. The remnants of these islands stand as Santiago
Peak to the southeast of the project among others. This island arc of volcanos spewed out vast
layers of tuff (volcanic ash) and breccia that have since been metamorphosed into hard rock of
the Santiago Peak Volcanic formation. These fine-grained rocks provided a regionally important
resource for Native American flaked stone tools.
As the Peninsular Batholith rose, it warped and metamorphosed the overlying sediments,
forming the Bedford Canyon Metasediments. Bedford Canyon Metasediments occur as very
hard black, often banded, rock with a good concoidal fracture. This material occurs in the Santa
Ana Mountains to the southeast and in scattered locations in the foothills to the east of the
project area. This material was used for Native American flaked stone tools.
The project site is entirely underlain by deposits of the El Modeno Volcanics (Morton and Miller
2006). The El Modeno Volcanics represent a middle Miocene volcanic rock unit that is interbedded
with marine sedimentary rocks of the Topanga Formation. In the project area it is dominated by tuff
and tuff breccia (Morton and Miller 2006).
Soils include Alo Clay in the lower portion of the project while slopes on the north side of the parcel
are underlain by Cieneba-Rock outcrop complex (NRCS 2013).
The climate of the region can generally be described as Mediterranean, with cool wet winters and
hot dry summers. Rainfall limits vegetation growth but Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation was
probably present within the project in the recent past and still exists on margins of the project.
Small remaining areas of native vegetation are present, but the majority of the property has been
graded and filled in the past. An intermittent drainage in the canyon through the project area
would have seasonal water to the area.
Animal resources in the region probably included deer, fox, raccoon, skunk, mountain lion,
bobcat, coyote, rabbit, and various rodent, reptile, and bird species. Small game, dominated by
rabbits, was probably relatively abundant in the past.
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 6
B. Cultural Setting
Paleoindian Period
The earliest well documented prehistoric sites in southern California are identified as belonging
to the Paleoindian period. The Paleoindian period is thought to have occurred between 12,000
years ago, or earlier, and 8,000 years ago in this region. Although varying from the well-defined
fluted point complexes such as Clovis, the period is seen as a hunting focused economy with
limited use of seed grinding technology. The economy is generally seen to focus on highly
ranked resources such as large mammals and relatively high mobility that may be related to
following large game. Archaeological evidence associated with this period has been found
around inland dry lakes, on old terrace deposits of the California desert, and also near the coast.
Archaic or Millingstone Period
Native Americans during the Archaic period had a generalized economic focus on hunting and
gathering. In many parts of North America, Native Americans chose to replace this economy
with types based on horticulture and agriculture. Coastal southern California economies
remained largely based on wild resource use until European contact (Willey and Phillips 1958).
The Early Archaic period is differentiated from the earlier Paleoindian period by a shift to a more
generalized economy and an increased focus on use of grinding and seed processing technology.
At sites dated between approximately 8,000 and 1,500 years before present (BP), the increased
use of groundstone artifacts and atlatl dart points, along with a mixed core-based tool
assemblage, identify a range of adaptations to a more diversified set of plant and animal
resources. Variations of the Pinto and Elko series projectile points, large bifaces, manos and
portable metates, core tools, and heavy use of marine invertebrates in coastal areas are
characteristic of this period, but many coastal sites show limited use of diagnostic atlatl points.
Major changes in technology within this relatively long chronological unit appear limited.
Several scientists have considered changes in projectile point styles and artifact frequencies
within the Early Archaic period to be indicative of population movements or units of cultural
change (Moratto 1984) but these units are poorly defined locally due to poor site preservation.
Late Prehistoric Period
Approximately 2,000 years ago, Shoshonean groups are thought to have migrated into southern
California. These people spoke a Takic language, a sub-family of the Uto-Aztecan family; the
descendants of whom include the Cahuilla, Gabrielino, Luiseño, and Serrano. The Late
Prehistoric period in San Bernardino County is recognized archaeologically by smaller projectile
points, the replacement of flexed inhumations with cremation, the introduction of ceramics and
an emphasis on inland plant food collection and processing, especially acorns. Inland semi-
sedentary villages were established along major water courses, and montane areas were
seasonally occupied to exploit acorns and piñon nuts, resulting in permanent milling stations on
bedrock outcrops. Mortars for acorn processing increased in frequency relative to seed-grinding
basins.
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 7
Gabrielino
The Native American people who occupied most of the Los Angeles basin and adjacent regions at the time of Spanish contact are referred to as the Gabrielino. This name was given to them by the Spanish in reference to the San Gabriel Mission, one of the two major Spanish missions established in Gabrielino territory (Bean and Smith 1978). The native name for these people and the modern descendants is Tongva. Although the area occupied by the Gabrielino is considered to have been one of the most environmentally favored in southern California and the Gabrielino are considered to have been one of the wealthiest and most influential cultural groups in the area, much less is known about them because the population was decimated early on (Kroeber 1925). The territory inhabited by the Gabrielino at Spanish contact encompassed Los Angeles County, northern Orange County, and parts of western San Bernardino and Riverside counties. The eastern boundary with the Serrano people was somewhere in the San Bernardino area. The Gabrielino relied heavily upon the exploitation of wild plant resources (Johnston 1962). Evidence about population size and density is scant. The group possibly had more than 50 or 100 mainland villages with an average population of 50-100 per village (Bean and Smith 1978). These estimates fit in with Kroeber's estimate that in 1770 the population was about 5,000. Like other Native Californians the Gabrielino wove baskets for many uses, although few baskets authentically assignable to them have been preserved (Kroeber 1925). No pottery was made by the Gabrielino until the mission days (Kroeber 1925:628). Few details are known with certainty regarding the Gabrielino social and political systems due to early severe disruptions of traditional culture following Spanish contact. It appears that a moiety system similar to nearby groups existed (Bean and Smith 1978). The available data indicate that the Gabrielino were characterized by three hierarchically ordered social classes: an elite that included chiefs, their immediate families, and the very rich; a middle class from fairly well-to-do and long-established lineages; and a third class of everyone else (Bean and Smith 1978). Villages were usually autonomous, and the dominant lineage's leader was usually the village chief. Sometimes a single chief maintained leadership over several villages, and a chief's authority was legitimized by his possession of the sacred bundle (Bean and Smith 1978). The Gabrielino are believed to have been highly associated with one of the most popular and widespread religious cults in the southwest. Unfortunately, extremely little ethnohistoric information exists for the Gabrielino on the Jimson-weed or toloache cult, or on Chinigchinich, the important leader responsible for spreading the beliefs and rituals of this religion to other societies (Johnston 1962). The severe cultural experiences and changes that the Gabrielino experienced during the Mission, Post-Mission, and American periods of history are well-described by Johnston (1962). Like many other native populations of the New World, the Gabrielino proved remarkably susceptible to European diseases, even in advance of direct contact or actual settlement. The seemingly low population estimates based on Spanish mission records probably reflect this early depopulation.
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 8
Ethnohistoric Period
The Ethnohistoric period refers to a brief period when Native American culture was initially
being affected by Euroamerican culture and historical records on Native American activities
were limited. When the Spanish colonists began to settle California, they established missions to
incorporate Native Americans into the emerging European society.
By the early 1820s California came under Mexico's rule, and in 1834 the missions were
secularized resulting in political imbalance which caused Indian uprisings against the Mexican
rancheros. Many Native Americans left the missions and ranchos and returned to their original
village settlements.
When California became a sovereign state in 1849, Native Americans were recruited more
heavily as laborers and experienced even harsher treatment. Conflicts between Indians and
encroaching Anglos finally led to the establishment of reservations for some Indian populations.
The reservation system interrupted Native American social organization and settlement patterns,
yet many aspects of the original culture still persist today. Certain rituals and religious practices
are maintained and traditional games, songs and dances continue as well as the use of foods such
as acorns, yucca and wild game.
Historic Period
Cultural activities within Orange County between the late 1700s and the present provide a record
of Native American, Spanish, Mexican, and American control, occupation, and land use. An
abbreviated history of the region is presented for the purpose of providing a background on the
presence, chronological significance, and historical relationship of cultural resources within the
County.
Native American control of the southern California region ended in the political views of western
nations with Spanish colonization of the area beginning in 1769. De facto Native American
control of the majority of the population of California did not end until several decades later. In
southern California, Euroamerican control was firmly established by the end of the Garra
uprising in the early 1850s (Phillips 1975).
The Spanish Period (1769-1821) represents a period of Euroamerican exploration and settlement.
Dual military and religious contingents established the San Diego Presidio and the San Diego,
San Gabriel, and San Juan Capistrano Missions. The Mission system used Native Americans to
build a footing for greater European settlement. The Mission system also introduced horses,
cattle, other agricultural goods and implements; and provided construction methods and new
architectural styles. The cultural and institutional systems established by the Spanish continued
beyond the year 1821, when California came under Mexican rule.
The Mexican Period (1821-1848) includes the retention of many Spanish institutions and laws.
The mission system was secularized in 1834 which dispossessed many Native Americans and
increased Mexican settlement. After secularization, large tracts of land were granted to
individuals and families and the rancho system was established. Cattle ranching dominated other
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 9
agricultural activities and the development of the hide and tallow trade with the United States
increased during the early part of this period. The Pueblos of Los Angeles and San Diego were
established during this period and Native American influence and control greatly declined. The
Mexican Period ended when Mexico ceded California to the United States after the Mexican-
American War of 1846-48.
Soon after American control was established (1848-present) gold was discovered in California.
The tremendous influx of American and Europeans that resulted, quickly drowned out much of
the Spanish and Mexican cultural influences and eliminated the last vestiges of de facto Native
American control. Few Mexican ranchos remained intact because of land claim disputes and the
homestead system increased American settlement beyond the coastal plain.
City of Orange History
The first European land owner in the area was retired Spanish soldier, Juan Pablo Grijalva, who
built an adobe ranch house on what is now Hoyt Hill. His land extended south of the Santa Ana
River, from the foothills above Villa Park to Newport Beach. The 79,000 acres of land became
known ad Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana after it was passed on to his son-in-law, Jose Antonio
Yorba, and grandson, Juan Pablo Peralta. Their families continued to own the rancho after the
1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo was signed and the rancho boundaries were validated in
1857.
In the early 1860s, an extended family member, Leonardo Cota, borrowed money against his
portion of the rancho and ended up defaulting on the loan to Abel Stearns – the largest
landowner in Southern California. The rancho land had to be partitioned in order for Stearns to
claim Cota’s section. This action took two years to sort out, resulting in the rancho being
divided into one thousand units. Alfred Beck Chapman and Andrew Glassell were Los Angeles
lawyers involved in the settlement, taking shares of land as their fees. They had been purchasing
sections of the rancho since 1864, and by 1870 owned around 5,400 acres in the area that is now
downtown Orange. Chapman had the land divided into tracts of 40 to 120 acres and called it
Richland, due to the rich valley soil.
Andrew Glassell’s brother Captain William T. Glassell laid out the downtown area including a
public plaza, bounded by Chapman and Glassell streets. William was also instrumental in
providing the town irrigation water through the construction of the A. B. Chapman Canal. By
1871, at least a dozen houses had been built in the area. The first school opened 1982, and the
first local store the following year.
Since there was already a town of Richland in Sacramento County, in order to have the town
map recorded and to open a post office, the town was renamed Orange in 1875. A major farming
community, various crops were grown with varying success. Raisin grapes were a primary crop
until the 1886 blight killed most of the vines in Orange and surrounding communities. Orange
groves had been planted in 1873, and fared the best among other tropical fruits that had been
attempted.
II. Natural and Cultural Setting
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 10
By 1880, the Southern Pacific Railroad had built a depot in town and seven years later the Santa
Fe Railroad was competing for customers in the area. This resulted in the reduction of passenger
fares and an influx of visitors from the east part of the country, many who ended up purchasing
land in Orange County. The 1880s were boom times for the town of Orange. The 3-square mile
city became incorporated in 1888. By the end of the 1880s, the boom was over, but farmers
continued to plant orange trees. By 1920, oranges had become the city’s premier crop. Citrus
prices began falling at the onset of the Depression and the city had an economic decline lasting
to the beginning of World War II. The late 1930s brought terrible weather and flooding, causing
damage to farmlands and roadways in Orange.
After the war, thousands of servicemen returned to Southern California where they had been
trained, resulting in the largest growth in the history of Orange County. By 1960, the city
covered 8.3 square miles, and continued to be developed annexing new areas covering nearly 25
square miles by the 1990s. The city continues expanding eastward with a mixture of residential,
commercial, and industrial development within its 38-square mile planning area and 55-square
mile sphere of influence. The city proudly calls itself “a major city with small town ambiance.”
C. Prior Research As the first step in performing the current investigation, archival research and background
studies were conducted including a literature and record search at the local archaeological
repository, in addition to examining historic maps and historic site inventories. This information
was used to identify previously recorded resources and determine the types of resources that
might occur in the survey area.
A records search was conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton (Appendix B). The record search indicated that five cultural resources have been recorded within a one-half mile radius of the project area, but no resources are recorded in, or directly adjacent to the project. The project area has not been previously surveyed for cultural resources. Nine previous investigations have been conducted within one-half mile but none on or adjacent to the project area. Historic research included an examination of a variety of resources. The current listings of the National Register of Historic Places were checked through the National Register of Historic Places website. The California Inventory of Historic Resources (State of California 1976) and the California Historical Landmarks (State of California 1992) were also checked for historic resources. No such resources have been recorded in the vicinity of the project area.
III. Research Design and Methods
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 11
III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
A. Research Design
The goal of this study was to identify and evaluate any cultural resources within the proposed
project alignment and alternatives, so that the potential effects of the project on these resources
could be assessed. To accomplish this goal, background information was examined and
assessed. Based on the records search and historic map check, the cultural resources that might
occur within the project may include both prehistoric and historic resources. Historic structures
appear within the project area on early maps and aerials of the area. Prehistoric cultural
resources could include temporary camps, and shell and lithic scatters.
B. Survey Methods
A cultural resource survey of the project area was conducted on December 28, 2015 by Mr.
Andrew R. Pigniolo. The survey included a surface walk-over of the entire project area in 5 to
10 m interval transects. The survey was constrained by the presence of fill over some areas
while other areas were heavily graded and disturbed. Overall surface visibility averaged 70
percent with limited vegetation cover. Grading associated with past cut and fill activity was
evident throughout the project.
The cultural resources identified during the survey were recorded on a State of California,
Department of Parks and Recreation forms (Appendix C). These records were submitted to the
SCCIC for official resource numbering designation.
IV. Survey Results
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 12
IV. SURVEY RESULTS
The survey resulted in the location of two historic-age structures on the property (JS-H-1 and JS-H-2). These structures appear to be a residence and associated garage (Figures 4 and 5). The structures are described in detail in Section V of this report. Much of the lower portion of the property near the structures appears to have originally been a seasonal drainage now covered by imported fill. Geotechnical studies for the project showed this fill to be as deep as 8 to 10 ft. in some areas. Some of this fill includes non-cultural marine shell. Other portions of the property include cut and fill terraces with bedrock exposures. Native soils away from cut areas were shallow due to the original slope of the area. A well is also present on the property approximately 40 ft. north of the house (JS-H-1). It is
possible this well location is historic in age, as some type of structure may have been present at
this location on the 1972 aerial photograph (NETR 1972). Earlier photographs are not clear
enough to indicate its presence/absence. USGS mapping from 1950 (when the residence first
appears) onward never shows a well at this location.
The current well does not represent a historic feature. It appears to date after the 1980s when the area was elevated with fill from nearby grading. The well is currently lined with precast concrete pipe segments that have been cemented together (Figure 6). A precast concrete manhole piece is present on the surface. A cast iron manhole cover was also present (see Figure 6). The manhole cover has an “Alhambra Foundary Co Ltd” mark on the cover. The mark and cover are not chronologically diagnostic and this company is currently producing the same type of cover. The lack of surface pumping equipment and piping nearby suggest this well has not been in use recently. PVC piping in the well also indicates the current well is of recent age. Water in the bottom of the well and the PVC pipe connections suggest that the well does not contain historic-age refuse as fill. Because the existing well does not appear to be of historic age it was not recorded and does not represent a historic resource. No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were identified within the project area during the survey.
Figure 4Project Overviews
b. Site Conditions, Looking North (PR-05287-094)
a. Project Overview Showing Structures, Looking South-southwest (PR-05287-093)
Figure 5Project on Aerial
0 50 100F E E T
N
HouseGarage
ProjectBoundary
Figure 6Well Overviews
b. Interior View of Well (PR-05287-084)
a. View of Above Ground Portion of Well (PR-05287-085)
V. Historic Resource Evaluation
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 16
V. HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION A. Introduction
The following discussion provides a description of ownership of the property in addition to a
detailed description of the structures themselves. The Chain of Title documentation is provided
in Appendix D.
B. Ownership and Occupation
County assessor records indicate an initial construction date of 1930 for the structures now at
6231 East Wimbleton Court. In 1930, the property was owned by William M. Mills and his wife
Addie A. Mills (Chain of Title), however, they were not living on the property. Presumably the
structures were initially constructed as a second home and/or in association with a farm. In
1930, William and Addie were living at 416 Park Road in Orange (USCB 1930). They were an
older couple (both age 63). William M. Mills’ occupation was listed as farmer and they live on a
farm. They were living with two daughters, a son, and a granddaughter (USCB 1930). One of
the daughters was named Evanalia.
In 1930, James W. Farley and his wife Evanalia Mills Farley lived at 129 South Jameson Street
in Orange (USCB 1930). They were both in their early thirties and were renting and living with
a three year old son named William. James Farley was working as a laborer doing carpet work
(USCB 1930). It seems likely that James and Evanalia Farley moved to the now 6231 East
Wimbleton Court residence sometime after 1931 since they were still listed at the South Jameson
Street address in 1931 (City Directory).
By 1940, James and Evanalia Farley were living in Orange Park Acres with no street or address
listed. Although slightly outside the current boundaries of Orange Park Acres, this probably
refers to the location of the current structure at 6231 East Wimbleton Court. The residence is not
listed as a farm and they are listed as renting. It is indicated that they were living in the same
house in 1935. They are living in the house with now three children. James Farley’s occupation
is listed as carpet layer (USCB 1940).
On December 8, 1938 and again on October 28, 1947, William M. Mills and Addie A. Mills
transferred the project property to their daughter Evanalia Mills Farley through a Grant Deed
(Chain of Title).
The 1940 census shows William and Addie Mills living probably at the same location on Park
Road although the street number has changed to 357. They were both 73 years old and one 50
year old daughter was still living with them. No occupation is listed, so William Mills was
presumably retired.
The structures first appear on historic aerial photographs in 1946 (NETR 1946). The aerial
shows the structure without the front porch and with only a partial shed roof extension in the rear
(NETR 1946).
V. Historic Resource Evaluation
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 17
The 1947 City Directory shows James and Evanalia Farley living on Mills Drive off East Old
Chapman Ave. (the current project area). James Farley is listed as a carpet cleaner (City
Directory 1947).
The structure first appears on the 1950 edition of the Orange 7.5’ quadrangle map (USGS 1950).
On June 23, 1958, Evanalia Farley granted the property to Jerald E. Naylor and his wife Marion
H. Naylor (Chain of Title).
A public records index covering the years 1950 to 1993 shows Jerald E. Naylor at 19841 East
Mills Drive (original address for the current project) at some point during that period. It is likely
that Jerald E. Naylor and Marion H. Naylor lived at the address between 1958 and 1986.
Title of the property transferred to Richard and Eileen Vining in 1986 (Chain of Title). By 1994
aerial photographs indicate use of the property has been terraced and filled and was used as a
nursery for potted trees (NETR 1994, 2002, 2004, 2009, 2010, 2012).
The property was sold to the current owners in 2014 (Chain of Title).
C. Building Descriptions
House
Two structures are present at 6231 East Wimbleton Court. They appear to have originally served
as a residence and a garage. The residential structure was initially a Tudor Revival cottage based
on its large arched fixed lattice light window and relatively high gabled roof line (Figure 7). The
826 sq. ft., three-room structure is wood-frame with a composition tile roof. The original
foundation appears to have been a combination of poured concrete and post and beam with a
crawl space understory. More recent additions of a row of concrete block and cement around
portions of the exterior on the northwest side may have been used to support failings of the
original foundation.
A small shed roof extension on one side of the rear of the structure may date to the original
structure or be an addition soon after (Figure 8). This partial shed extension appears as early as
1946 on the aerial photograph (NETR 1946). The panel door and horizontal sliding sash
windows in this portion of the extension (see Figure 8) appear similar in age to the single hung
wood sash windows on the remainder of the original part of the structure.
The northeastern portion of the rear shed roof extension appears to be a more recent addition to
the house (Figure 9). It first appears on the 1980 aerial of the area (NETR 1980). The
aluminum-framed sliding sash windows do not match the wood sash in the remainder of the
original portion of the house and the eve spacing also is inconsistent with the other portion of the
shed roof extension. The roof edge at the southeast corner of the structure also does not match
the roof edge of the original structure, again suggesting the entire shed roof portion is a later
addition to the original cottage.
Figure 7House Views, Front
b. Decorative Window, Close-up (PR-05287-054)
a. House Front Overview, Looking East (PR-05287-065)
Figure 8House Views, East
b. Close-up of East Side Door and Windows (PR-05287-035)
a. East Side Overview (PR-05287-018)
Figure 9House Views, North
b. Close-up of East Side Addition, Looking South (PR-05287-046)
a. North Side Overview (PR-05287-040)
V. Historic Resource Evaluation
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 21
A small brick fireplace and chimney are present on the southwest side of the structure (Figure
10). Original windows appear to be single-hung wood sash. In addition to the decorative fixed
lattice light window at the front of the structure, a decorative glass pane with diamond pattern is
present in the window next to the chimney accentuating the Tudor motif (Figure 11).
The high gable roof appears to contain a second story addition to what was probably originally
an attic (see Figure 9). Two generations of exterior staircases are apparent on the north side of
the structure. An older staircase from the direction of the back of the structure is outlined in the
exterior paint. An apparently newer steep staircase from the direction of the front of the
structure appears to have been the most recent access. Both these exterior stairways suggest the
room in the second story was not original to the house.
Flush window and door framing in relation to the exterior plaster of the structure suggest that the
original siding of the structure may have been wood and the plaster finish may be a later
addition.
The porch on the front of the house is also a later addition (see Figure 7). It first appears on the
1980 aerial photograph of the structure (NETR 1980). As can be seen from the way it covers the
top edge of the front window frame and its attachment to the eave over the exterior plaster, it was
a poorly designed addition to the structure. It dips sharply to the north and extends across most
of the front of the structure.
The house structure appears to have been modified in several ways from its original form.
Again, it is uncertain if the shed roof extension in the rear is original. A second addition to this
shed roof extension was added most-likely in the 1970s, so that the shed roof line now extends
across the entire rear of the structure. The addition of the front porch also appears to date from
the 1970s. The use of the second story and two sets of exterior staircases also appear to be later
additions to the structure, and the plaster finish may also not be original.
Garage
The original portion of the 468 sq. ft. garage is a wood frame structure with a moderate gabled
roof on a poured concrete foundation. It has horizontal wood siding with a sliding garage door
entrance (Figure 11). The roof is composition shingle. The rear of the structure includes an
addition with a second story and two single hung wood sash windows (see Figure 11). The
addition does not match the original foundation and siding board width. The addition also
includes a second door and roof extension over the doorway (Figure 12).
Figure 10House Views, South
b. South Side, Looking Northeast (PR-05287-058)
a. South East Aspect, Looking Northwest (PR-05287-034)
Figure 11House Details
b. South Side Decorative Window, Looking West (PR-05287-060)
a. Front Porch Addition above Decorative Window, Looking Northeast (PR-05287-079)
Figure 12Garage Overviews
b. South Side View, Looking West-northwest (PR-05287-004)
a. East and North Sides, Looking Southwest (PR-05287-012)
Figure 13Garage Views, West
b. West Side Close-up Showing Northern Addition Joint, Looking East (PR-05287-022)
a. West Side Overview, Looking East-northeast (PR-05287-028)
VI. Summary and Recommendations
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 26
VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The goal of the project was to identify resources that may be impacted by the proposed Jeerah
Single Family Residential project. The cultural resource survey identified two historic-age
structures within the project area.
The house at 6231 East Wimbleton Court represents a Tudor Revival style cottage originally
dating from 1930. The structure has significant additions that may date to the 1970s. The
additions and changes have significantly reduced the integrity of the structure. The garage also
has a significant addition on the rear of the structure reducing its original integrity. The
structures are not associated with events or persons that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of California or the City of Orange’s history and cultural heritage. The 6231
East Wimbleton Court structures lack the integrity and/or qualities to qualify them as eligible for
nomination to the California Register or local registers.
Structures JS-H-1 and JS-H-2 do not qualify as significant under the California Register of
Historical Resources (California Register) Guidelines used for CEQA review because of their
lack of integrity and because they lack other criteria used for evaluating eligibility to the
California Register. Significant impacts to cultural resources will not result from this project.
VII. References
Jeerah Single Family Residential Project Cultural Resources Survey and Historic Evaluation Report Page 27
VII. REFERENCES
Bean, Lowell J., and Charles R. Smith
1978 Gabrielino. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538-549. Handbook of
North American Indians, Vol. 8, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D. C.
Johnston, Bernice Eastman
1962 California's Gabrielino Indians. Southwest Museum, Los Angeles.
Kroeber, Alfred L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin No. 78, Bureau of American
Ethnology, Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.
Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Morton, Douglas M., and Fred K. Miller
2006 Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangles,
California. U. S. Geological Survey.
Nationwide Environmental Title Research (NETR)
Var. Historic Aerials. Electronic document, www.historicaerials.com
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)
2013 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/
Phillips, George Harwood
1975 Chiefs and Challengers: Indian Resistance and Cooperation in Southern
California. University of California Press, Los Angeles.
State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation.
1976 California Inventory of Historic Resources. Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento, California.
1992 California Historical Landmarks. Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento California.
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB)
1930-1940 Population Schedule Records. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Washington D.C.
Willey, G. R., and P. Phillips
1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. University of Chicago Press.
APPENDICES
A. Resume of Principal Investigator
B. Record Search Confirmation
C. Building, Structure, Object Forms
D. Chain of Title Documents
APPENDIX A
RESUME OF PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Laguna Mountain Environmental Appendix A
ANDREW R. PIGNIOLO, M.A., RPA Principal Archaeologist
Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc. Education
San Diego State University, Master of Arts, Anthropology, 1992 San Diego State University, Bachelor of Arts, Anthropology, 1985
Professional Experience
2002-Present Principal Archaeologist/President, Laguna Mountain Environmental, Inc., San Diego
1997-2002 Senior Archaeologist, Tierra Environmental Services, San Diego 1994-1997 Senior Archaeologist, KEA Environmental, Inc., San Diego 1985-1994 Project Archaeologist/Senior Archaeologist, Ogden Environmental and
Energy Services, San Diego 1982-1985 Reports Archivist, Cultural Resource Management Center (now the South
Coastal Information Center), San Diego State University 1980-1985 Archaeological Consultant, San Diego, California
Professional Affiliations
Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA; formerly called SOPA), 1992-present Qualified Archaeology Consultant, San Diego County Qualified Archaeology Consultant, City of San Diego Qualified Archaeology Consultant, City of Chula Vista Qualified Archaeology Consultant, Riverside County Society for American Archaeology Society for California Archaeology
Qualifications
Mr. Andrew Pigniolo is a certified archaeology consultant for the County and City of San Diego. He has received 40 hour HAZWOPPER training and holds an active card for hazardous material work. Mr. Pigniolo has more than 30 years of experience as an archaeologist, and has conducted more than 700 projects throughout southern California and western Arizona. His archaeological investigations have been conducted for a wide variety of development and resource management projects including military installations, geothermal power projects, water resource facilities, transportation projects, commercial and residential developments, and projects involving Indian Reservation lands. Mr. Pigniolo has conducted the complete range of technical studies including archaeological overviews and management plans, ethnographic studies, archaeological surveys, test excavations, historical research, evaluations of significance for National Register eligibility, data recovery programs, and monitoring projects.
Laguna Mountain Environmental Appendix A
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS Centinela Solar Project, Imperial County, California (KP Environmental, Inc.) Mr. Pigniolo
served as the Principal Investigator for a cultural resource survey of more than 240 acres of agricultural land near Mt. Signal, California. The survey was conducted in multiple phases based on crop conditions and surface visibility within various parcels. The project included surveys of highly impacted agricultural lands. Historic-age agricultural features were identified within several parcels. Cultural resources within the proposed project area were recorded during the survey and recommendations for impact avoidance were made. This project was conducted under both Federal and State environmental requirements.
Princess Street Monitoring and Data Recovery Project at the Spindrift Site (City of San
Diego). Mr. Pigniolo served as a Principal Investigator of an archaeological monitoring and data recovery program at the Spindrift Site in the community of La Jolla in the City of San Diego. The effort was initially to provide archaeological monitoring of a utility undergrounding project. The presence of the major prehistoric village site within the project alignment quickly became evident prior to construction monitoring and a data recovery plan was prepared prior to the start of work. Monitoring was conducted until the site was encountered. The data recovery plan was immediately implemented, so that data recovery could progress while construction excavation continued on other portions of the project. Data recovery included the excavation of 25 controlled units and the water screening of 100 percent of the archaeological site material impacted during trenching. More than 40 fragmented human burials were encountered. Working with Native American monitors and representatives, the remains were repatriated.
Hill Street Undergrounding Project, Point Loma, California (City of San Diego). Mr.
Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator of an archaeological monitoring project of utility undergrounding in the community of Point Loma. The project was located in an urban environment under city streets. Archaeological monitoring identified two prehistoric sites with high levels of integrity. Testing included the excavation of four units to evaluate the significance of these resources and mitigate project effects. A hearth feature, shell and a variety of prehistoric artifacts were recovered and additional impacts to the sites were avoided by reducing trench depth.
Center City Development Corporation Area 1 Utility Undergrounding Project, San Diego,
California (City of San Diego). Mr. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator of an archaeological monitoring project including the undergrounding of residential and commercial utilities in the community of Logan Heights in San Diego. The project was conducted under CEQA and City of San Diego guidelines. Historic streetcar lines were encountered along with sparse historic trash deposit, but adverse impacts did not occur and no further work was recommended.
Mission Hills Sever Group 664 Project (Lamprides Environmental Organization) Mr. Pigniolo
was the Principal Investigator for an archaeological monitoring project for a sewer line replacement in the community of Mission Hills in the City of San Diego. The project included archaeological construction monitoring in an urban environment. The project was located near the Old Town area of San Diego, but steep slopes and previous pipelines in the area resulted in an absence of cultural materials encountered.
Laguna Mountain Environmental Appendix A
City of San Diego Sever Group 783 Project, San Diego, California (Orion Construction
Company) Mr. Pigniolo was the Principal Investigator for an archaeological monitoring project for a sewer line replacement in the eastern portion of the City of San Diego. The project included archaeological construction monitoring in an urban environment. Shallow soils and previous pipeline disturbance in the area resulted in an absence of cultural materials encountered (2006-2007)
All American 105 Race Project, West Mesa, Imperial County, California (Legacy 106, Inc.)
Mr. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator, report author, and crew chief for an archaeological survey for a proposed off-road vehicle race course in the West Mesa area of Imperial County. The survey covered Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands and included close coordination with BLM staff. The survey included a proposed 7.5 mile course with a very short time-frame. The goal was project alignment adjustment and realignment to avoid resource impacts where possible. A variety of prehistoric cultural resources including 10 sites and 7 isolates were encountered. Human remains were identified and avoided. The race route was realigned to avoid significant resource impacts allowing the race to proceed on schedule.
Victoria Loop Road Survey, Alpine, San Diego County, California (Alpine Fire Safe
Council) Mr. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator of an 85-acre cultural resource survey in the Alpine area of San Diego County. The survey identified six cultural resources within the project area including prehistoric lithic scatters, an historic well, and historic artifact scatters. All resources were flagged and marked for avoidance during the vegetation treatment program. The Bureau of Land Management served as Federal Lead Agency for the project.
Spirit of Joy Church Project Testing Program, Ramona, San Diego County, California (Spirit of Joy Lutheran Church) Mr. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator and Project Manager a cultural resource testing program at site CA-SDI-17299. The site was a sparse temporary camp. The project included surface collection and subsurface testing. Subsurface deposits were not identified within the project area and the site material was recovered during testing. Construction monitoring was recommended to address alluvial soils within other portions of the project area.
Alpine Fire Safe Council Brush Management Monitoring Project, Alpine Region, San
Diego County, California (Alpine Fire Safe Council) Mr. Pigniolo served as Principal Investigator for a cultural resources monitoring and protection program on four project areas surrounding Alpine, California. Cultural resources identified during previous surveys within the vegetation treatment areas were flagged for avoidance. The project included hand clearing and chaparral mastication near residential structures to create a fire buffer zone. Vegetation removal was monitored to ensure cultural resources obscured by heavy vegetation were not impacted by the project and that all recorded cultural resources were avoided. The Bureau of Land Management served as Lead Agency for the project.
APPENDIX B
RECORD SEARCH CONFIRMATION
South Central Coastal Information Center California State University, Fullerton Department of Anthropology MH-426 800 North State College Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92834-6846 657.278.5395
California Historical Resources Information System Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura and San Bernardino Counties
[email protected] _____________________________________________________________________________ 8/27/2015 SCCIC File #: 15348.1429 Teresa Robertson Enviro Assessment PC P.O. Box 1154 Bonner Ferry ID 83805 Re: Jeerah Single Family Residential, 6231 East Wimbleton Court The South Central Coastal Information Center received your records search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Orange, CA USGS 7.5’ quadrangle. The following summary reflects the results of the records search for the project area and a ½-mile radius. The search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest (SPHI), the California Historical Landmarks (SHL), the California Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and the California State Historic Properties Directory (HPD) listings were reviewed for the above referenced project site. Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources, archaeological site locations are not released. RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS SUMMARY
Archaeological Resources Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 5 Built-Environment Resources Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 0 Reports and Studies Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 9 OHP Historic Properties Directory (HPD)
Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0
California Points of Historical Interest (SPHI)
Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0
California Historical Landmarks (SHL)
Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0
California Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG)
Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (ADOE):
Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW –Anaheim, CA (1896 & 1942) USGS 15’: indicated that in 1896, there was little to no visible development within the project site; however, there was one road within the vicinity of the project. The project site was located within the historic place name of Santiago de Santa Ana. In 1942, there was still little to no visible development within the project site; however, there were three roads within the vicinity of the project area. There was one intermittent stream within the vicinity of the project area. Major roadways nearby included Chapman Avenue and historic place names nearby included El Modena. RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the project areas proximity to recorded archaeological resources and a lack of cultural
resource studies for the project site, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist be retained to conduct a survey of the property. Additionally, it is recommended that any historic buildings, structures or object (45 years and older and in the area of potential effect) be identified, recorded, and evaluated for local, state, or national significance prior to the approval of project plans. Finally, the Native American Heritage Commission should be consulted to identify if any additional traditional cultural properties or other sacred sites are known to be in the area.
For your convenience, you may find a professional consultant* at www.chrisinfo.org. Any
resulting reports by the qualified consultant should be submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center as soon as possible. *The SCCIC does not endorse any particular consultant and makes no claims about the qualifications of any person listed. Each consultant on this list self-reports that they meet current professional standards.
If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at
657.278.5395 Monday through Thursday 9:00 am to 3:30 pm. Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the
SCCIC number listed above when making inquiries. Requests made after initial invoicing will result in the preparation of a separate invoice.
Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System, Lindsey Noyes Lead Staff Researcher
State of California The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
Page 1 of 3 Resource Name or #: JS-H-1 and JS-H-2 P1. Other Identifier: 6231 East Wimbleton Court
P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted a. County: Orange and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)
b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Orange Date: 2012 T4S;R9W; NE ¼ Section 35; S.B. BM c. Address: 6231 East Wimbleton Court City: Orange Zip: 92869 d. UTM: Zone: 11; NAD83; 427185mE/3738796mN e. Other Locational Data: The project parcel (APN 093-150-06-00) is located on the eastern edge of the City of Orange. The property is located east of Highway 55 and south of Chapman Avenue. The structures are on the north side of Canyon View Avenue. The parcel sits at approximately 470 foot elevation.
P3a. Description: Two structures are present at 6231 East Wimbleton Court. They appear to have originally served as a residence and a garage. The residencial structure was initially a tutor revival cottage with a large arched fixed lattice light window and relatively high gabeled roof line. The structure is wood-frame with a composition tile roof. The original foundation appears to have been a combination of poured concrete and post and beam with a crawl space understory. More recent additions include a shed roof extension and residential use of the second story. The original portion of the garage is a wood frame structure with a moderate gabeled roof on a poured concrete foundation. I t has horizontal wood siding with a sliding garage door entrance. The roof is composition shingle. The rear of the structure includes an addition with a second story and two single hung wood sash windows. The addition does not match the original foundation and siding board width. The addition also includes a second door and roof extension over the doorway The structure is not associated with events or persons that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California or Orange County’s history and cultural heritage. The structures lack the integrity and/or qualities to qualify as a significant historical resource under CEQA Guidelines.
P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2; Single family property P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.)
P5b. Description of Photo: Overview of garage & house, looking southwest; 12/28/15; PR-05287-093
P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both
P7. Owner and Address: Mr. Yasir Kahf P. O. Box 2956 Corona, CA 92878
P8. Recorded by: Andrew Pigniolo Laguna Mountain Environmental 7969 Engineer Road, Suite 208 San Diego, CA 92111
P9. Date Recorded: 12/28/15
P10. Project Type: Historic evaluation
P11. Report Citation: Andrew Pigniolo. 2016. Archaeological Survey and Historic Evaluation Report for the Jeerah Single Family Residential Project,6231 East Wimbleton Court, City of Orange, California.
Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):
State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial Page 2 of 3 Resource Name or #: JS-H-1 and JS-H-2 Map Name: USGS 7.5' Orange Quad Scale: 1:24000 Date of Map: 2012
DPR 523J (1/95) *Required information
JS-H-1
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page 3 of 3 *NRHP Status Code 6Z
*Resource Name or #: JS-H-1 and JS-H-2 B1. Historic Name: none B2. Common Name: 6231 East Wimbleton Court B3. Original Use: Residence and garage B4. Present Use: Abandoned
*B5. Architectural Style: Tutor Revival Cottage
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)
Built circa 1930 (not shown on maps or aerials until 1947 aerial photo). The house structure appears to have been modified in several ways from its original form. Again it is uncertain if the shed roof extension in the rear is original. A second addition to this shed roof extension was added most-likely in the 1970s, so that the shed roof line now extends across the entire rear of the structure. The addition of the front porch also appears to date from the 1970s. The use of the second story and two sets of exterior staircases also appear to be later additions to the structure and the plaster finish may also not be original.
*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: n/a Original Location: n/a
*B8. Related Features: The garage associated with the residence is located to the east of the house. The original portion of the
garage is a wood frame structure with a moderate gabeled roof on a poured concrete foundation. It has horizontal wood siding with a sliding garage door entrance. The roof is composition shingle. The rear of the structure includes an addition with a second story and two single hung wood sash windows. The addition does not match the original foundation and siding board width. The addition also includes a second door and roof extension over the doorway
Period of Significance: 1930s Property Type: residence Applicable Criteria: (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
Possible associated with scattered residential development in the Orange Park Acres area to the north. By 1980 much of the surrounding area was developed and graded. The significant additions and changes to the both the residence and garage has significantly reduced the integrity of these structures. Additionally, the structures are not associated with events or persons that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California or Orange County’s history and cultural heritage. The structure lacks the integrity and/or qual ities to qualify as a significant historical resource under CEQA Guidelines. B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes)
*B12. References:
Chain-of-title report. B13. Remarks: The current assessment was performed as part of an assessment for residential development.