CA High Speed Train, Historic Property Survey Report Information, Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Sacramento

Historic Property Survey Stockton

San Francisco Transbay Terminal

Redwood City or Palo Alto

Report Information

Downtown Modesto

Millbrae-SFO San Jose Diridon

Downtown Merced

City of Fresno

Gilroy Fresno

September 2011

Kings-Tulare Regional Station (Potential Station)

Bakersfield

Palmdale

Sylmar Burbank Los Angeles

Industry

Norwalk

Ontario Airport Riverside

Anaheim Murrieta

Escondido University City San Diego

California High-Speed Train Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Historic Property Survey Report Information City of Fresno

Prepared by: URS/HMM/Arup Joint Venture

September 2011

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table of Contents Page 1.0

2.0

3.0 4.0

5.0

6.0

Description of the Undertaking ....................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Introduction ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Alternatives........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2.1 Alignment Alternatives....................................................................... 1-1 1.2.2 Station Alternatives ........................................................................... 1-5 1.2.3 Heavy Maintenance Facility .............................................................. 1-12 1.3 Power......................................................................................................... 1-14 1.4 Project Construction .................................................................................... 1-14 1.5 Definition of the Area of Potential Effects....................................................... 1-16 1.5.1 Archaeological APE.......................................................................... 1-16 1.5.2 Historic Architectural APE ................................................................ 1-17 Summary of Findings........................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Summary ........................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Purpose of Historic Property Survey Report ...................................................... 2-1 2.3 Archaeological Resources ............................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Historic Architectural Resources ...................................................................... 2-3 Consulting Parties, Public Participation .......................................................... 3-1 3.1 Historic Architectural Resources: Interested Parties .......................................... 3-2 3.2 Native American Consultation ......................................................................... 3-2 Summary of Identification Effort .................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Archaeological Resources ............................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Background Literature Review ............................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Records Search................................................................................. 4-1 4.1.3 Survey Methods and Implementation .................................................. 4-1 4.1.4 Framework for Identifying Archaeological Properties ............................ 4-1 4.1.5 Summary of Native American Communication...................................... 4-1 4.1.6 Traditional Cultural Properties ............................................................ 4-1 4.2 Historic Architectural Resources ...................................................................... 4-2 4.2.1 Known Historic Properties and Previous Surveys .................................. 4-2 4.2.2 Field and Research Methods .............................................................. 4-3 Historic Context .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Natural Setting .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Prehistoric Setting ......................................................................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Early Holocene (12,000 to 7000 B.P.; 10,000 to 5000 B.C.) .................. 5-4 5.2.2 Middle Holocene (7000 to 4000 B.P.; 5000 to 2000 B.C.)...................... 5-4 5.2.3 Late Holocene (4000 B.P. to 150 B.P.; 2000 B.C. to A.D. 1850)............. 5-4 5.2.4 Ethnographic Setting ......................................................................... 5-4 5.3 Historic-Era Setting ........................................................................................ 5-5 5.3.1 The Spanish and Mexican Periods ....................................................... 5-5 5.3.2 Initial American Settlement and Travel in the Wake of the Gold Rush .... 5-6 5.3.3 The Advent and Growth of Irrigated Agriculture................................... 5-7 5.3.4 The Arrival of the Railroads.............................................................. 5-14 5.3.5 Municipal Development ................................................................... 5-20 5.3.6 Events and Trends of the Twentieth Century ..................................... 5-23 Historic Properties Identified.......................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Archaeological Resources ............................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Built Environment Resources .......................................................................... 6-1 6.3 NRHP Listed or Eligible Archaeological Properties ............................................. 6-2 6.4 NRHP Listed or Eligible Historic Architectural Properties .................................... 6-2 6.4.1 Railroad-Related Historic Properties .................................................... 6-3

PAGE i

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

7.0 8.0 9.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

6.4.2 Historic Properties Related to Water Conveyance ................................. 6-3 6.4.3 Residential Historic Properties ............................................................ 6-4 6.4.4 Commercial Historic Properties........................................................... 6-5 6.4.5 Institutional Historic Properties .......................................................... 6-6 6.4.6 Miscellaneous Historic Properties ........................................................ 6-7 6.5 Tables of Historic Properties Identified ............................................................ 6-8 6.6 Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA ................................................ 6-13 6.6.1 Residential Historical Resources ........................................................ 6-15 6.6.2 Commercial/Industrial Resources ...................................................... 6-15 Findings ...........................................................................................................7-1 References .......................................................................................................8-1 Preparer Qualifications .................................................................................... 9-1

Appendices A B C D E

Area of Potential Effects Interested Parties Correspondence Site Location and DPR 523 Forms California Historical Resource Status Codes Section 106 Programmatic Agreement for the HST Project

Tables Table 1-1 Construction Schedule ....................................................................................... 1-15 Table 3.0-1 Responses Received from Letter Sent to Parties Potentially Interested in Historic Architectural Resources ..................................................................................................... 3-1 Table 6.5-1 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) Listed in the NRHP .............. 6-8 [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] ................................................................. 6-8 Table 6.5-2 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) Previously Determined Eligible for the NRHP .................................................................................................................... 6-8 Table 6.5-3 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) That Appear Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested ................................................................ 6-9 [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] ................................................................. 6-9 Table 6.5-4 Historic Architectural Resources Evaluated as Not Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested Early in the NEPA Process, as Required by the Section 106 PA, Attachment C --- [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] ................................... 6-10 Table 6.6-1 Properties That Are Not Eligible for the NRHP But That Are Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA (Not Section 106 Properties) ............................................................ 6-13 [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] ................................................................ 6-13 Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor ........................................................................................................................... 7-5 [table reports Fresno resources only] .................................................................................. 7-5 Figures Figure 1-1 Fresno to Bakersfield HST alignments ............................................................... 1-2 Figure 1-2 Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative ................................................................. 1-7 Figure 1-3 Fresno Station–Kern Alternative ....................................................................... 1-9 Figure 1-4 Kings/Tulare Regional Station (potential).......................................................... 1-10 Figure 1-5 Bakersfield Station–North Alternative ............................................................... 1-11 Figure 1-6 Bakersfield Station–South Alternative ............................................................... 1-13 Figure 5-1 Historic natural vegetation and hydrology.......................................................... 5-2 Figure 5-2 Land colonies in the vicinity of Fresno ............................................................... 5-9 Figure 5-3 Fresno Irrigation District and Consolidated Irrigation District in 1929 .................. 5-12

PAGE ii

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Figure 5-4 San Joaquin Valley in 1873, showing irrigable lands and rivers .......................... 5-16 Figure 5-5 Major rail lines between Fresno and Bakersfield in 1900 ................................... 5-19 Figure 5-6 Fresno in 1901, bird’s eye view facing east ...................................................... 5-21 Figure 6-1 Washington Colony Canal, Fresno County .......................................................... 6-4 Figure 6-2 Vartanian Home, 362 F Street, Fresno ............................................................... 6-4 Figure 6-3 Hotel Fresno, 1257 Broadway, Fresno ............................................................... 6-5 Figure 6-4 2208 South Van Ness Avenue, Fresno ............................................................... 6-7 Figure 6-11 Liberty Laundry, 1830 Inyo Street, Fresno ..................................................... 6-16 Figure 6-12 Benham Ice Cream/Dale Bros. Coffee Building, 1420 H Street, Fresno ............. 6-17 Figure 6-13 Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel, 1536-1542 Kern Street, Fresno ............ 6-18 Figure 6-14 Azteca Theatre, 836-840 F Street, Fresno ...................................................... 6-18 Figure 6-15 Dick’s Shoes Building, 1522-1526 Kerns Street, Fresno ................................... 6-18 Figure 6-16 Budd & Quinn, 1514-1518 H Street, Fresno ................................................... 6-19 Figure 6-17 H.E. Jaynes & Son, 1452 H Street, Fresno ..................................................... 6-19

PAGE iii

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

This page intentionally left blank

PAGE iv

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Acronyms and Abbreviations APE

Area of Potential Effects

APN

assessor parcel number

ARRA

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

ASR

Archaeological Survey Report

AT&SF

Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe

Authority

California High-Speed Rail Authority

BNSF

BNSF Railway

B.P.

before the present

Caltrans

California Department of Transportation

CEQA

California Environmental Quality Act of 1969

CFR

Code of Federal Regulations

CHRIS

California Historical Resources Information System

CRHR

California Register of Historical Resources

DPR

Department of Parks and Recreation

EIR

Environmental Impact Report

EIS

Environmental Impact Statement

FID

Fresno Irrigation District

FRA

Federal Railroad Administration

GIS

Geographic Information System

GPS

Global Positioning System

HASR

Historic Architectural Survey Report

HMF

heavy maintenance facility

HPSR

Historic Property Survey Report

HST

high-speed train

JRP

JRP Historical Consulting, LLC

KCL

Kern County Land Company

NAHC

Native American Heritage Commission

NEPA

National Environmental Policy Act of 1970

PAGE v

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

NHPA

National Historic Preservation Act

NRHP

National Register of Historic Places

project

Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the California High-Speed Train Project

PTE

permission to enter

QI

Qualified Investigator

ROD

Record of Decision

RTP

Regional Transportation Plan

Section 106 PA

Section 106 Programmatic Agreement for the HST Project

SF&SJV

San Francisco and San Joaquin Valley Railway

SHPO

State Historic Preservation Officer

Southern Pacific

Southern Pacific Railroad

SR

State Route

TCP

traditional cultural property

TPSS

traction power substation

UPRR

Union Pacific Railroad

URS

URS Corporation

USGS

U.S. Geological Survey

WPA

Works Progress Administration

PAGE vi

Chapter 1 Description of the Undertaking

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

1.0

Description of the Undertaking

1.1

Project Introduction

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the California High-Speed Train (HST) Project would be approximately 114 miles long, varying in length by only a few miles based on the route alternatives selected. To comply with the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s (Authority’s) guidance to use existing transportation corridors when feasible, the Fresno to Bakersfield HST Section would be primarily located adjacent to the existing BNSF Railway right-of-way. Alternative alignments are being considered where engineering constraints require deviation from the existing railroad corridor, and to avoid environmental impacts. The Fresno to Bakersfield HST Section would cross both urban and rural lands and include a station in both Fresno and Bakersfield, a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station in the vicinity of Hanford, a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF), and power substations along the alignment. The HST alignment would be entirely grade-separated, meaning that crossings with roads, railroads, and other transport facilities would be located at different heights (overpasses or underpasses) so that the HST would not interrupt nor interface with other modes of transport. The HST right-of-way would also be fenced to prohibit public or automobile access. The project footprint would consist primarily of the train right-of-way, which would include both a northbound and southbound track in an area typically 100 feet wide. Additional right-of-way would be required to accommodate stations, multiple track at stations, maintenance facilities, and power substations. The Fresno to Bakersfield Section would include at-grade, below-grade, and elevated track segments. The at-grade track would be laid on an earthen rail bed topped with rock ballast approximately 6 feet off of the ground; fill and ballast for the rail bed would be obtained from permitted borrow sites and quarries. Below-grade track would be laid in an open or covered trench at a depth which would allow roadway and other grade-level uses above the track. Elevated track segments would span long sections of urban development or aerial roadway structures and consist of steel truss aerial structures with cast in place reinforced-concrete columns supporting the box girders and platforms. The height of elevated track sections would depend on the height of existing structures below, and would range from 40 to 80 feet. Columns would be spaced 60 feet to 120 feet apart.

1.2

Project Alternatives

1.2.1

Alignment Alternatives

This section describes the Fresno to Bakersfield HST Section project alternatives, including the No Project Alternative. The project EIR/EIS for the Fresno to Bakersfield HST Section examines alternative alignments, stations, and HMF sites within the general BNSF Railway corridor. Discussion of the HST project alternatives begins with a single continuous alignment (the BNSF Alternative) from Fresno to Bakersfield. This alternative most closely aligns with the preferred alignment identified in the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Statewide Program EIR/EIS. Descriptions of the additional five alternative alignments that deviate from the BNSF Alternative for portions of the route then follow. The alternative alignments that deviate from the BNSF Alternative were selected to avoid environmental, land use, or community issues identified for portions of the BNSF Alternative (Figure 1-1).

PAGE 1-1

U

BN

} ∙ 180

Clovis E SHAW AVE

PR

SF

R

SJVR

} ∙

Fresno

180

( !

} ∙ 180

E JENSEN AVE

Fresno Station

Sanger

} ∙ 145

Tulare County Orange Cove

Parlier

r

W MANNING AVE

sR ive

Fresno Works-Fresno

Fresno County

S BETHEL AVE

Fowler

ELKHORN AVE

41

6TH AVE

GRANGEVILLE BLVD

} ∙ 201

Traver

} ∙ 201

Woodlake AVENUE 328TH

} ∙ ∙ } 63

SJVR Goshen

( !

Hanford

Visalia

Kings/Tulare Regional Station (potential) KANSAS AVE

216

Farmersville

HOUSTON AVE

Lemoore

Exeter

} ∙

Cross Creek

269

Kings County

} ∙

S

BNSF

Fresno County

le Co

Dinuba

AVENUE 384TH

gh lo u

245

COUNTY HWY J 19

} ∙

Kingsburg

} ∙

Reedley

Kin g

Selma

63

} ∙ 137

Kings County-Hanford

AVENUE 256TH

Lindsay

Tulare UP R R

NEVADA AVE

} ∙ 190

Corcoran

Porterville

Tipton

10TH AVE

AVE 136

} ∙ 43

Earlimart

Tulare County BN S

Kern County

F

UP R R

POND RD

46

} ∙ 155

ELMO HWY

Poso Creek

} ∙

Kern County

Delano GARCES HWY VR

Kings County

COUNTY HWY J 24 AVE 84

Tulare County

Kings County

UTICA AVE

SJ

Tule River

McFarland Calico FOMOSO WOODY RD

Wasco

} ∙ 65

Kern COG-Wasco Shafter

LERDO HWY

Kern COG-Shafter East LERDO HWY

SJ

Kern COG-Shafter West

VR

7TH STANDARD RD

} ∙

SJVR

58

} ∙ 58

HAGEMAN RD

BN

} ∙ 58

( !

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Source: URS, 2011

BNSF Alternative

0

$

5

10

Miles

0

10 Kilometers

( !

184

Station location Alternative heavy maintenance facility (HMF)

Corcoran Bypass

Stream

Allensworth Bypass

Existing rail line

Wasco-Shafter Bypass Bakersfield South

BN S

F July 27, 2011

} ∙

Corcoran Elevated

20

} ∙ 58

Bakersfield

SJVR

r ive nR KerPANAMA LN

Bakersfield Station

SF

Community/Urban area County boundary

Figure 1-1 Fresno to Bakersfield HST alignments

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

A.

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Project Alternative, the HST System would not be built. The No Project Alternative represents the condition of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section as it existed in 2009 (when the Notice of Preparation was issued), and as it would exist without the HST project at the planning horizon (2035). To assess future conditions, it was assumed that all currently known programmed and funded improvements to the intercity transportation system (highway, rail, and transit), and reasonably foreseeable local development projects (with funding sources identified), would be developed by 2035. The No Project Alternative is based on a review of Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) for all modes of travel, the State of California Office of Planning and Research CEQAnet Database, the Federal Aviation Administration Air Carrier Activity Information System and Airport Improvement Plan grant data, the State Transportation Improvement Program, airport master plans and interviews with airport officials, intercity passenger rail plans, and city and county general plans and interviews with planning officials. B.

BNSF ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

The BNSF Alternative Alignment would extend approximately 114 miles from Fresno to Bakersfield and would lie adjacent to the BNSF Railway route to the extent feasible (Figure 1-1). Minor deviations from the BNSF Railway corridor would be necessary to accommodate engineering constraints, namely wider curves necessary to accommodate the HST (as compared with the existing lower-speed freight line track alignment). The largest of these deviations occurs between approximately Elk Avenue in Fresno County and Nevada Avenue in Kings County. This segment of the BNSF Alternative would depart from BNSF Railway corridor and instead curve to the east on the northern side of the Kings River and away from Hanford, and would rejoin the BNSF Railway corridor north of Corcoran. Although the majority of the alignment would be at-grade, the BNSF Alternative would include aerial structures in all of the four counties through which it travels. In Fresno County, an aerial structure would carry the alignment over Golden State Boulevard and State Route (SR) 99 and a second would cross over the BNSF Railway tracks in the vicinity of East Conejo Avenue. The alignment would be at-grade with bridges where it crosses Cole Slough and the Kings River into Kings County. In Kings County, the BNSF Alternative would be elevated east of Hanford where the alignment would pass over the San Joaquin Valley Railroad and SR 198. The alignment would also be elevated over Cross Creek, and again at the southern end of the city of Corcoran to avoid a BNSF Railway spur. In Tulare County, the BNSF Alternative would be elevated at the crossing of the Tule River and at the crossing of the Alpaugh railroad spur that runs west from the BNSF Railway mainline. In Kern County, the BNSF Alternative would be elevated over Poso Creek and through the cities of Wasco, Shafter, and Bakersfield. The BNSF Alternative would be at-grade through the rural areas between these cities. The BNSF Alternative Alignment would provide wildlife crossing opportunities by means of a variety of engineered structures. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would be provided from approximately Cross Creek (Kings County) south to Poso Creek (Kern County) in at-grade portions of the railroad embankment at approximately 0.3-mile intervals. In addition to those structures, wildlife crossing opportunities would be available at elevated portions of the alignment, bridges over riparian corridors, road overcrossings and undercrossings, and drainage facilities (i.e., large diameter [60 to 120 inches] culverts and paired 30-inch culverts). Where bridges, aerial structures, and road crossings coincide with proposed dedicated wildlife crossing structures, such features would serve the function of, and supersede the need for, dedicated wildlife crossing structures.

PAGE 1-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The preliminary wildlife crossing structure design consists of a modified culvert in the embankment that would support the HST tracks. The typical culvert would be 72 feet long from end to end (crossing structure distance), would span a width of approximately 8 feet (crossing structure width), and would provide 4 feet of vertical clearance (crossing structure height). Additional wildlife crossing structure designs could include circular or elliptical pipe culverts, and larger (longer) culverts with crossing structure distances of up to 100 feet. The design of the wildlife crossing structures may change depending on site-specific conditions and engineering considerations. C.

CORCORAN ELEVATED ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

The Corcoran Elevated Alternative Alignment would be the same as the corresponding section of the BNSF Alternative Alignment from approximately Idaho Avenue south of Hanford to Avenue 136, except that it would pass through the city of Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an aerial structure. The aerial structure begins at Niles Avenue and returns to grade at 4th Avenue. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would be provided from approximately Cross Creek south to Avenue 136 in at-grade portions of the railroad embankment at intervals of approximately 0.3 mile. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would also be placed between 100 and 500 feet to the north and south of both the Cross Creek and Tule River crossings. This alternative alignment would cross SR 43 and pass over several local roads on an aerial structure. Santa Fe Avenue would be closed at the HST right-of-way. D.

CORCORAN BYPASS ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

The Corcoran Bypass Alternative Alignment would run parallel to the BNSF Alternative Alignment from approximately Idaho Avenue south of Hanford, to approximately Nevada Avenue north of Corcoran. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would then diverge from the BNSF Alternative and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Railway route at Avenue 136. The total length of the Corcoran Bypass would be approximately 21 miles. Similar to the corresponding section of the BNSF Alternative, most of the Corcoran Bypass Alternative would be at-grade. However, one elevated structure would carry the HST over Cross Creek, and another would travel over SR 43, the BNSF Railway, and the Tule River. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would be provided from approximately Cross Creek south to Avenue 136 in at-grade portions of the railroad embankment at intervals of approximately 0.3 mile. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would also be placed between 100 and 500 feet to the north and south of each of the Cross Creek and Tule River crossings. This alternative alignment would cross SR 43, Whitley Avenue/SR 137, and several local roads. SR 43, Waukena Avenue, and Whitley Avenue would be grade-separated from the HST with an overcrossing/undercrossing; other roads would be closed at the HST right-of-way. E.

ALLENSWORTH BYPASS ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

The Allensworth Bypass Alternative Alignment would pass west of the BNSF Alternative, avoiding Allensworth Ecological Reserve and the Allensworth State Historic Park. This alignment was refined over the course of environmental studies to reduce impacts to wetlands and orchards. The total length of the Allensworth Bypass Alternative Alignment would be approximately 19 miles, beginning at Avenue 84 and rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would be constructed on an elevated structure only where the alignment crosses the Alpaugh railroad spur and Deer Creek. The alignment would pass through Tulare County mostly at-grade. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would be provided

PAGE 1-4

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

from approximately Avenue 84 to Poso Creek at intervals of approximately 0.3 mile. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would also be placed between 100 and 500 feet to the north and south of both the Deer Creek and Poso Creek crossings. The Allensworth Bypass would cross County Road J22, Scofield Avenue, Garces Highway, Woollomes Avenue, Magnolia Avenue, Palm Avenue, Pond Road, Peterson Road, and Elmo Highway. Woollomes Avenue and Elmo Highway would be closed at the HST right-of-way, while the other roads would be realigned and/or grade-separated from the HST with overcrossings. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative includes an option to relocate the existing BNSF Railway tracks to be adjacent to the HST right-of-way for the length of this alignment. The possibility of relocating the BNSF Railway tracks along this alignment has not yet been discussed with BNSF Railway; however, if this option is selected, it is assumed that the existing BNSF Railway right-ofway would be abandoned between Avenue 84 and Elmo Highway, and the relocated BNSF Railway right-of-way would be 100 feet wide and adjacent to the eastern side of the Allensworth Bypass Alternative right-of-way. F.

WASCO-SHAFTER BYPASS ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative Alignment would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, crossing over to the eastern side of the BNSF Railway tracks and bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would be at grade except where it travels over 7th Standard Road and the BNSF Railway to rejoin the BNSF Alternative. The total length of the alternative alignment would be approximately 24 miles. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass was refined to avoid the Occidental Petroleum tank farm as well as a historic property potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass would cross SR 43, SR 46, East Lerdo Highway, and several local roads. SR 46, Kimberlina Road, Shafter Avenue, Beech Avenue, Cherry Avenue, and Kratzmeyer Road would be grade-separated from the HST with overcrossings/undercrossings; other roads would be closed at the HST right-of-way. G.

BAKERSFIELD SOUTH ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

From the Rosedale Highway (SR 58) in Bakersfield, the Bakersfield South Alternative Alignment would run parallel to the BNSF Alternative Alignment at varying distances to the north. At Chester Avenue, the Bakersfield South Alternative curves south, and runs parallel to California Avenue. As with the BNSF Alternative, the Bakersfield South Alternative would begin at grade and become elevated starting at Palm Avenue through Bakersfield to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The elevated section would range in height from 50 to 70 feet. Dedicated wildlife crossing structures would be placed between 100 and 500 feet to the north and south of the Kern River. The Bakersfield South Alternative would be approximately 9 miles long and would cross the same roads as the BNSF Alternative. This alternative includes the Bakersfield Station–South Alternative.

1.2.2

Station Alternatives

The Fresno to Bakersfield HST Section would include a new station in Fresno and a new station in Bakersfield. An optional third station, the Kings/Tulare Regional Station, is under consideration. Stations would be designed to address the purpose of the HST, particularly to allow for intercity travel and connection to local transit, airports, and highways. Stations would include the station platforms, a station building and associated access structure, as well as lengths of bypass tracks

PAGE 1-5

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

to accommodate local and express service at the stations. All stations would contain the following elements:  

Passenger boarding and alighting platforms. Station head house with ticketing, waiting areas, passenger amenities, vertical circulation, administration and employee areas, and baggage and freight-handling service. 1  Vehicle parking (short-term and long-term) and “kiss and ride ”.  Motorcycle/scooter parking.  Bicycle parking.  Waiting areas and queuing space for taxis and shuttle buses.  Pedestrian walkway connections. A. FRESNO STATION ALTERNATIVES Two alternative sites are under consideration for the Fresno Station. Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative

The Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative would be in downtown Fresno, less than 0.5 mile east of SR 99 on the BNSF Alternative. The station would be centered on Mariposa Street and bordered by Fresno Street on the north, Tulare Street on the south, H Street on the east, and G Street on the west. The station building would be approximately 75,000 square feet, with a maximum height of approximately 64 feet. The two-level station would be at-grade; with passenger access provided both east and west of the HST guideway and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, which would run parallel with one another adjacent to the station. The first level would contain the public concourse, passenger service areas, and station and operation offices. The second level would include the mezzanine, a pedestrian overcrossing above the HST guideway and the UPRR tracks, and an additional public concourse area. Entrances would be located at both G and H streets. A conceptual site plan of the Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative is provided in Figure 1-2. The majority of station facilities would be east of the UPRR tracks. The station and associated facilities would occupy approximately 20.5 acres, including 13 acres dedicated to the station, short term parking, and kiss-and-ride accommodations. A new intermodal facility, not a part of this proposed undertaking, would be located on the parcel bordered by Fresno Street to the north, Mariposa Street to the south, Broadway Street to the east, and H Street to the west (designated “Intermodal Transit Center” in Figure 1-2). Among other uses, the intermodal facility would accommodate the Greyhound facilities and services that would be relocated from the northwestern corner of Tulare and H streets.

1

“Kiss and ride” refers to the station area where riders may be dropped off or picked up before or after riding the HST.

PAGE 1-6

Path: L:\Projects\High_Speed_Rail_27560685\Maps\Chapter_2\Current_2011_Updates\Figure2-35_FresnoMariposaAlt.mxd

July 27, 2011

$

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED

NOT TO SCALE

Figure 1-2 Fresno Station-Mariposa Alternative

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The site proposal includes the potential for up to three parking structures occupying a total of approximately 5.5 acres. Two of the three potential parking structures would each sit on 2 acres, and each would have a capacity of approximately 1,500 cars. The third parking structure would be slightly smaller in footprint (1.5 acres), with five levels and a capacity of approximately 1,100 cars. An additional 2-acre surface parking lot would provide approximately 300 parking spaces. Under this alternative, the historic Southern Pacific Railroad (Southern Pacific) depot and associated Pullman Sheds would remain intact. While these structures could be used for stationrelated purposes, they are not assumed to be functionally required for the HST project and are thus, not proposed to be physically altered as part of the project. The Mariposa station building footprint has been configured to preserve views of the historic railroad depot and associated sheds. Fresno Station–Kern Alternative The Fresno Station–Kern Alternative would be similarly situated in downtown Fresno and would be located on the BNSF Alternative, centered on Kern Street between Tulare Street and Inyo Street (Figure 1-3). This station would include the same components as the Fresno Station– Mariposa Alternative, but under this alternative, the station would not encroach on the historic Southern Pacific Railroad depot just north of Tulare Street and would not require relocation of existing Greyhound facilities. The station building would be approximately 75,000 square feet, with a maximum height of approximately 64 feet. The station building would have two levels housing the same facilities as the Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative (UPRR tracks, HST tracks, mezzanine, and station office). The approximately 18.5-acre site would include 13 acres dedicated to the station, bus transit center, short term parking, and kiss-and-ride accommodations. Two of the three potential parking structures would each sit on 2 acres, and each would have a capacity of approximately 1,500 cars. The third structure would be slightly smaller in footprint (1.5 acres) and have a capacity of approximately 1,100 cars. Surface parking lots would provide approximately 600 additional parking spaces. Like the Fresno Station–Mariposa Alternative, the majority of station facilities under the Kern Alternative would be sited east of the HST tracks. B.

KINGS/TULARE REGIONAL STATION

The potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station would be located east of SR 43 (Avenue 8) and north of the Cross Valley Rail Line (San Joaquin Valley Railroad) (Figure 1-4). The station building would be approximately 40,000 square feet with a maximum height of approximately 75 feet. The entire site would be approximately 27 acres, including 8 acres designated for the station, bus transit center, short-term parking, and kiss-and-ride. An additional approximately 19 acres would support a surface parking lot with approximately 1,600 spaces. C.

BAKERSFIELD STATION ALTERNATIVES

Two options are under consideration for the Bakersfield Station. Bakersfield Station–North Alternative The Bakersfield Station–North Alternative would be located at the corner of Truxtun and Union Avenue/SR 204 along the BNSF Alternative Alignment (Figure 1-5). The three-level station building would be 52,000 square feet, with a maximum height of approximately 95 feet. The first

PAGE 1-8

July 27, 2011

$

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED

NOT TO SCALE

Figure 1-3 Fresno Station-Kern Alternative

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Figure 1-4 Kings/Tulare Regional Station (potential)

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 1-10

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Figure 1-5 Bakersfield Station–North Alternative

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 1-11

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

level would house station operation offices and would also accommodate trains running along the BNSF Railway line. The second level would include the mezzanine; the HST platforms and guideway would pass through the third level. Under this alternative, the station building would be located at the western end of the parcel footprint. Two new boulevards would be constructed to access the station and the supporting facilities. The 19-acre site would designate 11.5 acres for the station, bus transit center, short-term parking, and kiss-and-ride. An additional 7.5 acres would house two parking structures that together would accommodate approximately 4,500 cars. The bus transit center and the smaller of the two parking structures (2.5 acres) would be located north of the HST tracks. The BNSF Railway line would run through the station at-grade, with the HST alignment running on an elevated guideway. Bakersfield Station–South Alternative The Bakersfield Station–South Alternative would be would be similarly located in downtown Bakersfield, but situated on the Bakersfield South Alternative Alignment along Union and California avenues, just south of the BNSF Railway right-of-way (Figure 1-6). The two-level station building would be 51,000 square feet, with a maximum height of approximately 95 feet. The first floor would house the concourse, and the platforms and the guideway would be on the second floor. Access to the site would be from two new boulevards, one branching off from California Avenue and the other from Union Avenue. The entire site would be 20 acres, with 15 acres designated for the station, bus transit center, short-term parking, and kiss-and-ride. An additional 5 acres would support one six-level parking structure with a capacity of approximately 4,500 cars. Unlike the Bakersfield Station–North Alternative, this station site would be located entirely south of the BNSF Railway right-of-way.

1.2.3

Heavy Maintenance Facility

One HST heavy vehicle maintenance and layover facility would be sited along either the Merced to Fresno or Fresno to Bakersfield HST section. Before the startup of initial operations, the HMF would support the assembly, testing, commissioning, and acceptance of high-speed rolling stock. During regular operations, the HMF would provide maintenance and repair functions, activation of new rolling stock, and train storage. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site would encompass approximately 150 acres to accommodate shops, tracks, parking, administration, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. The HMF would include tracks that allow trains to enter and leave under their own electric power or under tow. The HMF would also have management, administrative, and employee support facilities. Up to 1,500 employees could work at the HMF during any 24-hour period. The Authority has determined that one HMF would be located between Merced and Bakersfield; however, the specific location has not yet been finalized. Five HMF sites are under consideration in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section (Figure 1-1):   

The Fresno Works–Fresno HMF site lies within the southern limits of the city of Fresno and county of Fresno next to the BNSF Railway right-of-way between SR 99 and Adams Avenue. Up to 590 acres are available for the facility at this site. The Kings County–Hanford HMF site lies southeast of the city of Hanford, adjacent to and east of SR 43, between Houston and Idaho Avenues. Up to 510 acres are available at the site. The Kern Council of Governments–Wasco HMF site lies directly east of Wasco between SR 46 and Filburn Street. Up to 420 acres are available for the facility at this site.

PAGE 1-12

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Figure 1-6 Bakersfield Station–South Alternative

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 1-13

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT



The Kern Council of Governments–Shafter East HMF site lies in the city of Shafter between Burbank Street and 7th Standard Road to the east of the BNSF Railway right-of-way. This site has up to 490 acres available for the facility.



The Kern Council of Governments–Shafter West HMF site lies in the city of Shafter between Burbank Street and 7th Standard Road to the west of the BNSF Railway right-of-way. This site has up to 480 acres available for the facility.

1.3

Power

To provide power for the HST, high-voltage electricity at 115 kV and above would be drawn from the utility grid and transformed down to 25,000 volts. The voltage would then be distributed to the trains via an overhead catenary system. The project would not include the construction of a separate power source, although it would include the extension of power lines to a series of power substations positioned along the HST corridor. The transformation and distribution of electricity would occur in three types of stations: 

Traction power supply stations (TPSSs) transform high-voltage electricity supplied by public utilities to the train operating voltage. TPSSs would be sited adjacent to existing utility transmission lines and the HST right-of-way, and would be located approximately every 30 miles along the route. Each TPSS would be 200 feet by 160 feet.



Switching stations connect and balance the electrical load between tracks, and switch power on or off to tracks in the event of a power outage or emergency. Switching stations would be located midway between, and approximately 15 miles from, the nearest TPSS. Each switching station would be 120 feet by 80 feet and located adjacent to the HST right-of-way.



Paralleling stations, or autotransformer stations, provide voltage stabilization and equalize current flow. Paralleling stations would be located every 5 miles between the TPSSs and the switching stations. Each paralleling station would be 100 feet by 80 feet and located adjacent to the HST right-of-way.

1.4

Project Construction

The construction plan developed by the Authority and described below would maintain eligibility for eligibility for federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding. For the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, specific construction elements would include at-grade, below-grade, and elevated track, track work, grade crossings, and installation of a positive train control system. Atgrade track sections would be built using conventional railroad construction techniques. A typical sequence includes clearing, grubbing, grading, and compacting of the rail bed; application of crushed rock ballast; laying of track; and installation of electrical and communications systems. The precast segmental construction method is proposed for elevated track sections. In this construction method, large concrete bridge segments would be mass-produced at an onsite temporary casting yard. Precast segments would then be transported atop the already completed portions of the elevated track and installed using a special gantry crane positioned on the aerial structure. Although the precast segmental method is the favored technique for aerial structure construction, other methods may be used, including cast-in-place, box girder, or precast span-byspan techniques. Pre-construction activities would be conducted during final design and include geotechnical investigations, identification of staging areas, initiation of site preparation and demolition, relocation of utilities, and implementation of temporary, long-term, and permanent road closures.

PAGE 1-14

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Additional studies and investigations to develop construction requirements and worksite traffic control plans would be conducted as needed. Major construction activities for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section would include earthwork and excavation support systems construction, bridge and viaduct construction, railroad systems construction (including trackwork, traction electrification, signaling, and communications), and station construction. During peak construction periods, work is envisioned to be underway at several locations along the route, with overlapping construction of various project elements. Working hours and workers present at any time will vary depending on the activities being performed. The Authority intends to build the project using sustainable methods that:    

Minimize the use of nonrenewable resources. Minimize the impacts on the natural environment. Protect environmental diversity. Emphasize the use of renewable resources in a sustainable manner.

The overall schedule for construction is provided in Table 1-1. Table 1-1 Construction Schedule Activity

Tasks

Duration

Mobilization

Safety devices and special construction equipment mobilization

March–October 2013

Site Preparation

Utilities relocation; clearing/grubbing right-of- April–August 2013 way; establishment of detours and haul routes; preparation of construction equipment yards, stockpile materials, and precast concrete segment casting yard

Earthmoving

Excavation and earth support structures

Construction of Road Crossings

Surface street modifications, grade separations June 2013–December 2017

Construction of Elevated Structures

Viaduct and bridge foundations, substructure, and superstructure

June 2013–December 2017

Track Laying

Includes backfilling operations and drainage facilities

January 2014–August 2017

Systems

Train control systems, overhead contact system, communication system, signaling equipment

July 2016–November 2018

Demobilization

Includes site cleanup

August 2017–December 2019

HMF Phase 1a

Test track assembly and storage

August–November 2017

Maintenance-of-Way Facility

Potentially co-located with HMFa

January–December 2018

August 2013–August 2015

PAGE 1-15

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 1-1 Construction Schedule Activity

Tasks

Duration

HMF Phase 2a

Test track light maintenance facility

June–December 2018

HMF Phase 3a

Heavy Maintenance Facility

January–July 2021

HST Stations

Demolition, site preparation, foundations, structural frame, electrical and mechanical systems, finishes

Fresno: December 2014–October 2019 Kings/Tulare Regional: TBDb Bakersfield: January 2015–November 2019

Notes: a The HMF would be sited along either the Merced to Fresno or Fresno to Bakersfield section. b ROW would be acquired for the Kings/Tulare Regional Station; however, the station itself would not be part of initial construction. Acronym: TBD = to be determined

1.5

Definition of the Area of Potential Effects

Section 106 requires that an Area of Potential Effects (APE) be defined for the project. An APE is defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 800.16(d) as the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of an undertaking; it may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking and different types of resources. Given the inherent differences in archaeological and historic architectural resources, distinct APEs were developed for each of these resource classes. Map sets that show the extent of these different APEs are provided in Appendix A. For the HST project, the APE for archaeological resources and historic architectural resources was established in consultation with the project engineer (Arup) and the Authority. The SHPO concurred with the approach regarding the delineation of the APE on June 28, 2010 (Stratton 2010), in accordance with the Section 106 PA.

1.5.1

Archaeological APE

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 1-16

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

1.5.2

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historic Architectural APE

The APE for historic architectural resources was established in consultation with the project engineer (Arup) and the Authority. The APE will be revised as planning proceeds to reflect refinements to the proposed rail alignment alternatives and as engineering revisions become available. The APE for historic architectural resources was defined according to the parameters of Attachment B of the Section 106 PA (Appendix E). All parcels within the APE that contain buildings, structures, or objects more than 50 years of age at the time of the survey were subject to intensive-level study or were deemed to be streamlined documentation properties, as defined in the Section 106 PA. The historic architectural resources APE for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section includes all legal parcels intersected by the proposed right-of-way, construction of proposed ancillary features (such as grade separations or maintenance facilities), and construction staging areas. If historic architectural resources existed on a large rural parcel within 150 feet (46 meters) of the proposed HST right-of-way, or if it was determined that the resources on that parcel were otherwise potentially affected by the project, the entire parcel was included in the APE. If historic architectural resources on a large rural parcel were more than 150 feet (46 meters) away from the proposed HST at-grade right-of-way and were otherwise not potentially affected by the project, the APE boundary was set at 150 feet (46 meters) from the right-of-way. In these cases, resources outside the APE on that parcel did not require further survey. This methodology for establishing the Historic Architectural APE follows both standard practices for the discipline and Attachment B of the Section 106 PA. The historic architectural resources APE also includes parcels adjacent to those intersected by the proposed HST project if the historic architectural resources on those parcels may be indirectly affected. For the California High-Speed Train Project, a key phrase in the APE definition in the Section 106 regulations is “may cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties.” Some sections of the undertaking may introduce rail service where none existed during the historic era, for example along a highway or through agricultural fields. For such sections, the undertaking is more likely to change the character or use of a historic property, and the APE is drawn to include legal parcels or historic architectural resources properties that might be affected by changes to their setting and the introduction of visible or audible elements. Other potential effects that were considered when delineating the APE included, but were not limited to, physical damage or destruction of all or part of a property; physical alterations; moving or realigning a property; isolating a property from its setting; visual, audible, or atmospheric intrusions; shadow effects; damage from vibrations; and change in access or use.

PAGE 1-17

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

This page intentionally left blank

PAGE 1-18

Chapter 2 Summary of Findings

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

2.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Summary of Findings

This chapter summarizes the project, the purpose of the Historic Property Survey Report, the archaeological resources evaluated, and the historic architectural resources evaluated.

2.1

Project Summary

The Authority proposes to construct, operate, and maintain an electric-powered HST system in California. When completed, the nearly 800-mile (1,290-kilometer) train system would provide new passenger rail service to more than 90% of the state’s population. More than 200 weekday trains would serve the statewide intercity travel market. The HST would be capable of operating at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, with state-of-the-art safety, signaling, and automated train control systems. The system would connect and serve the major metropolitan areas of California, extending from San Francisco and Sacramento in the north to San Diego in the south. In 2005, the Authority and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) prepared a Program Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) (Statewide Program EIR/EIS) evaluating HST’s ability to meet the existing and future capacity demands on California’s intercity transportation system (Authority and FRA 2005). This was the first phase of a tiered environmental review process (Tier 1) for the proposed statewide HST system. The Authority and the FRA completed a second Program EIR/EIS in July 2008 to identify a preferred alignment for the Bay Area to Central Valley section (Authority and FRA 2008). The Authority and FRA are now undertaking second-tier, project environmental evaluations for sections of the statewide HST system. This Historic Property Survey Report is for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. The Fresno to Bakersfield Section begins at the proposed Fresno HST station in downtown Fresno and extends east past the proposed Bakersfield HST station in downtown Bakersfield for approximately 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) to Oswell Street. Information from this report is summarized in the project EIR/EIS for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section and will be part of the administrative record supporting the environmental review of the proposed project. For the HST system, including the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, the FRA is the lead federal agency for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other federal laws. The Authority is serving as a joint-lead agency under NEPA and is the lead agency for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is serving as a cooperating agency under NEPA for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section.

2.2

Purpose of Historic Property Survey Report

URS Corporation (URS) and its subconsultant, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC (JRP), prepared this Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) as part of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the California High-Speed Train Project (project). The HPSR has been prepared to assist the project proponent, the Authority, and the lead federal agency, the FRA, to comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as these pertain to federally funded undertakings and their impacts on historic properties. The HPSR follows the procedures set forth in the “Draft Programmatic Agreement among the Federal Railroad Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California HighSpeed Rail Authority regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as it Pertains to the California High-Speed Train Project” (Section 106 PA) (Authority and FRA 2011b) (Appendix E). The HPSR also assists the Authority and FRA to comply with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, as they pertain to historical resources, for this project.

PAGE 2-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The purpose of this HPSR is (1) to present the APE for archaeology and historic architectural resources for the project, (2) to identify known and potential historic properties within that APE, and (3) to present the historic status and the findings of evaluations of significance of the historic properties identified within the APE. A separate document called the Historic Architectural Survey Report (HASR) has been prepared to document historic architectural resources that are not listed in and do not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), but that must be evaluated to fulfill Section 106 and CEQA obligations. Similarly, a separate document called the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) has been prepared to document archaeological inventory efforts and archaeological properties that do not appear to be eligible for the NRHP. This HPSR (as well as the HASR and ASR) will be submitted to the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review. The SHPO will review and evaluate the adequacy of the APEs and the identification and evaluation findings of the studies. To facilitate review by the appropriate individual, many of the sections within this report are divided into separate subsections for archaeological resources and historic architectural resources. Upon SHPO concurrence with the eligibility determinations, future documents will present the findings of the effects analysis and propose appropriate mitigation for any adverse effects to historic properties that are identified in a Findings of Effect report. The results of these studies will be used as the basis for the identification of cultural resources in the EIR/EIS that is being prepared for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the HST system.

2.3

Archaeological Resources

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 2-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

2.4

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historic Architectural Resources

The APE for historic architectural resources is described in Section 1.5.2 and shown in Appendix A-2; the tables in Chapters 6 and 7 indicate the map identification numbers for the historic architectural resources inventoried and evaluated in this study. The tables in Sections 6 and 7 also cross-reference the map identification numbers to assessor parcel numbers (APNs). The evaluations are presented on DPR 523 forms, DPR 523 Update forms for resources determined eligible more than 5 years ago, and other recordation forms prepared for previous studies (Appendix C). The remainder of this summary outlines the conclusions of the inventory and evaluation of historic architectural resources in the APE for the project. The APE for historic architectural resources for this project contains a survey population of 52 properties containing buildings, structures, or objects that are either known historic properties (identified by previous studies) or require inventory and evaluation because they had not been previously evaluated. The survey population resources are in Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties and were constructed in or before 1960. This HPSR assists in achieving project compliance with Section 106 by soliciting SHPO concurrence with the findings of the inventory and evaluation of these resources. Of the 52 historic architectural resources addressed in this survey, 5 were previously listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR. This HPSR evaluated the remaining 47 properties under NRHP and CRHR criteria. A summary of the findings for the historic architectural resources addressed in this HPSR is as follows (definitions of the status codes are provided in Appendix D): 

Four (4) properties are listed in the NRHP (Status Code 1) and CRHR.



One (1) property was previously determined eligible for listing in the NRHP (Status Code 2).



Nine (9) properties appeared to be eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR as identified in previous studies (Status Code 3).



Eleven (11) properties appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR (Status Code 3) as part of the current survey.



Twenty-seven (27) properties were previously identified and/or listed in a local register (Status Code 5 or 3C) and although they retain their local status, after evaluation for this project they do not appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP (Status Code 6).

Therefore, of the 52 historic architectural resources surveyed in the APE, 25 historic properties were listed in, have been determined eligible for listing in, or appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP. All historic architectural resources were also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)– (3) of the CEQA Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. All of the 52 historic architectural resources surveyed are historical resources for the purposes of CEQA, and 27 are historical resources for CEQA only (i.e., are not eligible for the NRHP). This number includes the resources that are listed in the CRHR, eligible for listing in the CRHR, or meet other standards as historical resources, as per Section 15064.5(a)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines. The historic architectural resources that met the Section 106 PA definition of streamlined documentation properties and those that required evaluation but were not likely to be found

PAGE 2-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR were surveyed and presented as part of the HASR submittal for this project.

PAGE 2-4

Chapter 3 Consulting Parties, Public Participation

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

3.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Consulting Parties, Public Participation

The Section 106 PA sets forth the procedures for public participation and involvement in the Section 106 process for the project. The public, local agencies, and other interested parties have the opportunity to comment on the findings of the historic properties surveys at public meetings and through review of the Draft and Final EIS/EIR documents (see Appendix E for a copy of the Section 106 PA, Section V). Consulting parties, who may include other federal, state, regional, or local agencies that may have responsibilities for historic properties and may want to review reports and findings for an undertaking within their jurisdiction, shall be invited to participate in undertakings covered by the Section 106 PA (Section V, Part B). A letter regarding this project was sent to parties potentially interested in historic architectural resources. The recipients, listed in Section 3.1, include such interested parties as area planning agencies; local government planning departments; and/or historic preservation programs, historical societies, and museums, in compliance with the consultation requirements of NHPA and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800). Copies of the letter, the responses received, and any other correspondence related to historic architectural resources are provided in Appendix B. All future correspondence submitted and received will be included in any future revision of this HPSR. Five responses have been received to date; these responses are summarized in Table 3.0-1. Moreover, future consultation with these entities and local government agencies regarding historic properties will be included herein. Table 3.0-1 Responses Received from Letter Sent to Parties Potentially Interested in Historic Architectural Resources Summary of Response Received

Related Action Reported In This HPSR

[not provided in Fresno abridged version] Fresno County Historic Landmarks and Records Commission indicates that the HST route passes through Fresno’s “warehouse district.” The commission also responded that the mapping provided with the letter did not include enough detail to determine the proximity of historic properties to the project or its proposed facilities.

Possible contributors to the warehouse district in Fresno were subject to intensive-level survey and evaluation by project QIs. See Appendix C for multiple DPR 523 forms, such as Reference #46619507 or #46619604.

[not provided in Fresno abridged version] The Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Historic Preservation Project Manager requested to review the Fresno portion of the HST historic architectural resources survey. Respondent noted that five known Fresno historic landmarks and as-yet-unidentified historic properties may be in the project APE. Also noted a potential resource and general area known as Fresno’s Chinatown that may be intersected by the project. Ground-disturbing activities for the project will require archaeological study.

All local landmarks, possible contributors to the potential Chinatown district, and any other historic architectural resources within the APE that were 50 years old or older, including those mentioned in this response letter, were subject to intensive-level survey by project QIs. See Appendix C for multiple DPR 523 forms, such as Reference #46707101 or #46707102.

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 3-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 3.0-1 Responses Received from Letter Sent to Parties Potentially Interested in Historic Architectural Resources Summary of Response Received

3.1

Related Action Reported In This HPSR

Historic Architectural Resources: Interested Parties

Fresno County: Fresno City & County Historical Society 7160 West Kearney Boulevard Fresno, CA 93706 City of Fresno Historic Preservation Program 2600 Fresno Street, Third Floor Fresno, CA 93721 Fresno County Landmarks and Records Advisory Commission Fresno County Library 2420 Mariposa Fresno, CA 93721

Clovis-Big Dry Creek Historical Society, Clovis Museum 401 Pollasky Avenue Clovis, CA 93612 Meux Home Museum P.O. Box 70 Fresno, CA 93707 Reedley Historical Society & Museum P.O. Box 877 Reedley, CA 93654 Society for California Archaeology Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fresno 5245 N. Backer Avenue M/S Fresno, CA 93740

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

3.2

Native American Consultation

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 3-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

This page intentionally left blank

PAGE 3-2

Chapter 4 Summary of Identification Effort

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

4.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Summary of Identification Effort

This chapter describes the inventory and field methods employed, the methods to characterize historic context and previously recorded historic properties, and involvement of the public, including Native American groups and individuals. The methods outlined here represent the implementation of the Fresno-Bakersfield Archaeological Identification and Evaluation Plan and the Fresno-Bakersfield Historic Architecture Identification and Evaluation Plan (Authority and FRA 2011c, 2011d), which were submitted to and approved by the Project Management Team and the Authority. Relevant aspects of the Section 106 PA were incorporated into both inventory and evaluation plans, and were also implemented during the course of the identification effort.

4.1

Archaeological Resources

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.1

Background Literature Review

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.2

Records Search

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.3

Survey Methods and Implementation

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.4

Framework for Identifying Archaeological Properties

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.5

Summary of Native American Communication

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

4.1.6

Traditional Cultural Properties

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 4-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

4.2

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historic Architectural Resources

Historic architectural resources consist of buildings, structures, and/or objects. These resources can exist singly or as part of a larger district, system, or historic cultural landscape. In addition to buildings, these resources can include engineering features (e.g., dams, canals, railroads) and objects, such as a statue, gatepost, or fountain. When historic architectural resources appear eligible for listing, are determined eligible for listing, or have been listed in the NRHP, they are called historic properties. CEQA and the CEQA guidelines use the term historical resources for these properties and for resources eligible for the CRHR. For the purposes of this report, which will be summarized in the EIS/EIR for the project, the term historic properties will be used to refer to historic architectural resources that are listed, determined eligible for, or that appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP, and the term historical resources will be used for those eligible for or listed in the CRHR only. The term historic architectural resources will apply generically to these resources regardless of historic status.

4.2.1

Known Historic Properties and Previous Surveys

Architectural historians meeting the professional qualifications of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural History and meeting the definition of QI, as per the Section 106 PA, conducted the identification and evaluation of historic architectural resources for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the HST. As discussed in Section 4.1.2, URS Corporation conducted records searches for this project at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center; URS shared the relevant results regarding historic architectural resources with JRP. All previously recorded resources and previous surveys within a 1.25-mile (2.01-kilometer) radius of the HST alternative alignments were digitized. The following references were also reviewed for built environment resources:       

National Register of Historic Places – Listed Properties and Determined Eligible Properties Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data Files for Kern, Kings, Tulare, and Madera Counties (OHP 2009). California Inventory of Historic Resources (OHP 1976). California Points of Historical Interest (OHP 1992). California Historical Landmarks (OHP [1990] 1995). Sanborn Maps in urban areas. Historic USGS quadrangles.

The Information Center did not have many historic architectural resources in its files that are located within the record search area. In total, the records search identified only 11 historic architectural resources in the search area, which was a 500-foot (152-meter) radius around the centerline of the current alignment. Of these 11 resources, only 1 was listed in the NRHP: the Shafter Railroad Depot, in Kern County. The other historic properties identified in the records search were three canals found locally eligible and a State Historic Landmark marker. The six other resources identified in the search results had been found to be not eligible for listing in the NRHP, had been destroyed, or had not been fully evaluated. Those not fully evaluated were added to the HPSR survey population. Due to the scope and magnitude of the proposed project, the historical context of the project corridor vicinity, and the limited results of the information center records search, extensive field survey and background research was undertaken to thoroughly identify historic architectural resources within the APE. The project QIs noted any additional potential historic architectural resources during fieldwork, reviewed local registers and lists of historic properties while conducting research in local repositories, and consulted with local government planning staff to

PAGE 4-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

thoroughly account for previously identified historic properties and include them in the HPSR survey population.

4.2.2

Field and Research Methods

Project QIs conducted all intensive-level field survey and field research for preparation of this draft HPSR during the period from March to May 2010 and from March through July 2011. Consistent with the Section 106 PA and the Fresno-Bakersfield Historic Architecture Identification and Evaluation Plan (Authority and FRA 2011d), JRP conducted an intensive-level survey of 52 known historic properties and historic architectural resources that were 50 years of age or older at the time of the survey within the APE. All field surveys and inventories were conducted from public thoroughfares, except in cases where the property owners were contacted and agreed to provide entry to properties not adequately visible from a public thoroughfare. Access was arranged in the manner specified in the project protocol for such contact, and the inventory was completed. Once the historic architectural resources APE was defined (see Section 1.5.2), JRP staff began fieldwork with a reconnaissance-level survey of the area to account for all buildings, structures, and objects found within the APE. This reconnaissance-level survey took into account known resources (see above) and identified any additional resources that would require survey for the HPSR, including previously identified historic architectural resources that did not appear in the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center search results or properties that appeared to be potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR. These known resources and potentially eligible properties became the survey population for this HPSR and were then subject to intensive-level surveys. (Properties that met the Section 106 PA criteria for streamlined documentation properties and those that required evaluation but were not likely to be eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR are addressed in the HASR submittal for this project.) JRP conducted field research in conjunction with the reconnaissance-level survey and refined and redirected research efforts in accordance with the results of that survey. JRP then continued property-specific research once identification of the intensive-level survey population was complete. To confirm specific construction dates and to narrow estimated dates of construction, background research was done through First American Real Estate Solutions commercial database and through review of historic plat maps and current USGS topographic maps, county assessor records, historic aerial photographs, and other documents. This field reconnaissance and preliminary research helped to determine which resources were built in or before 1960. The historical overview presented in this report and the property-specific research conducted for the significance evaluations were based on a wide range of primary and secondary material gathered by JRP historians and architectural historians. Research on the historic themes and survey population was conducted in both archival and published records, including but not limited to, the Kern County Museum (Bakersfield); the Beale Memorial Library (Bakersfield); the Fresno Historic Preservation Program, Fresno Planning Office; California State University, Fresno, Special Collections; Fresno County Historical Society; Kings County Assessor; Tulare County Assessor; Kern County Assessor and Recorder; California Geological Survey Library; California State Archives and Library; Bancroft Library (University of California, Berkeley); Shields Library (University of California, Davis); Burris Park Museum Archive (Hanford); maps and plans obtained from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 6 (Fresno); and the Caltrans Transportation Library and History Center (Sacramento). JRP also reviewed CHRIS, California Historical Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest publications and updates, the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, and local register listings. In addition, JRP used published and digital versions of U.S. Census Bureau information, including population (U.S. Census Bureau 1850–1930) and agricultural schedules (U.S. Census Bureau 1850-1880).

PAGE 4-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Additionally, project QIs reviewed previous cultural resources reports, historic-period maps, aerial photography, local and state historical resources lists, and city directories. Lastly, a review of the Caltrans “Historic Bridge Inventory” (Caltrans 2006) identified 39 state-owned highway bridges within the project limits; however, all are listed as Category 5 (not eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR).

PAGE 4-4

Chapter 5 Historic Context

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

5.0

Historic Context

5.1

Natural Setting

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The study area for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the California HST system is at the southern end of California’s San Joaquin Valley. The San Joaquin Valley is bounded by the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta to the north, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Coast Ranges to the west. The western slope of the Sierra Nevada is the source for the rivers and streams that cross the San Joaquin Valley (Gronberg et al. 1998). The San Joaquin Valley is divided into two hydrologic sub-basins: (1) the San Joaquin Sub-basin to the north and (2) the Tulare Sub-basin to the south. Rivers of the San Joaquin Subbasin join the San Joaquin River as it drains into the Sacramento River, which flows into San Francisco Bay. The rivers of the Tulare Sub-basin, from the Kings River south, have no natural perennial surface outlet, and in the past they formed large, shallow, semi-permanent inland lakes. Only in years of exceptional rainfall did water cross the divide and enter the San Joaquin Sub-basin. Today, the climate in the region is characterized by hot, dry summers with insignificant rainfall and comparatively mild winters, with precipitation ranging from meager to moderately heavy (Durrenberger and Johnson 1976:17, 29–31, 37; Harding 1960:4–5; Haslam 1993: 257–258). This combination of landform and climate has greatly influenced land use and development patterns in the region.

[remainder of section not provided in Fresno abridged version]

5.2

Prehistoric Setting

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 5-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Figure 5-1 Historic natural vegetation and hydrology

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 5-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

11x17 back

PAGE 5-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

5.2.1

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Early Holocene (12,000 to 7000 B.P.; 10,000 to 5000 B.C.)

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

5.2.2

Middle Holocene (7000 to 4000 B.P.; 5000 to 2000 B.C.).

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

5.2.3

Late Holocene (4000 B.P. to 150 B.P.; 2000 B.C. to A.D. 1850)

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

5.2.4

Ethnographic Setting

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 5-4

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

5.3

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historic-Era Setting

Irrigation and transportation systems were the two principal factors in the historic-era development of the region in which the Fresno to Bakersfield Section is situated. This region had advantageous environmental conditions but was sparsely inhabited before California statehood. The California Gold Rush in the mid-nineteenth-century initially stimulated economic development and settlement, but it was the advent of irrigated agriculture and the arrival of the first railroad in the 1870s that profoundly reshaped the existing setting to promote agricultural and municipal growth. Subsequent events and trends beginning at the turn of the twentieth century—the rise of oil production in Kern County, federal-state water development projects in the Central Valley, and widespread adoption of the automobile and ensuing highway construction—largely amplified and extended the development initially brought to the region of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section in the late nineteenth century. These themes are discussed below to provide the appropriate context within which the resources of the survey population are evaluated for historic significance.

5.3.1

The Spanish and Mexican Periods

Despite its rich soils and generally favorable weather, the San Joaquin Valley was little settled before the Gold Rush. By the eighteenth century, after more than two centuries of exploring the California coast, the Spanish had established a significant presence in the future state; however, that presence was largely confined to settlements on the coast and in nearby valleys. Several Spanish explorers eventually forayed into the San Joaquin Valley in the late-eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries to find sites for additional missions, but no permanent settlements resulted from their efforts. Spanish army officer Gabriel Moraga conducted the most extensive expeditions in the early 1800s. In 1806, Moraga led a group of 25 soldiers from Mission San Bautista across the San Joaquin River near the present-day boundary between Merced and Fresno counties and then north to the Mokelumne River (which Moraga named). The expedition’s return route skirted the eastern side of the valley to Tejon Pass. Two years later, traveling from San Jose, Moraga entered the valley once more. He crossed the San Joaquin River and proceeded as far south as the Merced River (Bean and Rawls 1983:25, 31–34, 40–41, 53; Rice, et al. 1988:46, 87–95; Durrenberger and Johnson 1976:53; Jelinek [1979] 1982:11–22; Beck and Haase 1974:15–16, 20–22; Hayes 2007:40, 42, 46,58–59; Clough 1985:12–13). Little settlement occurred within the San Joaquin Valley during the Mexican period (1820s to 1840s). For the most part, after its successful bid for independence from Spain in 1822, Mexico found itself in the position of defending what California settlements it had from native raiding. A cycle of raids and reprisals across the coastal mountains continued until the mid-1840s, when non-Mexican, primarily American, settlers took up permanent residence in the San Joaquin Valley and aggressively suppressed native raiding (Beck and Haase 1974:21–23; Broadbent 1974:89, 96–97; Cook 1976:229–232; Fountain 2007:80–119; Preston 1981:54–55). The only Mexican-era land grant intersected by the Fresno to Bakersfield Section is the Rancho Laguna de Tache, which stretched for miles along the northern bank of the Kings River south of present-day Kingsburg and westward toward Riverdale. Grantee Manuel Castro ran cattle on the property and established a bunkhouse for his foreman and vaqueros west of Laton. The bunkhouse was well to the west of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. Rancho Laguna de Tache, which persisted for several decades, was among the few Mexican-owned land grants confirmed by the U.S. District Court, but the rancho was acquired by land development interests in the 1890s, subdivided, and sold. Its lands were the site of extensive irrigation activities by the turn of

PAGE 5-5

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

the twentieth century. Although the Fresno to Bakersfield Section transects the former rancho, no historic architectural resources from this period survive within the APE (Perez 1996:71; Preston 1981:54–55; Roberts 2005:36–37; Mead 1901:308–310). Mexican rule in California came to an end in 1847, when forces of the United States military seized the territory during the Mexican-American War. By this time, almost half of the non-Indian inhabitants of California were Americans who had settled in either coastal towns or, more commonly, established farmsteads in the upper Sacramento Valley, away from Mexican control (Bean and Rawls 1983: 76–82). The absence of settlement in the Central Valley during the Spanish and Mexican periods resulted in fairly low demand for extensive roads and other infrastructure. Neither the Spanish nor the Mexicans had public systems of road construction and maintenance and most trade was conducted by sea; inland travelers either made use of native trails or cut their own. Nevertheless, two important routes took shape beginning in the Spanish period: El Camino Real, which ran along the California coast, and El Camino Viejo. Less well known than the coastal route, El Camino Viejo traversed north-south through the length of the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. This route connected what became Los Angeles to the Central Valley and eastern San Francisco Bay Area. The trail descended through San Emigdio Canyon into the southwestern corner of the San Joaquin Valley. From there it skirted the eastern slopes of the Coastal Ranges, leaving the valley through Patterson Pass southwest of Tracy. El Camino Viejo became popular as a cattle and sheep trail from southern California to San Francisco from 1849 to the 1880s. The historic route is west of and outside the APE for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section (Cleland 1941; Latta 1932; Owens 1990:8–10).

5.3.2

Initial American Settlement and Travel in the Wake of the Gold Rush

In the wake of the California Gold Rush, the trickle of immigration into California that began before the Mexican War became a torrent. Besides the well-known mining towns that sprang into existence from Humboldt County in the north to Kern County in the south, other communities farther from the gold fields also experienced enormous growth. San Francisco was one of these “instant cities,” but so too were Sacramento and Stockton, which served as supply and shipping centers for the foothill mining districts. These towns and settlements initially fed by the economic fuel of the Gold Rush ultimately demonstrated commercial, industrial, and political reasons for surviving the mining boom (Barth 1975: passim; Bean and Rawls 1983:84–96; Hoover et al. 1966:14–15; Shinn 1885). The effects of the Gold Rush and emigration to the new state of California were slower to realize in the upper and lower Central Valley, where development was generally more gradual than in urban and coastal areas, partly because of the absence of efficient transportation systems but also because of the concentration of vast tracts of land in the hands of a few. Until the arrival of the railroad in the valley in the 1870s, travelers relied on existing trails and roads—El Camino Viejo, in particular—supplemented by a few new wagon and stage roads and ferries and bridges built during the mid-nineteenth century. The first wagon road followed old Indian trails below the Sierra Foothills along the eastern side of the valley, east of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, with many laterals branching off to the gold mines in the mountains. This general route, which became known as the Los Angeles–Stockton Road, was surveyed by Lieutenant George Derby in the spring of 1850. In the years following, several important ferries and bridges were established on the principal rivers of the valley to assist wagon and stage travel: Gordon’s Ferry (1852) on the Kern River; Payne’s Ferry (1851) on the Kaweah River; Whitmore’s Ferry (1855) on the lower Kings River; Pool’s Ferry (1851) and

PAGE 5-6

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Smith’s Ferry (1855) on the upper Kings River; and two crossings on the San Joaquin River, one at Brackman’s on the Lower Detour and the other at Jones’ Ferry on the Upper Detour. John Butterfield, founder of the American Express Company and a veteran of staging operations in the East, established the first transcontinental mail service from St. Louis to San Francisco in 1858 utilizing large portions of the Los Angeles–Stockton Road. The Butterfield route through the eastern San Joaquin Valley deviated little from the Los Angeles–Stockton Road as far north as the current site of Fresno. However, at that point, the route veered westward across the valley, over Pacheco Pass, and through Gilroy and San Jose en route to San Francisco. Congress voted to discontinue mail service over this southern route in 1861 and transfer it to a more central route (Conkling 1947:passim; Preston 1981:72–73; Moehring 2004:29). Regardless of the means by which travelers moved across the San Joaquin Valley, the valley itself was predominately grazing lands and wheat fields in the mid nineteenth century—the product of early monopolization of vast tracts of land. Land speculators, stockmen, and ranchers benefited from minimal government oversight and used liberal state and federal land laws to acquire large amounts of public land within the valley. Henry Miller, Charles Lux, and Solomon Jewett, along with speculators and developers such as James B. Haggin, Lloyd Tevis, and William S. Chapman, led this mass acquisition and in many instances came to dominate the physical and social structure of the region. Their holdings, which included acreage in and near the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, had a character of their own: typically absentee ownership, seasonal labor demands, no crop rotation, employment of dry-farming methods, and speculative returns from an unstable international wheat market (Gates 1975:158–178; Jelinek [1979] 1982:23–38; Thickens 1946a:18–19; Zonlight 1979:6–12). The California Gold Rush and subsequent emigration stimulated commerce, agriculture, manufacturing, lumbering, and countless other economic pursuits statewide. In the middle decades of the nineteenth century, a scattered network of small towns, serving both travelers and agriculturalists, began to arise throughout the San Joaquin Valley. The most notable community south of Stockton was Visalia, founded in 1852. Within 15 years, Bakersfield—at the southern end of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section—emerged as a thriving town in its own right (Moehring 2004:29).

5.3.3

The Advent and Growth of Irrigated Agriculture

Central to the development of the entire Fresno to Bakersfield Section was the transformation of the San Joaquin Valley into a remarkably successful agricultural region. That transformation began with the establishment of irrigation systems that expanded the zone of cultivation beyond nearby riverbanks to eventually bring vast areas of otherwise arid land into production and make specialty agriculture possible. Expansion and diversification of agriculture worked in concert with railroad development, particularly after completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869 and the construction of the first rail line through the valley itself in the early 1870s, which provided access to Midwestern and Eastern markets for San Joaquin Valley produce. The broader demand for the valley’s agricultural output and access to rail transportation increased the importance of existing communities, such as Bakersfield, and ushered into existence numerous other towns and communities within and along the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. The San Joaquin Valley was among the first areas in California that Americans irrigated. The first irrigation ditches in the valley were built by farmers in the Visalia area, east of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, and other early diversions were from the Merced River, farther to the north. Diversions in and near the corridor date to the late 1850s; the diversions were built by a wide variety of private and public entities. Private organizations—commercial irrigation companies, land colonies, and mutual water companies—led water development diversion projects in the 1860s, 1870s, and early 1880s. Between 1873 and 1878 the Peoples Ditch Company formed and built a canal to bring irrigation water from the Kings River southward through the Mussel Slough

PAGE 5-7

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

2

district. Other water diversion projects, such as the Lower Kings River Ditch, Last Chance Ditch, Settlers Ditch, and Lakeside Ditch, all became points of contention between settlers in the Mussel Slough region and representatives of Southern Pacific Railroad. By the late 1880s, public organizations including irrigation districts, county water districts, and later water storage districts, assumed a greater role in designing, building, and administering irrigation systems in the San Joaquin Valley (Adams 1929:204; Harding 1960:83–90; JRP 2000:19–24). Initially, ranching and dry-farmed wheat cultivation dominated other forms of agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley and these two land use interests often conflicted. Bonanza wheat production in the 1870s spurred changes in the law, and in 1873 the California State Legislature enacted the “No Fence Law,” which led to the ascendancy of diversified agriculture over ranching. With this law, farmers were no longer obligated to put up fences to keep roaming livestock out of their crops and any crop destruction became the responsibility of the rancher who owned the offending livestock. The passage of this legislation also reflected the transition of rural California from a pastoral economy toward a commercial agricultural economy. Although the wheat boom soon faded, irrigated agriculture emerged in its wake and brought with it irrigation-dependent products, such as deciduous fruits, alfalfa, and citrus, among others (Tinkham 1923:203–206; Harding 1960:90–93). Throughout the Central Valley and within the area of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, many types of organized efforts advanced irrigated agriculture during the late-nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries, including privately controlled land colonies, mutual water companies, irrigation districts, and water storage districts. Land colonies are considered to have been among the more innovative methods of irrigation and land development of the period. These colonies were tracts of subdivided irrigable land wherein water delivery canals were often built in advance of settlement to service blocks of small-scale family-farm units suitable for growing fruit orchards, vegetables, and vineyards. Colony developers marketed the tracts to prospective buyers nationwide, selling small, roughly 10- to 20-acre farm plots, each supplied with irrigation. Sometimes the colony owners directed their sales effort to specific groups with common theologies or, more often, to residents of a certain geographical area, particularly from the Midwest. Bernhard Marks, in partnership with landowner William Chapman, developed the Central California Colony in 1875—the first successful colony in the Fresno area—on a 6-square-mile (9.7 km2) plot adjacent to the Fresno to Bakersfield Section (Figure 5-2) (Thickens 1946a:26–35; JRP 2000:12–15). In addition to the Central California Colony, other similar colonies were created in the late 1870s and early 1880s in areas that are partially in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. These other colonies included the Washington Irrigated Colony, south of and next to the Central California Colony; the Fresno Colony, north of and next to the Central California Colony; and the Malaga Colony, founded by G. G. Briggs, a Yolo County orchardist and grape grower. Colony development was particularly successful in the vicinity of Fresno, a town platted by the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1872 (discussed in greater detail below), but was also used elsewhere in the valley, including Merced and Kern counties. Indeed, many of the colonies were established on land owned by the railroad along or near the line, and the water was delivered from local streams in canals to the place of use, often many miles distant (Adams 1929:204; Clough 1985:121–180; Clough et al. 1986:169; Elliott & Co. 1882 [1973]:102, 103, 212; Thickens 2

The Peoples Ditch and East Branch Peoples Ditch in Kings County, which pass through the APE, appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP under Criterion A and the CRHR (Criterion 1) at the state level of significance because of their association with the pioneer settlement patterns of Mussel Slough in the 1870s and because of their association with the events that led to the Mussel Slough Tragedy. See Appendix C for the DPR 523 form for these properties.

PAGE 5-8

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

1946a:18–19, 22–23, 32–35, 169–177; Thickens 1946b:171–172; Vandor 1919:168; Willison 1980:84, 1875 map). Wendell Easton, J.P. Whitney, and A.T. Covell established the Washington Colony in 1878 by subdividing about 7,700 acres (31 km2) of land 8 miles (13 km) south of Fresno into small farm lots. (The Fresno to Bakersfield Section passes through former colony land.) The colony organizers invested heavily in advertising across the country, as well as in Europe and Australia, to promote the endeavor, but initially failed to sell even 1 acre. Although the organizers persisted and convinced five people to visit the colony, only three ended up buying lots. The organizers were undeterred and advertised that 60% of prospective buyers purchased lots. By the late 1880s, the Washington Colony lots did begin to sell, as did those in the neighboring Central California Colony. Washington Colony organizers purchased water rights from the Fresno Canal Company, and each buyer into the colony was guaranteed water, which allowed colony residents 3 to lay out large farms and vineyards (Harvey 1907; Thickens 1946a:32–35; Thompson 1891).

Source: Thickens 1946a

Figure 5-2 Land colonies in the vicinity of Fresno Settlers in these land colonies aspired to achieve an idyllic, homogeneous, rural culture, but vineyard and orchard agriculture in California differed from the family farms of the Midwest. 3

The Washington and Oleander canals of the Washington Colony were found eligible for the NRHP by a previous survey and were also field-checked as part of the present survey. DPR523 forms for the canals are provided in Appendix C.

PAGE 5-9

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historian David Vaught has described this manner of agriculture as “specialized, market-oriented, labor-intensive farming.” The principal early crop of the colonies in this area was grapes, marketed as raisins. The raisin crop thrived in the San Joaquin Valley climate, which led to overproduction and sinking prices. To control prices and market their product nationally, local growers organized and formed the California Raisin Growers Association in the late 1890s to help ensure a measure of economic stability. Vineyard and orchard agriculture also required large amounts of low-wage labor for short periods of time throughout the year. Waves of transient workers flooded into the communities to answer this need. Many were recent immigrants to the United States, including Armenians, Italians, Chinese, Portuguese, and in the early twentieth century, Japanese and Mexicans. Permanent residents often saw these non-Anglo peoples as a disruption of their vision of an ideal community, and prejudice and violence against the workers were common. Adequate farm labor housing, low wages, and harsh working conditions were common labor problems arising in the orchards and vineyards during the early twentieth century. Although these issues ultimately led to farm labor union organization and government regulation, conditions for farm workers in the San Joaquin Valley continued to be poor and labor unrest would continue into the modern era (Vaught 1999:1, 20-25, 53–56, 94, 70–75, 78, 98, 184–186). Land development companies and land colonies also played a role in the agricultural development of the Bakersfield area, in the southern portion of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. The efforts of one company in particular were notable—the Kern County Land Company (KCL). In 1890, before organizing the Kern County Canal and Water Company, James B. Haggin and Lloyd Tevis formed KCL to attract settlers and investors to the land they had recently irrigated and wanted to sell. Although Haggin eventually sold most of his land to KCL and moved to the East, Tevis and his family remained the driving force in the company through the end of the nineteenth century. KCL used the colony concept to market its lands, breaking it into large subdivisions of small farms (i.e., colonies). The colony farms were further subdivided and sold to settlers as 20acre lots for $60 to $100 an acre. As this form of land and agricultural development began to fade in the early 1900s, the continually resourceful KCL turned toward managing commercial agricultural production on its still considerable land base. For the next 50 years, the company operated a number of farms, raising both cattle and crops, and prospered from the San Joaquin Valley’s growing role as the nation’s breadbasket. The company also reaped the benefits of the discovery of abundant oil reserves on its landholdings, particularly the discovery of the Fruitvale Oil Field in and around northwest Bakersfield in the late 1920s. (This area of this oil field is transected by the Fresno to Bakersfield Section.). By the time drillers struck oil on KCL land, the first oil discoveries in western Kern County in the late nineteenth century had become a key regional industry (Baker 1989; Bakersfield Californian 1968a, 1968b; Berg 1971:1, 34-35; Morgan 1914: 175–176; Taylor 1954:42–45). In the 1890s, the Kern County Canal and Water Company—a subsidiary of Haggin and Tevis’s earlier company, KCL—consolidated its interests and companies into a single unit. Many of the canals of the various irrigating and farming entities were intertwined with one another, and priority in diversions was shifted as conditions warranted. By the second decade of the twentieth century, the Kern County Canal and Water Company owned or controlled more than 17 canals or canal companies in and around Bakersfield. At this time, one of the principal irrigated crops produced in Kern County was alfalfa. Orchard crops and vineyards accounted for a portion of agricultural production in the first decades of the twentieth century, but challenges arising from water shortages, market conditions, and expensive infrastructure costs undermined the widespread development of these crops in Kern County. The crop that rose to prominence in this area was cotton. Since the 1920s, and particularly after the Second World War, cotton has been the principal crop of the region (Baldwin 1916:41; Benson n.d.:88–90; Morgan 1914:148–152; Berg 1971:43).

PAGE 5-10

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Although KCL was the dominant developer in the Bakersfield area, large land companies were not the only ones to invest and sell land in the region, or within the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. For example, local farmer John T. Basye established the Virginia Colony, a subdivision east of Bakersfield in the 1890s. He and his wife, Katherine, moved to Bakersfield from Virginia in 1880, and he apparently invested in the Virginia Colony at that time. In March 1893, a tract map of the colony was filed with the Kern County Recorder (Bakersfield Californian 1944b; Kern County Recorder 1893; U.S. Bureau of Land Management 1893). New streets sited in the Virginia Colony were given names associated with Basye’s home state—Potomac, Washington, Quantico, Jefferson, Virginia, and Mt. Vernon. It does not appear that the lots were served by a private irrigation system, so this “colony” was developed more as a rural residential subdivision rather than as a typical San Joaquin Valley land colony. The majority of the colony tract was subdivided into 5-acre parcels, and by the turn of the twentieth century most early property owners in the Virginia Colony owned more than one lot (Randall and Denne 1901). The Virginia Colony remained rural and sparsely populated in the first decades of the twentieth century, with only a small re-subdivision of its eastern side called the Kern Citrus Home Sites subdivision (Kern County Recorder 1928). Bakersfield and its surrounding areas expanded after the Second World War, but the Virginia Colony has never been incorporated into the City of Bakersfield, and much of it remains sparsely developed to this day (Bakersfield Californian 1944a, 1944b; Kern County Recorder 1893). Although small farms and small residential developments co-existed with larger enterprises, KCL and other agri-business operations became the norm in the San Joaquin Valley, encouraged by concentration on a few key crops, particularly the cultivation of cotton. The commercial cotton industry in California originated in Kern County after the U.S. Department of Agriculture sent specialist Wofford B. “Bill” Camp to California to investigate its suitability for growing long-staple cotton during the First World War. Camp was a native of South Carolina, the nation’s leading cotton producer, where cotton crops had been infected with boll weevils in 1915. Camp arrived in Kern County in 1917 and his successful experimental cotton crops soon caught the attention of local farmers. Between 1,000 and 2,000 acres (4 to 8 km2) of cotton were planted in Kern County the following year, and the amount increased dramatically each year thereafter to ultimately top 1 million acres (4,000 km2) in the San Joaquin Valley. Camp continued to work to educate farmers on ways to grow cotton in the valley region even as the demand for long-staple cotton dropped after the First World War. Camp discovered that Acala cotton was better suited to the valley climate and encouraged the U.S. Department of Agriculture to open a cotton research station to study the variety and support the new industry in California. The department opened the station near Shafter in 1921 on land leased for $1 per year from KCL, with additional funding from Kern County. Within a few years, at Camp’s urging, the California legislature passed an ordinance prohibiting the cultivation of non-Acala cotton varieties in the San Joaquin Valley because cross-pollination crops resulted in an inferior crop yield. Acala completely dominated the San Joaquin Valley cotton industry for the next 60 years, before being overtaken by the Pima cotton varieties (Bakersfield Californian 1975; Cline 2007; Pomeroy 1957; U.S. Cotton Field Station 1959:1; USDA 2009). Beyond the land colony system, irrigation districts did much to advance the growth of agriculture in and around the area of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section. Irrigation districts emerged in the late 1880s out of the conflicts between riparian and appropriative water users in the San Joaquin Valley that culminated in the landmark California Supreme Court decision in Lux v. Haggin. This case pitted Kern River water user Charles Lux, co-owner of the Miller and Lux cattle company, against Haggin, founder of the Kern Valley Land and Water Company, one of several water companies operating in the Bakersfield area in the 1880s. In its 1886 decision, the California Supreme Court upheld the right of riparian water users, such as Lux, whose property bordered

PAGE 5-11

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

the water source, over the right of appropriative water users, such as Haggin, who tapped the water source to bring water to lands not adjacent to the source via canals. Faced with this decision, irrigation supporters looked to the state legislature to secure the power they needed to undertake irrigation development without continuing to be undercut by riparian water right holders. The result was the passage of the Wright Act in 1887, which authorized the creation of quasi-governmental entities known as irrigation districts. Irrigation districts functioned much like municipalities, with the power to issue bonds, condemn property, levy and collect taxes, and maintain and operate water diversion and distribution works. Although the Wright Act was not initially effective, the legislature amended the act several times in the years that followed, and these revisions spawned successful irrigation districts throughout the Central Valley and elsewhere in the state. These districts not only provided water for irrigation but also became municipal water and power providers (Hundley 2001:93–103; Jelinek [1979] 1982:47–60; JRP 2000:14–15; Preston 1981:136–137). Within the area of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, farmers and landowners organized irrigation districts in the early twentieth century, such as the Fresno Irrigation District, Consolidated Irrigation District, and Corcoran Irrigation District. The Fresno Irrigation District (FID) is the most northern of these, and by the late 1920s FID was the largest irrigation district diverting from Kings River, watering lands south of the San Joaquin River in Fresno County in the vicinity of the City of Fresno (Figure 5-3). Created in June 1920, FID assumed the water rights and canal system of the Fresno Canal and Land Corporation (previously the Fresno Canal and Irrigation

Source: Adams 1929,206

Figure 5-3 Fresno Irrigation District and Consolidated Irrigation District in 1929

PAGE 5-12

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Company). Private diversions from the Kings River to service FID lands had begun in the late 1860s, and by the 1890s diversions included the extensive series of canals built by the owners of Rancho Laguna de Tache. Within a decade of the organization of FID, it served a large area of land around Fresno in the northwestern part of the Kings River delta that extended as far north as the San Joaquin River. Crops grown in the district included raisins, deciduous fruits (apricots and peaches), alfalfa, cotton, melons, berries, citrus fruits, and grains (Adams 1929:204–209, Plate XXIV; Bonte 1930: 57). The Consolidated Irrigation District, which bordered FID to the south, was organized a little over a year after FID, in August 1921. The early history of the Consolidated Irrigation District mirrored that of FID. Championed by the Fresno County Farm Bureau, the district was successor to the water rights and canal system of a private water development company—in this case, Consolidated Canal Company, whose rights and system dated back to the late 1870s. The service area of the Consolidated Irrigation District included much of the land between the southern boundary of the FID and the Kings River, and its crops were similar: raisins, deciduous fruits, and alfalfa (Adams 1929:209–214, Plate XXIV; Bonte 1930:50). Farther south, surrounding the town of Corcoran in Kings County, was the Corcoran Irrigation District. Formed in 1919 by landowners east of Tulare Lake, the Corcoran Irrigation District was an effort—as state irrigation economist Frank Adams described it in 1929—“to gather up such scattered waters as are available and apply them to a fertile belt of land that thus far has not been very highly developed.” Although the district acquired the water rights and canal built by the Lake Canal and Irrigation Company and the Union Water and Ditch Company in 1903 and 1904, it was not until the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built the Pine Flat Reservoir in 1954 that it was able to obtain the water it needed to bring all of its lands into cultivation. As elsewhere in the Kings County and Kern County portions of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, crops in the district historically included alfalfa, cotton, and melons, and now also include pistachios, almonds, and tomatoes (Adams 1929:257–261, Plate XXVI; Bonte 1930:51; Cline 2007; USACE 1975:189– 190). Farmers beyond the reach of canal systems developed groundwater as a means of irrigation. The first use of groundwater for irrigation in California was from artesian wells, and in the early years of this practice flows could be secured from wells in the area between the Southern Pacific Railroad line and Tulare Lake Basin. By the 1880s, wells 300 feet deep had been dug or drilled west of Tulare, with flows upward of 800,000 gallons per day. Steam-powered pumps came into use during the next decade, beginning with groundwater pumping for irrigation near Lindsay, but remained relatively rare until electric service reached the valley from hydroelectric plants in the Kern River canyon. Pumping increased rapidly after 1910, when hydroelectric power became readily available. A significant overdraft of groundwater resulted, which retarded irrigation in areas without sufficient recharge sources until the Friant-Kern Canal was completed as part of the Central Valley Project and water deliveries began in the early 1950s (Davis et al. 1959; Fox 1905; Hunter 1905; JRP 2000:14–15; Mendenhall et al. 1908; Mendenhall 1916; Pisani 1984: 390–392). The character of irrigation systems varied in response to topography and geological conditions. The earliest irrigation systems in the Central Valley were constructed through alluvial soils where the rivers emerged from the foothills into the valley; the diversion lines in these systems were short and unlined to minimize construction difficulties. Later systems employed mountain storage reservoirs and lined and reinforced canal construction through hilly country that required bench cuts, fluming, retaining walls, siphons, and tunnels. The irrigation systems in the broad flat valley were of a different character. They usually consisted of earth canals with comparatively few unusual engineering structures. Valley irrigation systems commonly employed structures such as diversion weirs, regulators, check gates, lateral head gates, delivery gates, and bridges or culverts at roadways and railroad crossings. As with all utilities and infrastructure, the

PAGE 5-13

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

components of these systems have been improved, replaced, and altered over the succeeding decades (Moritz 1909:370, 1912:987; Etcheverry 1916:121–124; JRP 2000).

5.3.4

The Arrival of the Railroads

The expansive territory of California, its limited inland navigation and road systems, and its remoteness from the populous East made railroads vital to the state’s early economic development. Nowhere in California was this truer than in the Central Valley, where railroad construction, in concert with irrigation development, brought settlement, growth, and prosperity. In the years since statehood, some 200 railroads have been constructed and operated in California. The Fresno to Bakersfield Section parallels some of these railroads along its route through the San Joaquin Valley, including the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe (AT&SF) line (now owned by BNSF), and farther to the east the first rail line to enter the region, the Southern Pacific Railroad (now owned by UPRR). The Fresno to Bakersfield Section also parallels or crosses many smaller rail systems and branch and spur lines that feed into the main lines of the major railroad routes. The construction of the Southern Pacific Railroad southward through the Central Valley and into the San Joaquin Valley in the 1870s spurred development within the San Joaquin Valley, but the line is largely east of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section except in the cities of Fresno and Bakersfield. Much of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section parallels the AT&SF rail line, which did not reach into the valley until the late 1880s and 1890s. The railroad companies platted towns and established stations that spawned communities, several of which are situated in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, such as the city of Fresno and the city of Hanford (both established by Southern Pacific) and the AT&SF cities of Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter. Existing towns that the railroad bypassed struggled to survive and many dwindled away. Both the AT&SF and the Southern Pacific continued to add branch lines and to acquire competitors well into the twentieth century. Wheat was the main agricultural product shipped out of the San Joaquin Valley by the Southern Pacific in its first decade. The advent of irrigated agriculture in the 1880s and 1890s, coupled with the introduction of rail shipping in general and refrigerated rail cars in particular, encouraged the cultivation of more land and a greater diversity of specialty crops. Although wheat remained an important crop in California, farms along the various San Joaquin Valley rail lines produced a remarkable variety of commodities, including table grapes, raisins, stone fruits, almonds, pistachios, tomatoes, and cotton as well as dairy products and cattle (Jelinek [1979] 1982:57–58, 61–78; Preston 1981:121–163). The Southern Pacific Railroad was the first major railroad to build through the Central Valley. The company was the descendant of the Central Pacific Railroad established by Sacramento merchants Charles Crocker, Mark Hopkins, Collis P. Huntington, and Leland Stanford—popularly known as the “Big Four”—who had joined forces in 1863 to construct the western portion of the Transcontinental Railroad line (completed in 1869), ultimately connecting the line to the shipping points in the San Francisco Bay area. After establishing that link, they turned their attention to the south, where a rail line was needed to tap the wheat-producing region of the San Joaquin Valley and open the sparsely settled southern portion to development. Although other investors formed a rail corporation and surveyed the initial line, the Central Pacific ultimately gained majority control of the San Joaquin Valley rail route in 1868. On October 12, 1870, the various competing lines were officially consolidated into a corporation known as the Southern Pacific Railroad of California, with the Big Four in control of the board of directors (Kraus 1969: passim; Smith 1939: 203–204). The company pushed the San Joaquin Valley mainline south from Stockton to the Stanislaus River by May 1870, and the first train entered Modesto on May 5, 1870. The Southern Pacific not

PAGE 5-14

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

only had a profound effect on new towns because it was the first line into the valley, but it also affected existing settlements and stage stops because people from these communities removed their homes and businesses to the new town sites along the rail line. Early settlements on the Kings, Kaweah, and Tule rivers were similarly drained of population by the new railroad towns. During early 1872, the Southern Pacific drove southeast through Merced County to Fresno, a railroad town laid out by the Contract and Finance Company—the land-development arm of the Southern Pacific—in May 1872, and immediately established scheduled service to the new community. The town was in the center of an 81,000-acre ranch supplied with irrigation and municipal water from Kings River by the Fresno Canal and Irrigation Company (see below for more on Fresno) (Tinkham 1923: 94;Carothers 1934:47–48, 52–54; Preston 1981:128–129). The Southern Pacific continued down the valley, locating stations on terms favorable to its interests. Visalia, a town of nearly 1,000 residents, for instance, was bypassed when its citizens voted not to pay the subsidies that the Southern Pacific demanded. The Big Four chose to continue their southern route from Goshen, west of Visalia, to a point midway between the foothills and Tulare Lake, where the railroad company founded the town of Tulare City. Tracks were laid out over the semi-barren, dusty plains to Tipton and reached Delano Station, an important shipping point for wool and stock east of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, in July 1873 (Figure 5-4). In April 1874, construction resumed south of Delano to the Kern River, but the

PAGE 5-15

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Source: Secretary of War 1873 Note: Southern Pacific rail line had reached Delano.

Figure 5-4 San Joaquin Valley in 1873, showing irrigable lands and rivers Southern Pacific did not enter Bakersfield. Instead, the company laid out a new town called Sumner to the east of the valley’s most prosperous community, initiating rail service to Sumner in August of that year. Sumner was later called Kern, or Kern City, and was eventually annexed to the city of Bakersfield. Now, it is generally known as East Bakersfield (Bailey 1984:72–75; Burmeister 1969:21; Hoover and Kyle 1990:129; Smith 1976:175–180). (See below for additional information on Bakersfield and its surrounding communities.) In a brief time, the Big Four had created a prodigious railroad empire that transformed California and much of the American West. Nowhere was the transformation more profound than in the San Joaquin Valley, where between 1870 and 1880 the population grew by 45% and the acreage of improved land increased by more than 70%. Southern Pacific established about 50 stations in the six San Joaquin Valley counties before 1890, including: 14 stations in San Joaquin County; 6

PAGE 5-16

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

stations in Stanislaus County; 5 stations in Merced County; 8 stations in Fresno County; 2 4 stations in Kings County; 5 stations in Tulare County; and 4 stations in Kern County. Town sites were founded at 24 of these stations. The Fresno to Bakersfield Section is largely west of the original Southern Pacific alignment, but a few of these Southern Pacific towns are within the APE, including the city of Fresno, the city of Hanford, and the community of Sumner (East Bakersfield). By the late nineteenth century, Southern Pacific also held patent to more than a million acres of valley land, much of which was sold to large land developers and speculators. Some acreage went to small farmers through the efforts of the Southern Pacific Colonization Agency—a business division formed by the railroad to encourage farmers to settle on lands owned by the railroad—and some was developed as agricultural colonies, often planned and sponsored by Southern Pacific land agents. Nevertheless, much of the property remained in large tracts, controlled by railroad subsidiaries or sold to the large private companies that were predecessors to today’s “industrial farms” (Orsi 2005, 105–123; Smith 1976, passim). The AT&SF faced tough competition when it entered the San Joaquin Valley roughly 20 years after the Southern Pacific because its rival was determined to maintain its monopoly in the region. Southern Pacific had built branch lines down both sides of the valley and feeder branches to tap strategic resources, so it was not until the 1890s that its hold was seriously challenged by the AT&SF. The AT&SF, also known as the Santa Fe, built a rail line from Kansas to New Mexico in the 1860s, and headed westward to eventually establish a line that would reach Southern California in the 1880s. Construction of the AT&SF reached the California-Arizona border in 1883, where it connected to the newly built Southern Pacific line from San Francisco that terminated in Needles, California. In 1884, the AT&SF leased the Needles-Mojave line from the Southern Pacific, and by 1888 the AT&SF had two coastal terminals in southern California, at San Diego and Los Angeles. AT&SF and its subsidiaries and partners went into receivership during the economic Panic of 1893, but soon reorganized and managed to obtain trackage rights over the Tehachapi Mountains from the Southern Pacific in 1897, and AT&SF trains could finally access the San Joaquin Valley (Snell and Wilson 1968; Waters 1950: 93–126, 127-133; Clarke 1958: 145– 150; Marshall 1945: 176–195). Breaking the monopoly of the Southern Pacific in the San Joaquin Valley was a formidable task. The Southern Pacific and its rail and steamboat affiliates still controlled transportation in northern California, where the company had instituted a rate policy of “all the traffic will bear.” Merchants, farmers, and other shippers organized into associations to fight control of “The Octopus,” as Southern Pacific was derisively dubbed. Nowhere was the anti-railroad sentiment more intense than among the businessmen of San Francisco and farmers of the San Joaquin Valley, who sought lower freight rates and retribution for the Big Four’s oppression of the small landowners of Mussel Slough who resisted Southern Pacific’s uncompromising land acquisition tactics. Mussel Slough and the surrounding farmland are in northeastern Kings County, an area intersected by the Fresno to Bakersfield Section south of the Kings River and north of Hanford. The area, later known as Lucerne, was one of the first near the Kings River to be successfully irrigated. Local farmers incorporated the Peoples Ditch Company and began water distribution in 1873, completing the first phase of their works by 1879. Settlers invested heavily in expensive irrigation projects like Peoples Ditch and other improvements, such as houses, farm buildings, fences, wells, and crops. The settlers deemed the land forfeited by the railroad company and hoped to procure it through preemption or homestead 4

The Southern Pacific Railroad Depot in Fresno (Reference: 467-031-3ST), built in 1889 in the Queen Anne architectural style, is listed in the NRHP under Criteria A and C at the local level of significance (see Appendix C).

PAGE 5-17

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

laws. After a Southern Pacific appraiser assessed the improved lands and the railroad raised the price it demanded from the settlers, a dispute between pro-railroad and anti-railroad supporters began. In 1880 several men were killed in what became known as the Mussel Slough Tragedy after violence erupted when armed marshals intervened in a property dispute between Southern Pacific and local landowners. The event is memorialized by California State Historic Landmark No. 245, which is on 14th Avenue, west and outside of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section APE. The Mussel Slough area and Hanford changed substantially in the 1890s, when Kings County separated from Tulare County in 1893. Hanford became the new seat of Kings County, and by 1897 the AT&SF railroad also served the town, solidifying Hanford’s role as a regional shipping and commerce center (Bryant 1974:173–175; Kings County Library 2005; Menefee and Dodge 1913; Orsi 2005:102–104; Waters 1950:133–138). Another response to the hold of “The Octopus” was the establishment of a new rail company known as the San Francisco and San Joaquin Valley Railway (SF&SJV) in the 1890s. The San Francisco Traffic Association, a group of San Francisco merchants who had promoted several waterborne freight operations, decided in 1893 that the only way to free San Francisco from the Southern Pacific monopoly was to construct an independent railway from San Francisco Bay down the San Joaquin Valley to a connection with the AT&SF. The SF&SJV, nicknamed “the People’s Railroad,” was supported by valley farmers tired of being at the mercy of the Southern Pacific monopoly. The railroad would run from Stockton to Bakersfield, generally east of, but substantially parallel to, the Southern Pacific line. After many financing delays, the state issued a charter for the SF&SJV on February 25, 1895 (Bergman 2009: 51–53; Brown 1958: 123–125; Rice et al. 1988: 217–236). The SF&SJV opened its mainline between Stockton and Fresno in 1896 and finished a branch line from Fresno to Visalia the following year. Construction pushed south from Hanford to Bakersfield, so that the SF&SJV stretched 278 miles (447 km) through the valley, including a branch loop from Fresno to Corcoran by way of Visalia in 1898 (Figure 5-5) 5 (Bryant 1974:175–178; Storey 1940:31–39; Vandor 1919: 271). The SF&SJV had no outlet to the south, but offered an important shipping option for the San Francisco Bay Area and northern California markets. The new railroad company knew that success depended on linking with the AT&SF. In the fall of 1898, AT&SF agreed to purchase the common stock of SF&SJV and soon thereafter turned its attention to eliminating the 68-mile (109 km) gap in its service between Bakersfield and the AT&SF main line at Mojave. Edward P. Ripley, president of the AT&SF from 1895 to 1914, hesitated to build a new line from Mojave to Bakersfield that merely paralleled the Southern Pacific over the rugged Tehachapi Pass. The Tehachapi Pass climb was one of the most difficult in the United States, and Southern Pacific’s route included 15 tunnels, an ascent of 4,000 feet at 2.5% grades, and the engineering feat known as the “Tehachapi Loop,” a portion of the route that actually crosses 77 feet in elevation over itself in a spiral alignment and tunnel. When no suitable alternative route was found, Ripley paid dearly to lease the Tehachapi trackage from the Southern Pacific. The AT&SF avoided building a second track through the pass, but Tehachapi proved to be a bottleneck for the railroad in future years (Bergman 2009:51–53; Bryant 1974:177–178; Duke and Kistler 1963; Waters 1950:139–140).

5

The SF&SJV Section House in rural Shafter (Reference: 027-070-28) appears eligible for listing in the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion A and Criterion C (see Appendix C).

PAGE 5-18

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Source: Cram 1899

Figure 5-5 Major rail lines between Fresno and Bakersfield in 1900 Throughout the remainder of the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth century, the railroad industry faced its share of challenges, but it nevertheless remained a steady presence in the San Joaquin Valley. The First World War placed a heavy burden on the major railroad companies in the United States as the federal government took control of the railroads for more than 2 years in support of the nation’s war efforts. After the war, Southern Pacific began a vast long-range program of rehabilitation and improvements that included extensions, additions, and reconstruction. This program of improvements was interrupted during the Great Depression, when Southern Pacific’s revenue dropped to about 50% of its 1929 peak. Retrenchment of services followed; some branch lines were abandoned and torn up, unprofitable services were curtailed, and old equipment was put out of service (Heath 1945:26; Hofsommer1986:71-77). This trend reversed during the Second World War, which brought all-time freight records. The magnitude of change was probably greater on the West Coast than anywhere else because of the busy San Francisco Bay ports and the numerous new military facilities established in California. During the war years, the Southern Pacific made great strides in improving its rail system and rolling stock and also began to address the problem of its single-track mainline in California. The

PAGE 5-19

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

company installed 1,400 miles (2,250 km) of new rail along its trunk lines, both as replacement rail for existing lighter-gauge rail and newly laid rail for double-tracking, and 115 miles (185 km) of track at 268 sidings and siding extensions. Also, many track structures, such as bridges and trestles, were strengthened, new roundhouse and shop facilities were installed, and stations were expanded (Heath 1945:44-51; Hofsommer 1986:190–207). Southern Pacific used its wartime profits to continue to enhance its operating system. By 1951, the company had replaced approximately 2,600 miles (4,184 km) of track with new and heavier rail on its main lines to facilitate larger locomotives and longer freight and passenger trains. Rails between San Francisco and Los Angeles through the western side of the San Joaquin Valley, for example, were improved in part to accommodate upgrades to the overnight streamline train Lark, a long and heavy luxury overnight passenger train that was also among the company’s first to be converted from steam to diesel locomotive power. Southern Pacific’s upgrading program for the main line through the San Joaquin Valley in the 1960s included installation of new welded rails called “ribbon rails,” which were manufactured at its Tracy rail-welding plant. Today, these rails are still functioning on hundreds of miles of Southern Pacific track (now owned by the Union Pacific) throughout the Central Valley (Hofsommer 1986:210-212, 273). The AT&SF mainline improvements through central California have included upgrades to its roadbed and replacement of most engineering features from its original construction in the 1890s. BNSF owns the former AT&SF line between Fresno and Bakersfield, and all of the rails, ties, and ballast in this part of the system were installed from the 1970s through the 1990s, or even more recently (BNSF 2003; Bryant 1974:314–319, 322–323, 344–346; Chant 2007:304, 331–339; Heath 1945:25–30, 44–51; Hofsommer 1986:306–310).

5.3.5

Municipal Development

The California Gold Rush initiated the first American economic growth and settlement within the San Joaquin Valley, but sustained municipal development did not come to the vicinity of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section until irrigation projects and railroad construction combined to make the valley fit for diversified agriculture. The powerful combination of irrigation development and the arrival of railroads in the 1870s (and the next major line in the 1890s) transformed the San Joaquin Valley from an isolated, pastoral and relatively unpopulated place to a dominant agricultural region that featured the beginnings of two large municipalities. This influence affected town creation and growth throughout the region, but not always in the same way throughout the corridor. Bakersfield, for instance, predated the railroad and instead owed its existence to the early reclamation and irrigation efforts of its founder, Colonel Thomas Baker; it succeeded in spite of the Southern Pacific’s efforts to minimize its growing importance to the San Joaquin Valley. Fresno, by contrast, was the direct product of the railroad and irrigated agriculture. Fresno and Bakersfield were not the only towns to emerge within the Fresno to Bakersfield Section during this period, but the two communities became the largest in the valley. They contain most of the urban development that took place within the corridor, and most of the historic architectural resources surveyed for this HPSR. A.

FRESNO

Fresno and nearly all Central Valley railroad towns share a common layout: a central depot and a uniform plat set at right angles to the rail line. Individual parcels, or lots, were established in a uniform pattern on a rectangular grid set at right angles to the tracks, rather than with the surrounding government land survey. Blocks were 400 feet by 320 feet, contained 32 individual lots, and had mid-block alleys 20 feet wide. Commercial arteries were 100 feet wide, and residential streets were 80 feet across.

PAGE 5-20

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

As railroad towns grew, the streets outside the original town plat conformed to the public land surveys and parcel lines of surrounding landowners rather than to the railroad town plat. The legacy is a special hybrid street pattern characteristic of all the valley railroad towns (Figure 5-6) (Bergman 2009:9–10, 51–52, 57–58; Smith 1976).

Source: Britton & Rey 1901b

Figure 5-6 Fresno in 1901, bird’s eye view facing east Unlike Bakersfield, Fresno owed its creation and development entirely to the railroad, but like other communities in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section, Fresno also benefited from the success of San Joaquin Valley irrigated agriculture. The land for the site of Fresno was owned by the San Joaquin Valley Association, a German syndicate organized under the supervision of W.S. Chapman for the purpose of establishing an irrigation colony of some 80,000 acres in Fresno County. The association induced the Big Four to locate its town site on their lands by donating three sections of land to the railroad. Fresno, platted by the railroad’s Contract and Finance Company according to its standard town design, grew slowly at first and then blossomed with construction of dependable irrigation systems in the 1870s, the creation of cooperative irrigation colonies like Washington Colony, and the establishment of successful satellite agricultural towns, such as Millerton, Orange Cove, and Reedley. The Southern Pacific main rail line reached Fresno in 1872. Two years later Fresno became the county seat and Southern Pacific completed a branch line from Fresno through the prosperous Porterville citrus region to Kern Junction— solidifying Fresno’s position as an important valley transshipment center. As discussed above, commercial farming developed in Fresno County with the advent of irrigation colonies, co-operatives, and districts and water companies that converted arid lands on the valley floor into fields. The population of the town of Fresno stood at just over 1,100 in 1880, but jumped rapidly to almost ten times that population a decade later. The population more than doubled over the next 20 years, reaching almost 25,000 by 1910. The value of agricultural land increased tenfold during this period in the vicinity of the town, and Fresno County had become the leading raisin shipping center in the United States. Fresno businessmen and investors diligently promoted commercial and irrigated agriculture to bring as much land in the valley into production as possible, and by the early 1900s, small towns and irrigated farms populated the vast district of land that had been unbroken and uncultivated just a generation earlier (California Digital Library 2001:Fresno County, Fresno City 1880, 1890, 1910; Carothers 1934:41; Elliott & Co. 1883:20, 102–109; McAdie et al. 1905:332; Moehring 2004:31; Smith 1976:158).

PAGE 5-21

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Fresno was an ethnically diverse town during its early decades, beginning with Chinese residents who came to Fresno County during the Gold Rush, working initially on the railroad and later in agriculture. As elsewhere in California, the Chinese population of Fresno during this period was overwhelmingly male. Segregated by law into West Fresno, Fresno’s Chinatown provided a separate social and cultural identity. China Alley, a major street within the Chinatown by the 1880s, was two blocks long and ran between F and G streets. Chinatown housed Fresno’s notorious red-light district, which contained brothels, gambling houses, and opium dens patronized by Chinese and non-Chinese alike. As the Chinese population of Fresno declined in the middle decades of the twentieth century, the distinctive ethnic identity of Chinatown faded. Blacks and Chicanos moved into the areas vacated by the Chinese and West Fresno thus continued to be a segregated—but increasingly mixed—ethnic enclave within the larger town (Chacon 1988; Sanborn 1889a, 1899a, 1918–1919, 1918–1948). Another significant ethnic group in the Fresno area was the Basque from northern Spain and southern France. This group did not establish a specific neighborhood in Fresno, but lived, worked, and established homes and businesses throughout the area. The Basque began immigrating to the western United States as early as 1849, and settled mainly in San Francisco and Los Angeles. By the late 1800s, rapid urbanization of these areas caused many Basque immigrants to relocate elsewhere in California, particularly Bakersfield, Fresno, and Stockton. Some migrated to Fresno County and farmed, but most came to work as sheepherders on the region’s many large ranches. By the turn of the twentieth century, the city of Fresno included the fourth largest Basque population in the state (Echeverria 1999:103, 117). New Basque immigrants, mostly young unmarried men, found food and lodging within a familiar atmosphere at the Basque hotels and boardinghouses in Fresno. These facilities provided a place where Basques congregated, enabling the established community to further assist the new immigrants, who typically did not speak English, in finding jobs and doctors, processing permits and papers, and attending to other tasks. These hotels and boardinghouses specifically catered to transient Basque sheepherders and laborers, but also served a range of working-class patrons, from railroad workers to ranch hands, farmers, and miners (JRP 2002: 60–61). The first Basque hotel in Fresno was the Hotel Bascongado on G Street, which opened in about 1898 just west of the Southern Pacific rail line near downtown. By 1901, the Hotel des Pyrenees (later renamed Frechou House) was constructed on the western side of town at the corner of O and Kern streets, followed by the Fresno Hotel (also known as “Sheepcamp” Hotel) near the old Santa Fe Railroad Depot (Santa Fe Avenue and Tulare Street). A fourth hotel, Hotel de Spanio, opened in 1907. These boardinghouses served Fresno’s Basque community for the next 20 years; however, by the mid 1920s the old hotels gave way to a new wave of hotels, including the Basque Hotel, the 1926 Hotel Santa Fe, the 1932 Victoria Hotel, and the early 1940s Yturri Hotel (Echeverria 6 1999; Sanborn 1918–1948, 1918–1950). B.

COMMUNITIES BETWEEN FRESNO AND BAKERSFIELD

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6

The Basque Hotel (Reference: 467-062-08) at 1102 F Street was built in 1922 and appears eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR (see Appendix C).

PAGE 5-22

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

5.3.6

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Events and Trends of the Twentieth Century

Since the turn of the twentieth century, additional events and trends have influenced the development of the region of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section: the discovery of oil in Kern County, federal-state water development projects, and adoption of the automobile as the primary mode of transportation in the United States and the Central Valley. Although these changes were distinct and important, their overall effect on the corridor was to intensify and expand upon the land settlement patterns already established in the late nineteenth century. The Kern River oil boom of May 1899 initiated a rapid building increase in Bakersfield and the surrounding area, including, ultimately, Wasco to the north. Encouraged by the discovery of oil in Kern County, the Southern Pacific and AT&SF railroads collaborated on building the Sunset Railroad to connect Bakersfield with the Sunset Oil Field. By 1910, benefitting from a second oil boom, the Sunset line became highly profitable (Bailey 1984: 77, 81). Since the mid 1930s the State of California, under the sponsorship of the Department of Water Resources, and the federal government, under the aegis of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, have played a major role in the development and distribution of water resources to agricultural, industrial, and municipal users throughout the state. Both the federal Central Valley Project and California’s State Water Project have transferred water from the water-rich northern half of the state southward to water-deficient areas in the San Joaquin Valley. Largely because of these federal-state water projects, even some of the most water-poor areas of the valley have been transformed into fertile agricultural land (Hundley 2001: 234–272). Among the high-volume canals was the Friant-Kern Canal, which passes through the study area just northeast of Bakersfield. Constructed between 1945 and 1951, the Friant-Kern Canal was built as an initial segment of the Central Valley Project. It is one of the West’s longest canals, measuring 152 miles and carrying San Joaquin River water stored at the Friant Dam, east of Fresno, southward to the Kern River, near Bakersfield. The canal provided water for local distribution and spurred the creation of new irrigation districts in the San Joaquin Valley, which, in turn, expanded California’s agricultural economy (JRP 2000: 77-79). A.

FRESNO

The first two decades of the twentieth century were generally a period of prosperity for farmers and agricultural regions, and Fresno, as a major hub for its surrounding agricultural districts, concurrently experienced an increase in population and construction. Lumber yards, fruit and raisin packing sheds, and other businesses developed in an industrial corridor along the Southern Pacific tracks through Fresno. As the market for these products matured, early businesses began to build new more substantial buildings, often to replace earlier, more modest edifices (Sanborn 1898:11–19, 1906: 21–29). The uses of buildings along this corridor also became diversified. The warehouses, industrial showrooms, and factories included the Hobbs Parsons Warehouse (1903), Benham Ice Cream Factory (1913), and Budd & Quinn Showroom (1937). The downtown commercial area of Fresno developed a few blocks farther east of the railroad than the industrial buildings immediately adjacent to the tracks. A series of “skyscrapers” were constructed in the downtown area during the 1910s and 1920s. The skyscrapers included the Hotel Fresno (1912), the Helm Building (1914), the Mason Building (1918), the Bank of Italy Building (1918), the Mattei Building (1919), the T.W. Patterson Building, the Pacific Southwest 7 Building, the San Joaquin Power Building, and the Californian Hotel (1923). These buildings 7

Situated within the APE for this project, the Hotel Fresno (Reference: 466-21-401) was Fresno’s first high-rise building and appears to be eligible for the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion C.

PAGE 5-23

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

ranged from 7 to 16 stories. The growing city also offered more modest accommodations for visitors and single professionals at the edge of the downtown area. Early examples included the 1900 Crackler Apartments, 2429–2439 E. Belmont; 1912 Hotel Fresno, 1241 Broadway; 1912 Kern Kay Hotel, and 906–912 Van Ness (City of Fresno 2010); additional examples were constructed through the 1920s (Clough et al. 1986; Sanborn 1918–1948, 1918–1950). The sluggish agricultural economy of the 1920s and the Great Depression, beginning in 1929, brought an end to this period of prosperity, severely curtailing construction and development until the end of the Second World War. After the war, development of Fresno focused on the suburban areas to the north as the automobile became prevalent and the Highway 99 corridor was improved. In an attempt to revitalize downtown, Victor Gruen Associates created a new plan for the city’s commercial center, which included new freeways and the Fulton Mall. The Fulton Mall was designed to replace the busy Fulton Street shopping district with a pedestrian mall. Garrett Eckbo designed the mall to encompass 16 blocks, but this grand plan was not realized and only a six-block length was completed. In 2010, Fulton Mall, which is adjacent to but not in the APE of this project, was determined to be eligible for listing in the NRHP; Fulton Mall was also listed in the CRHR (Fulton Mall NRHP Nomination Form 2008; Correspondence with SHPO 2010; 8 City of Fresno 2011). Other aspects of planned downtown revitalization, including altered transportation routes and parking, were also not completed. Despite the fact that the revitalization did not completely materialize, it had an impact on the surrounding area, and the pedestrian mall attracted national attention, with other cities attempting similar projects. Many buildings along Broadway in Fresno were demolished to make room for parking. As the pedestrian mall proved unable to compete with suburban retail centers, the retail space and commercial offices became vacant. Subsequent redevelopment plans have resulted in the replacement of earlier structures with new construction in the downtown area (Downtown Association of Fresno 2010). Increasing suburban development also diluted the ethnic neighborhoods of Fresno. The number of Basque residents decreased, and only three of the numerous Basque boardinghouses and hotels remained in 1951 (Zubiri 1998:144). By the 1960s, Basque immigration slowed to a trickle, and the heyday of the hotels and boardinghouses catering to that segment of the population was over. Today, the Basque Hotel and the Santa Fe (outside of the study area) are the only two Basque hotels in operation in Fresno (Powell 1994; Zubiri 1998:4, 22–23, 144–146). B.

BAKERSFIELD

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

The seven-story structure reflects early trends in skyscraper tripartite design and was designed by prominent architect Edward T. Foulkes. The eight-story Bank of Italy Building (Reference: 467-065-08T) is an important example of the Italian Renaissance revival in early skyscraper development (Criterion C) and was listed in the NRHP in 1981. 8 In August 2010, the SHPO concurred that Fulton Mall is eligible for listing in the NRHP and was listed in the CRHR. Because a majority of Fulton Mall property owners objected to its listing in the NRHP, it is not likely that the mall will be listed in the NRHP.

PAGE 5-24

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

PAGE 5-25

Chapter 6 Historic Properties Identified

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

6.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historic Properties Identified

This chapter provides a general discussion of the archaeological resources identified, a general discussion of the historic architectural resources identified, a discussion of the specific NRHPlisted or NRHP-eligible archaeological resources, a specific discussion of the NRHP-listed or NRHPeligible historic architectural resources, tables of the historic properties identified, and a table that lists the historical resources identified for the purposes of CEQA.

6.1

Archaeological Resources

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.2

Built Environment Resources

The 52 historic architectural resources inventoried and evaluated in this HPSR reflect the major events and trends discussed in Chapter 5 (Historic Context). The survey area stretches from the downtown area in the city of Fresno, through rural Kings and Tulare counties, through the city of Bakersfield, and terminates in unincorporated Kern County, east of Bakersfield. Although the survey area is large and includes portions of four counties, the majority of the resources surveyed herein are in, or in the immediate vicinity of, Fresno and Bakersfield; however, some of the built environment resources are in the smaller towns and rural areas of Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties. (For a complete list of historic architectural resources inventoried and evaluated in this HPSR, see Table 7-1, below.) Of the 52 historic architectural resources identified in this HPSR, 25 are either listed in, previously determined eligible for, or appear to be eligible for the NRHP. As such, these properties are considered historic properties under the Section 106 process. Eligibility for the NRHP rests on dual factors: significance and integrity. The 25 properties meet one or more of the NRHP significance criteria (listed below) for inclusion in the NRHP (National Park Service 1997) and retain integrity: Criterion A: association with “events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.” Criterion B: association with “the lives of persons significant in our past.” Criterion C: resources “that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.” Criterion D: resources “that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to history or prehistory.” In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the 25 historic properties retain integrity, which is determined through application of seven aspects: location, design, setting, workmanship, materials, feeling, and association. Location and setting relate to the relationship between the property and its surrounding environment. Design, materials, and workmanship relate to construction methods and architectural details. Feeling and association are the least objective of the seven aspects of integrity, and pertain to the overall ability of the property to convey a sense of the historical time and place in which it was constructed.

Page 6-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The remaining 27 historic architectural resources were fully evaluated for NRHP eligibility in this study. The evaluations concluded that the resources either did not meet any of the criteria for listing or did not retain sufficient integrity to convey their potential significance (for complete evaluations see the DPR 523 forms provided in Appendix C). As such, these 27 historic architectural resources are not considered historic properties for the purposes of the Section 106 process. However, they are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA because a local government has recognized or identified the properties. This section discusses the evaluation contexts of the 25 NRHP-eligible properties and is organized by general property type. The section provides tables that list the historic architectural and archaeological resources identified within the APE that this HPSR is required to report, per the Section 106 PA, including the following:     

Properties listed in the NRHP. Properties previously determined eligible for the NRHP. Properties determined eligible for the NRHP for which SHPO concurrence is requested. Archaeological properties that are currently being evaluated and are presumed eligible. 9 Properties evaluated as not eligible for the NRHP as a part of this study.

The tables include information on the applicable NRHP criterion or criteria and the level, period, and area of historic significance. In addition, this section includes a table that lists the 27 historic architectural resources that are not eligible for the NRHP but that are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA because a local government has recognized or identified the properties.

6.3

NRHP Listed or Eligible Archaeological Properties

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.4

NRHP Listed or Eligible Historic Architectural Properties

The 25 historic architectural properties within the APE relate to a number of themes of development in the study area. Railroad features represent some of the earliest history of the area, with the corridors of the Southern Pacific and the AT&SF providing crucial transportation linkages that spurred the development of the area’s towns and agricultural regions. Similarly, irrigation features are indicative of the earliest and most fundamental advances allowed by the introduction of reliable water sources to the largely arid region. Residential development in the study area is reflective of both the population growth and social evolution of the region, with some of the earliest being farmsteads and homesteads and much of the later development being more urban in form. This evolution is indicative of the increasing development of towns and cities of the San Joaquin Valley, as cities such as Bakersfield and Fresno became major population centers. Similarly, the range of commercial and industrial construction reflects the increasing social and economic complexity of the area.

9

For historic architectural resources that were subject to inventory and evaluation but that do not appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR, please refer to the HASR.

PAGE 6-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The historic architectural resources reflect a number of functional uses, including railroad facilities, hotels, retail, residential, and others. Designed in the late nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century in a range of styles, many of the properties have been altered over time, as continuous use and changing stylistic preferences and functions required new forms. The study area also includes several institutional properties. The development of schools, government centers, and research facilities in the study area was a response to growing populations and new mandates for city, county, and state governance and educational and governmental complexes. All of these property types convey the development of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section from a largely undeveloped agricultural hinterland to an economically and socially diverse region of California. Each property type is discussed in more detail below. The location of each historic architectural resource is shown by “map reference number” on the APE maps in Appendix A. For the full evaluation of each property, refer to the DPR 523 forms provided for this study in Appendix C.

6.4.1

Railroad-Related Historic Properties

Three historic properties identified in the study area relate to the development of the railroad, which had a profound influence on the region. The properties include two railroad depots and a section house: the 1889 Fresno Southern Pacific Passenger Depot; the 1917 Santa Fe Depot in Shafter; and an 1898 San Francisco & San Joaquin Valley Section House in Shafter. The Southern Pacific Railroad Depot in Fresno (Reference: 467-031-3ST) was built in the Queen Anne architectural style. The property is listed in the NRHP under Criteria A and C at the local level of significance.

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.4.2

Historic Properties Related to Water Conveyance

Three historic properties in the study area are irrigation canals. These structures transect the Central Valley and were of vital importance to the development and agricultural success of the region. Entirely utilitarian in form, the canals are basic infrastructural elements that range from modest earth-lined canals to larger lined and piped canals. One historic canal property in the survey area is the Peoples Ditch in rural Kings County. [not provided in Fresno abridged version] The other two canals in the survey area that are historic properties are in rural Fresno County: the Washington Colony Canal (Figure 6-1) and the North Branch of the Oleander Canal. Both appear eligible for listing in the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion A as contributing elements of the Washington Irrigated Colony Historic District. The canals are earthen-lined and date to the late nineteenth century. Although they remain largely in their original form, they have likely been rechannelized over time and also have new concrete check features and culverts. This systematic alteration is common in continuously used infrastructural elements such as these canals.

Page 6-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

April 20, 2010

Figure 6-1 Washington Colony Canal, Fresno County

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.4.3

Residential Historic Properties

The study area includes two historic properties that relate to the residential development of the area, one in Fresno and the other in Bakersfield. The Vartanian Home at 362 F Street in Fresno (Reference: 467-092-34) appears eligible for listing in the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion B and Criterion C. The circa 1895 property includes three outbuildings and a residence constructed in the Queen Anne style (Figure 6-2). Architectural detailing includes a prominent gable with hip roof design, spindle work, fish-scale detailing, and a prominent bay window. The building is a good but modest example of Queen Anne design, which is typified by prominent gables and irregular rooflines, asymmetrical massing, and a variety of exterior surfaces and ornamental details. The property is also significant for its association with the original owner and resident, Henry Vartanian, one of the first Armenian settlers in the region.

(Reference: 467-092-34), April 21, 2010

Figure 6-2 Vartanian Home, 362 F Street, Fresno

PAGE 6-4

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.4.4

Commercial Historic Properties

The study area includes seven commercial properties that appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP. One is in Corcoran, and six are in the city of Fresno. All of the commercial properties are indicative of the prominent roles that urban centers played in the development of the surrounding region. Acting as service centers for the surrounding agricultural hinterland, both Fresno and Corcoran developed as commercial hubs throughout the twentieth century. To a large degree, the commercial and industrial development was largely vernacular and standardized in form, with basic commercial block construction and common design elements.

[not provided in Fresno abridged version] Two hotels are included among the commercial properties in Fresno: the 1912 Hotel Fresno (Reference: 466-21-401) and the 1922 Basque Hotel (Reference: 467-06-208). The period in which the hotels were constructed was a time of great growth in Fresno, as the city consolidated its role as a major regional hub. The period was also a time in which hotels, residential hotels, and rooming houses gained in social acceptability and popularity (Sandoval-Stausz 2007). The Hotel Fresno was Fresno’s first high-rise building (Figure 6-3) and appears to be eligible for the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion C. The seven-story structure reflects early trends in skyscraper tripartite design, with a monumental base, shaft, and emphatic cornice. The hotel was designed by prominent architect Edward T. Foulkes and illustrated Fresno’s increasingly urban aspirations. The building’s design was reminiscent of hotel design in major metropolitan areas, including such hotels as San Francisco’s St. Francis. The Basque Hotel was far more modest in its styling and architectural aesthetic, and is notable for its relationship to the Basque community rather than its design or architecture. The two-story building has an L-shaped footprint with common Streetcar Commercial influences. The residential hotel was designed for mixed-use, with a commercial first level, and was a focal point for the area’s sizeable Basque population. The building appears eligible for the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion A for its historically significant relationship to the Basque community.

(Reference: 466-214-01), April 20, 2010

Figure 6-3 Hotel Fresno, 1257 Broadway, Fresno

Page 6-5

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

The Bank of America building at 947-951 F Street (Reference: 467-07-401), a two-story, two-part building with Mission Revival elements built in 1908, was originally known as the Industrial Bank of Fresno. The building appears to be eligible under NRHP Criterion A and Criterion B at the local level as Fresno’s first Japanese-owned lending institution, and for its connection to Dr. Bunkaro Okonogi, the bank’s founder and prominent member of the city’s Japanese community. The remaining commercial buildings in Fresno are eligible for the National Register for their architectural merits (Criterion C). The Holt Lumber Company property at 1916 S. Cherry Avenue (Reference: 467-020-13) is a one-story brick building constructed circa 1920. The building features a hip roof with mission tiles, narrow boxed eaves with modillions, and a recessed entrance highlighted by an arched opening with surrounding square pilasters, and is significant as a distinguished local example of Italian Renaissance Revival commercial construction. The Radin-Kamp Department Store at 959 Fulton Mall (Reference: 468-281-01) was built in 1925 and is a four-story reinforced-concrete building with brick facing and decorative terracotta elements along the roof and frieze. The building is listed in Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources (No. 124) and is presumably eligible as an important local example of early-twentieth-century commercial architecture. The eight-story Bank of Italy building (1918), located at 1015 Fulton Mall, is an important example of the Italian Renaissance revival and early skyscraper development (Reference 467-065-08T). This property was listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 1981 and is therefore also included in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and local register. The Radin-Kamp Department Store and the Bank of Italy buildings are adjacent to Fulton Mall, but both are outside the historic property boundary of Fulton Mall and are not contributing features of the mall. Fulton Mall is outside the APE of this project. Lastly, the Crest Theatre, at 1160 Broadway Plaza, was constructed in 1948 as a part of the West Coast Theater chain (Reference: 466-212-12). The reinforced-concrete building followed the tenets of the “Skouras Style,” named after Charles Skouras, president of the West Coast Theaters, which included sweeping curves and flourishes, elaborately draped prosceniums, neon backlighting, and copious use of gold leaf, brass, and aluminum.

6.4.5

Institutional Historic Properties

The survey population includes four historic properties that can be classified as institutional in nature, two each in Fresno and Kern counties. The properties reflect a diverse range of uses: they include the First Mexican Baptist Church in Fresno; the Fresno Fire Department No. 3 building; the Kern County Civic Administration Complex in Bakersfield; and the Harvey Auditorium at the Bakersfield High School (Error! Reference source not found.). The properties date from the 1920s to the mid 1950s. The First Mexican Baptist Church at 1061 E Street (Reference: 467-103-01) is a brick Mission Revival style building with a prominent, two-story bell tower. Built in 1924, it is listed on Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources (No. 23) and appears to be individually eligible for the NRHP at the local level under Criterion A, for its role as an important service and gathering place for Fresno’s Mexican community, and under Criterion C, as a distinguished expression of the Mission Revival style. The Fresno Fire Department Station No. 3, located at 1406-1430 Fresno Street (Reference: 467065-08T), was built in 1939 as part of the federal Works Progress Administration (WPA) program. Buildings designed under this Depression-era program—in which the federal government commissioned prominent architects for public projects—often reflected popular period styles such as Art Deco, Streamline Moderne, and International. This fire station, with its simplified ornament and emphasis on horizontal lines expressed through incised and raised banding and flat-roof parapet, is listed in Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources (No. 213) and appears eligible under NRHP Criterion C and CRHR Criterion 3 as a distinctive local example of the Streamline Moderne style. It is also an important work of E.W. Peterson, a locally significant architect.

PAGE 6-6

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

6.4.6

Miscellaneous Historic Properties

Four resources in the architectural APE are not common property types and do not fit into the categories discussed above. One such miscellaneous historic property occurs in each of the four counties. In Fresno County, the South Van Ness Entrance Gate to the City of Fresno (at 2208 South Van Ness Avenue) is a streetscape element consisting of an arched truss with a sheet metal sign supported by two Ionic columns on pedestals (Figure 6-4). The sign bears the inscription, “Fresno: The Best Little City in the U.S.A.” The gate was erected in the 1920s to lure Highway 99 travelers into the city, and is emblematic of the rise of roadside commercial architecture and the advent of automobile culture in the valley. The property appears eligible for listing in the NRHP at the local level of significance under Criterion A and Criterion C.

(Reference: South Van Ness Entrance Gate), April 21, 2010.

Figure 6-4 2208 South Van Ness Avenue, Fresno

[remainder not provided in Fresno abridged version]

Page 6-7

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

6.5

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Tables of Historic Properties Identified

The historic properties in the APE that are listed in the NRHP are shown in Table 6.5-1. The historic properties in the APE that were previously determined eligible for listing in the NRHP are shown in Table 6.5-2. The historic properties in the APE that appear to be eligible for the NRHP, as evaluated by this study and for which SHPO concurrence is requested, are listed in Table 6.5-3. The historic architectural resources in the APE evaluated as not eligible for the NRHP, for which SHPO concurrence is requested, are listed in Table 6.5-4. DPR 523 forms for all historic architectural resources evaluated and addressed in this HPSR are included in Appendix C.

[All tables below report properties in Fresno County only]

Table 6.5-1 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) Listed in the NRHP

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only]

Map ID# 13

14

APN

Address / Resource Name

46703031ST 1033 H Street Southern Pacific Railroad Depot 46621307

1015 Fulton Mall Bank of Italy

Applicable NRHP Year Criterion Level; Period; Area Built or Criteria of Significance

City

County

Fresno

Fresno

1889

A, C

Fresno

Fresno

1918

C

Local; 1889–1971 (A), 1889 (C); agriculture, architecture, commerce, transportation

Local; 1918-1928; agriculture

Table 6.5-2 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) Previously Determined Eligible for the NRHP

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

PAGE 6-8

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.5-3 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) That Appear Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only]

Map

Address / Resource Name

City

Applicable Level; Period; NRHP Year Criterion Area of County Built or Criteria Significance

ID#

APN

9

46621401

1257 Broadway Hotel Fresno

Fresno

Fresno

1912

C

Local; 1912; architecture

10

46621212

1160 Broadway Plaza

Fresno

Fresno

1948

C

Local; 1948; architecture

Local; 1939; architecture

Crest Theater 11

46706508T

1406–1430 Fresno Street Fresno Fire Department No. 3

Fresno

Fresno

1939

A, C

12

46706208

1102 F Street Basque Hotel

Fresno

Fresno

1922

A

Local; 1920s– 1960s; social history, ethnic heritage

15

46710301

1061 E Street First Mexican Baptist Church

Fresno

Fresno

1924, 1929

A, C

Local; 1924– 1929; ethnic heritage; Architecture

16

46707401

947–951 F Street Bank of America

Fresno

Fresno

1908

A, B

Local; 1908; ethnic heritage

20

46828101

959 Fulton Mall Radin-Kamp Department Store

Fresno

Fresno

1925

C

Local; 1925; architecture

30

46709234

362 F Street Vartanian Home

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1895

B, C

Local; none specified; architecture

31

46702013

1916 S. Cherry Avenue Holt Lumber

Fresno

Fresno

1920s, post1961

C

Local; 1920s; architecture

32

n/a

2208 S. Van Ness Avenue (vic.) South Van Ness Entrance Gate

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 19251929

A, C

Local; none specified; transportation, architecture

Page 6-9

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.5-3 Historic Properties (Historic Architectural Resources) That Appear Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only]

Map

Address / Resource Name

Applicable Level; Period; NRHP Year Criterion Area of County Built or Criteria Significance

ID#

APN

33

n/a

Washington Colony Canal (eligible component of the Washington Irrigated Colony Historic District)

n/a

Fresno

ca. 1878– 1880

A

Local; none specified; none specified

34

n/a

North Branch of Oleander Canal (eligible component of the Washington Irrigated Colony Historic District)

n/a

Fresno

ca. 1880s

A

Local; none specified; none specified

City

Table 6.5-4 Historic Architectural Resources Evaluated as Not Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested Early in the NEPA Process, as Required by the Section 106 PA, Attachment C --- [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

1

46620407

Address / Resource Name 1560 H Street Budd & Quinn Showroom

Year Built

City

County

NRHP Status

Fresno

Fresno

1929, 1937

6Z

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1922

6Z

Fresno Body & Fenderworks (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP) 2

46620406

1514–1518 H Street Budd & Quinn Warehouse (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

PAGE 6-10

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.5-4 Historic Architectural Resources Evaluated as Not Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested Early in the NEPA Process, as Required by the Section 106 PA, Attachment C --- [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

3

46620514

4

5

City

County

Year Built

NRHP Status

1454 H Street H.E. Jaynes & Son (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1944

6Z

46620513

1452 H Street H.E. Jaynes & Son (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1928

6Z

46620219

1460–1462 Broadway Parker Nash Building (located in the CEQAonly thematic Automotive District, which is not eligible for NRHP or CRHR)

Fresno

Fresno

1913, 1934

6Z

26620220

Address / Resource Name

6

46620207

1416 Broadway (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1911– 1912

6Z

7

46620505

1415–1417 Broadway Mayflower Hotel

Fresno

Fresno

1917

6Z

8

46620511

1420 H Street Benham Ice Cream/Dale Brothers Coffee Building; Dale Brothers Coffee Sign

Fresno

Fresno

1912, 1913, 1923, 1937, 1940

6Z

17

46707101

1528–1548 Tulare Street (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1895, 1930, 1945

6Z

18

46704012S

1626 Tulare Street Pacific Coast Seeded Raisin Company Del Monte Plant No. 68

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1906, 1946

6Z

19

46704024S

903–911 H Street Hobbs Parsons Produce Building

Fresno

Fresno

1903

6Z

Page 6-11

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.5-4 Historic Architectural Resources Evaluated as Not Eligible for the NRHP for Which SHPO Concurrence Is Requested Early in the NEPA Process, as Required by the Section 106 PA, Attachment C --- [Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

21

46707402

22

Address / Resource Name

City

County

Year Built

NRHP Status

937 F Street Peacock Department Store

Fresno

Fresno

1926

6Z

46707402

942 Fagan Alley H. Sargavak Building

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1925

6Z

23

46707116

938-952 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 18981906, ca. 1925

6Z

24

46707102

956 China Alley Haruji Ego Family Building (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1900

6Z

25

46707201

1536–1542 Kern Street Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1901, ca. 1918

6Z

26

46707208

1522–1526 Kern Street Dick’s Shoes Building (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1923

6Z

27

46707206

836–840 F Street Azteca Theater (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca.1950

6Z

28

46828611

1830 Inyo Street Liberty Laundry

Fresno

Fresno

1928

6Z

29

46828604

729 Broadway Baskin’s Auto Supply Sign

Fresno

Fresno

1953

6Z

Note: See Table 6.6-1 for a list of the CEQA-only historical resources.

PAGE 6-12

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

6.6

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA

As discussed in the introduction to this section, 27 of the historic architectural resources identified in the study area do not appear to meet the NRHP significance criteria or the integrity standards for listing in the NRHP. Although these historical resources are not historic properties under Section 106, they have been recognized or identified by local governments as having historical interest or recognition at the local level, and thus are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. These resources represent two broad property types: residential, which are all in the city of Bakersfield, and commercial/industrial, all in the city of Fresno. Both property types are discussed in further detail below. Table 6.6-1 lists the 27 surveyed resources that are considered historical resources for CEQA only. The DPR 523 forms for each are provided in Appendix C (for CEQA-only property status, please refer to the California Historical Resource Status [CHRS] codes provided in Appendix D of this HPSR).

[Table below reports properties in Fresno County only]

Table 6.6-1 Properties That Are Not Eligible for the NRHP But That Are Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA (Not Section 106 Properties)

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

1

46620407

2

3

Address / Resource Name

Year Built

CEQA Only Property Status

Fresno

1929, 1937

3CD, 5D3, 5S3, 6Z

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1922

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

Fresno

Fresno

1944

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

City

County

1560 H Street Budd & Quinn Showroom Fresno Body & Fenderworks (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

46620406

1514–1518 H Street Budd & Quinn Warehouse (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

46620514

1454 H Street H.E. Jaynes & Son (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Page 6-13

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.6-1 Properties That Are Not Eligible for the NRHP But That Are Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA (Not Section 106 Properties)

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

4

46620513

5

Address / Resource Name

City

County

Year Built

CEQA Only Property Status

1452 H Street H.E. Jaynes & Son (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1928

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

46620219 26620220

1460–1462 Broadway Parker Nash Building (located in the CEQAonly thematic Automotive District, which is not eligible for NRHP or CRHR)

Fresno

Fresno

1913, 1934

5D3, 5S1, 6Z

6

46620207

1416 Broadway (located in the CEQAonly Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1911– 1912

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

7

46620505

1415–1417 Broadway Mayflower Hotel

Fresno

Fresno

1917

3CS, 5S3, 6Z

8

46620511

1420 H Street Benham Ice Cream/Dale Brothers Coffee Building; Dale Brothers Coffee Sign

Fresno

Fresno

1912, 1913, 1923, 1937, 1940

5S1, 6Z

17

46707101

1528–1548 Tulare Street (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1895, 1930, 1945

5B, 6Z

18

46704012S

1626 Tulare Street Pacific Coast Seeded Raisin Company Del Monte Plant No. 68

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1906, 1946

5S2, 6Z

19

46704024S

903–911 H Street Hobbs Parsons Produce Building

Fresno

Fresno

1903

5S1, 6Z

21

46707402

937 F Street Peacock Department Store

Fresno

Fresno

1926

5D3, 6Z

PAGE 6-14

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 6.6-1 Properties That Are Not Eligible for the NRHP But That Are Historical Resources for the Purposes of CEQA (Not Section 106 Properties)

[Table reports properties in Fresno County only] Map ID#

APN

22

46707402

23

City

County

Year Built

CEQA Only Property Status

942 Fagan Alley H. Sargavak Building

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1925

5S1, 6Z

46707116

938–952 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1898– 1906, ca. 1925

5D3, 6Z

24

46707102

956 China Alley Haruji Ego Family Building (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1900

5B, 6L, 6Z

25

46707201

1536–1542 Kern Street Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1901, ca. 1918

3CS, 5S1, 5D3, 6Z

26

46707208

1522–1526 Kern Street Dick’s Shoes Building (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

1923

3CS, 5D3, 5S3, 6Z

27

46707206

836–840 F Street Azteca Theater (located in the potential CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1950

3CS, 5D3, 5S3, 6Z

28

46828611

1830 Inyo Street Liberty Laundry

Fresno

Fresno

1928

5S1, 6Z

29

46828604

729 Broadway Baskin’s Auto Supply Sign

Fresno

Fresno

1953

5S1, 6Z

6.6.1

Address / Resource Name

Residential Historical Resources

[not provided in Fresno abridged version]

Page 6-15

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

6.6.2

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Commercial/Industrial Resources

The study area includes 24 commercial properties that are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA, but do not appear to meet the significance criteria or the integrity standards for listing in the NRHP. The buildings reflect a range of construction dates, architectural styles, and massing, but to a large degree the commercial and industrial development was largely vernacular in form, with basic commercial block construction and design elements common to the first half of the twentieth century. Five of the commercial properties were previously determined eligible for the City of Fresno Local Register of Historic Resources on an individual basis (rather than as contributors to potential districts, as discussed further below). These resources reflect a range of commercial uses, from retail shops to larger manufacturing concerns. The retail-oriented resources include the Liberty Laundry building (Figure 6-11) at 1830 Inyo Street (Reference: 468-286-11), a single-story brick commercial building built in 1928 in the Streetcar Commercial style. It is listed in Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources (No. 262). The Hobbs Parsons Produce Building (Reference: 467-040-24S), at 903-911 H Street, is a singlestory, brick wholesale produce warehouse constructed in 1903 and listed in Fresno’s Local Register (No. 169) as a significant architectural representative of warehouse/commercial construction. The Baskin’s Auto Supply Sign is a prominent neon blade sign erected in 1953; it is a good example of mid-century neon roadside advertising; it is located at 729 Broadway and is listed in Fresno’s Local Register (No. 263) as a heritage sign (Reference: 468-286-04).

(Reference: 468-286-11), April 20, 2010.

Figure 6-11 Liberty Laundry, 1830 Inyo Street, Fresno Of a more industrial nature are the Pacific Coast Seeded Raisin Company/Del Monte Plant (Reference: 467-040-12S) and the Benham Ice Cream/Dale Bros. Coffee Building (Reference: 466-205-11), built in 1906 and 1912–13, respectively. The Pacific Coast Seeded Raisin Company building, at 1626 Tulare Street, is a reinforced-concrete dried-fruit-processing plant that in 1946 was heavily altered and remodeled in the International Style. Located at 1420 H Street, the Benham Ice Cream/Dale Bros. Coffee Building and rooftop sign are listed in Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources (Nos. 248 and 247, respectively) for their association with Fresno’s commercial and economic development, and as significant architectural representatives of commercial construction (Figure 6-12).

PAGE 6-16

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

(Reference: 466-205-11), April 20, 2010.

Figure 6-12 Benham Ice Cream/Dale Bros. Coffee Building, 1420 H Street, Fresno The rest of Fresno’s commercial buildings belong to one of two potential local historic districts, neither of which has been formally listed in any local, state, or federal register. Also, several of the buildings have been previously determined to be individually eligible for Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources under local significance criteria; none meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP (see Table 6.6-1 for the eligibility status of each individual building). Eight commercial buildings are identified in the City of Fresno Chinatown Historic Property Survey (ARG 2006) and found to be eligible under Fresno Designation Criterion 1, for associations with the development of Fresno’s Chinatown neighborhood and as contributors to a potential Chinatown historic district. The evaluation specified a period of significance for the district spanning from 1872 to 1942; the contributors are all “one or two stories, but vary in style and detail according to their period of construction.” Many are two-part commercial blocks with commercial functions on the first floor and lodgings on the second” (ARG 2006). The buildings treated by this HPSR are a two-story brick commercial building at 1528 Tulare Street constructed circa 1895 and altered in 1934 to 1935 (Reference: 46707101); the Haruji Ego Family Building, a single-story brick commercial building at 956 China Alley, built circa 1900 (Reference: 467-07102); a two-story, two-part commercial block brick building at 938-952 F Street, built circa 1925 (Reference: 467-071-16); Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel, a two-story, two-part brick commercial building and residential hotel at 1536-1542 Kern Street, built circa 1901 (Reference: 467-072-01) (Figure 6-13); the Azteca Theatre, an Art Deco–style theatre at 836-840 F Street, constructed circa 1950 (Reference: 467-072-06) (Figure 6-14); Dick’s Shoes Building, a twostory, two-part brick commercial building at 1522-1526 Kern Street, built in 1923 (Reference: 467-072-08) (Figure 6-15); Peacock Department Store, a two-story, two-part brick commercial building at 945 F Street, built in 1926 (Reference: 467-074-02); and the H. Sargavak Building, a one-story brick commercial building at 942 Fagan Alley, built circa 1925 (Reference: 467-074-02).

Page 6-17

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

(Reference: 467-072-01), April 26, 2010.

Figure 6-13 Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel, 1536-1542 Kern Street, Fresno

(Reference: 467-072-06), April 26, 2010.

Figure 6-14 Azteca Theatre, 836-840 F Street, Fresno

(Reference: 467-072-08), April 20, 2010.

Figure 6-15 Dick’s Shoes Building, 1522-1526 Kerns Street, Fresno

PAGE 6-18

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Four buildings were found to contribute to Fresno’s potential Historic Warehouse District. In the City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report (Urbana Preservation and Planning 2006), the evaluator found the district to appear to be eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion 1 and Criterion 3 and for listing on the City of Fresno Local Register of Historic Resources under Fresno District Designation Criteria 1, 3, and 4, because of its association with the commercial development of Fresno. The period of significance was given as circa 1920 to 1950s. The buildings are as follows: Budd & Quinn, a single-story brick warehouse at 1514-1518 H Street, built in 1922 (Reference: 466-20-406) (Figure 6-16); Budd & Quinn Showroom/Fresno Body & Fender Works, a single-story warehouse at 1560 H Street built in 1929 (Reference: 46620-407); H.E. Jaynes & Son, a single-story warehouse at 1452 H Street, built in 1928 (Reference: 466-20-513) (Figure 6-17); and H.E. Jaynes & Son, a single-story warehouse at 1454 H Street, constructed in 1944 (Reference: 466-20-514).

(Reference: 466-204-06), May 18, 2010.

Figure 6-16 Budd & Quinn, 1514-1518 H Street, Fresno

(Reference: 466-205-13), May 18, 2010.

Figure 6-17 H.E. Jaynes & Son, 1452 H Street, Fresno

Page 6-19

Chapter 7 Findings

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

7.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Findings

The two archaeological resources inventoried and evaluated in this HPSR and the three previously recorded archaeological resources are considered ineligible as historical properties under the NHPA or historical resources under CEQA. The 52 historic architectural resources inventoried and evaluated in this HPSR reflect the major historical events discussed in the historical context for the APE that stretches from the downtown area in the city of Fresno, continues through rural Kings and Tulare counties, and terminates in unincorporated Kern County east of the city of Bakersfield. Although the survey area covers a large area that includes portions of four counties, the majority of the resources surveyed herein are in, or in the immediate vicinity of, the cities of Fresno and Bakersfield. A few properties are in the rural areas of Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties. The historic status of each of the 52 historic architectural resources surveyed is shown in Table 7-1 and on the DPR 523 form for each resource in Appendix C. Table 7-1 illustrates that the majority of the 52 buildings, structures, or objects had been identified by previous studies. Many of the previous studies were conducted in the 1970s or 1980s, before the development of current evaluation guidelines and standards. Several of the previous recordation forms were incomplete or Office of Historic Preservation staff had identified them as requiring re-evaluation. The re-evaluations were necessary because of the passage of time and the need to address eligibility under NRHP and/or CRHR criteria for some resources that had not been fully evaluated previously. Project QIs conducted field checks, prepared updates to all previous evaluations, and evaluated six previously unevaluated properties. Following standard practice, resources adequately surveyed within the past 5 years at the time of field survey (i.e., in or after 2005) were not re-evaluated and the previous recordation forms are included in Appendix C. No resources require further studies to resolve the question of their eligibility. (Historic architectural resources that met the Section 106 PA definition of streamlined documentation properties and those that required evaluation but were not likely to be found eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR were subject to intensive-level survey and presented as part of the HASR submittal for this project [Authority and FRA 2011a].) Four properties addressed in this HPSR were previously listed in the NRHP (Status Code 1) and CRHR: 

Bank of Italy, 1015 Fulton Mall, Fresno (NRHP #82000963).



Southern Pacific Railroad Depot, 1933 H Street, Fresno (NRHP #78000665; also Local Register #11).



Allensworth Historic District, 4129 Grant Drive, Earlimart (NRHP #72000263; also a California State Historic Park).



Santa Fe Depot, 150-200 Central Valley Highway, Shafter (NRHP #82002187).

One property addressed in this HPSR was previously determined eligible for listing on the NRHP (Status Code 2) and is listed in the CRHR: 

Friant-Kern Canal, Kern County.

The 47 remaining properties of the historic architectural survey population were evaluated for this study using NRHP and CRHR criteria; 20 appear eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR (Status Code 3). Twenty-seven of the resources do not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP (Status Code 6); however, some of these are considered to be historical resources for the purposes of CEQA and are described further below.

Page 7-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Nine historic architectural properties appeared eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR (Status Code 3) in previous studies. Seven of these properties are in Fresno County and two are in Bakersfield (Kern County), as noted below: 

Vartanian Home, 362 F Street, Fresno (Reference: 467-092-34).



Bank of America Building, 947-951 F Street, Fresno (Reference: 467-07-401).



First Mexican Baptist Church, 1061 E Street, Fresno (Reference: 467-10-301)



Radin-Kamp Department Store, 959 Fulton Mall, Fresno (Reference: 468-28-101).



South Van Ness Entrance Gate, S. Van Ness Avenue, Fresno.



Washington Colony Canal, Fresno County.



North Branch, Oleander Canal, Fresno County.



Kern County Civic Administrative Center, 1315–1415 Truxtun Ave, Bakersfield (Reference: 006-290-01).



Stark/Spenser Residence, 1321 N Street, Bakersfield (Reference: 006-430-02).

Eleven of the 44 historic evaluated architectural properties appear eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR as part of this study (Status Code 3): 

Hotel Fresno, 1257 Broadway, Fresno (Reference: 466-214-01).



Basque Hotel, 1102 F Street, Fresno (Reference: 467-062-008).



Holt Lumber Office Building, 1916 S. Cherry Avenue, Fresno (Reference: 467-020-13).



Crest Theater, 1160 Broadway Plaza, Fresno (Reference: 466-21-212).



Fresno Fire Department No. 3, 1406-1430 Fresno Street, Fresno (Reference: 467-06-508T).



Zuniga’s Tortilleria, 901 Flory Avenue, Corcoran (Reference: 030-184-010-000).



Lakeside Cemetery, Kent Avenue, Kings County (Reference: 028202004000)



Peoples Ditch, Kings County.



Joe O’Brien Stables, 1320 E. Lerdo Highway, vicinity of Shafter (Reference: 089-090-29).



SF&SJV Section House, 434 Central Valley Highway, Shafter (Reference: 027-070-28).



Harvey Auditorium, 1241 G Street, Bakersfield (Reference: 004-052-01).

The 27 historic architectural resources that do not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP (Status Code 6) remain listed in or are eligible for listing in a local register (Status Code 5 or 3C). Even though these resources were evaluated under NRHP criteria for this study and do not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP, they have some level of local designation and are considered to be historical resources for the purposes of CEQA (see Table 7-1). URS and its subconsultant, JRP, prepared this HPSR as part of project compliance with applicable sections of the NHPA and its implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as these pertain to federally funded undertakings and their impacts on historic

Page 7-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

properties. No historic architectural resources require further studies to resolve the question of their eligibility. Forty-nine historic-era historic architectural resources were evaluated to determine their eligibility for the NRHP for this investigation, in compliance with the Section 106 PA. Of the 52 historic architectural resources surveyed in the APE, 25 historic properties were listed in, have been determined eligible for listing in, or appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP. All historic architectural resources were also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)– (3) of the CEQA Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. All of the 49 historic architectural resources surveyed are historical resources for the purposes of CEQA, and as stated above, 24 are considered historical resources under CEQA only (i.e., not eligible for the NRHP). CEQA historical resources are those listed in the CRHR, eligible for listing in the CRHR, or that meet other local government standards as historical resources, as per Section 15064.5(a)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Page 7-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

This page intentionally left blank

Page 7-4

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor

[table reports Fresno resources only] Map ID#

APN/ Ref #

1

46620407

2

Address

CHRSa Code

Section 106 Resource

CEQA Resource

Previous Status

Budd & Quinn 3CD, 5D3, Showroom/Fresno Body 5S3, 6Z & Fender Works (located in the CEQA-only Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)



3CD, 5B, 7R

ca.1922

Budd & Quinn 3CD, 5D3, (located in the CEQA-only 6Z Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)



5D3

Fresno

1944

H. E. Jaynes & Son 3CD, 5D3, (located in the CEQA-only 6Z Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)



3CD, 5D3

Fresno

Fresno

1928

H. E. Jaynes & Son 3CD, 5D3, (located in the CEQA-only 6Z Warehouse District, which is not eligible for NRHP)



3CD, 5D3

Fresno

Fresno

1913, 1934

Parker Nash Building (located in the CEQA-only thematic Automotive District, which is not eligible for NRHP or CRHR)



3CD, 5B, 5S1

City

County

Year Built

1560 H Street

Fresno

Fresno

1929, 1937

46620406

1514–1518 H Street

Fresno

Fresno

3

46620514

1454 H Street

Fresno

4

46620513

1452 H Street

5

46620219 46620220

1460–1462 Broadway

Resource Name

5D3, 5S1, 6Z

Page 7-5

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor

[table reports Fresno resources only] Map ID#

APN/ Ref #

6

46620207

7

Address

CHRSa Code

Section 106 Resource

CEQA Resource

Previous Status

(located in the CEQA-only 3CD, 5D3, Warehouse District, 6Z which is not eligible for NRHP)



3CD, 5D3

Mayflower Hotel

3CS, 5S3, 6Z



3CS, 5S3

5S1, 6Z



5S1, 7W, 7R, Local Register #248 (bldg.); Local Register #247 (sign)





7N, Local Register #166

3S, 5S1





5S1, Local Register # 270

Fresno Fire Department No. 3

3S, 5S1





7R, Local Register #213

1922

Basque Hotel/EA Walrond Building

3S, 5S1





7R, Local Register #212

Fresno

1889

Southern Pacific Railroad Depot

1S, 5S1





1S, Local Register #11

Fresno

1918

Bank of Italy

1S





1S, 2S3

City

County

Year Built

Resource Name

1416 Broadway

Fresno

Fresno

1911–1912

46620505

1415–1417 Broadway

Fresno

Fresno

1917

8

46620511

1420 H Street

Fresno

Fresno

9

46621401

1257 Broadway

Fresno

Fresno

1912

Hotel Fresno

3S, 5S1

10

46621212

1160 Broadway Plaza

Fresno

Fresno

1948

Crest Theater

11

46706508T

1406–1430 Fresno Street

Fresno

Fresno

1938

12

46706208

1102 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

13

46703031ST

1033 H Street

Fresno

14

46621307

1015 Fulton Mall

Fresno

1912–1913, Benham Ice Cream/Dale 1923, 1937, Bros. Coffee Building; 1940 Dale Bros. Coffee Sign

Page 7-6

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor

[table reports Fresno resources only] Map ID#

APN/ Ref #

15

46710301

16

Address

CHRSa Code

Section 106 Resource

CEQA Resource

Previous Status

First Mexican Baptist Church

3S, 5S1





3S, Local Register #23

Bank of America

3S, 5S1





3S, Local Register #64, 7N

(located in the CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

5B, 6Z



5B, 6Z

Pacific Coast Seeded Raisin Company / Del Monte Plant No. 68

5S2, 6Z



5S2, 7R, 7J



7N, Local Register #169



3S, Local Register #124

City

County

Year Built

Resource Name

1061 E Street

Fresno

Fresno

1924, 1929

46707401

947–951 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

1908

17

46707101

1528–1548 Tulare Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1895, 1930, 1945

18

46704012S

1626 Tulare Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1906, 1946

19

46704024S

903–911 H Street

Fresno

Fresno

1903

Hobbs Parsons Produce Building

5S1, 6Z

20

46828101

959 Fulton Mall

Fresno

Fresno

1925

Radin-Kamp Department Store

3S

21

46707402

937–945 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

1926

Peacock Department Store

5D3, 6Z



5D3, 6Z

22

46707402

942 Fagan Alley

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1925

H. Sargavak Building

5B, 3CS, 6Z



5B

23

46707116

938–952 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1898– 1906, ca. 1925

5D3, 6Z



5D3



Page 7-7

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor

[table reports Fresno resources only] Map ID#

APN/ Ref #

24

46707102

25

CHRSa Code

Section 106 Resource

CEQA Resource

Previous Status

5B, 6Z



5B, Fresno Heritage Property #008

Komoto’s Department Store and Hotel (located in the CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

3CS, 5S1, 5D3, 6Z



3CS, Local Register #72

1923

Dick’s Shoes Building(Dick Avakian Shoe Repair) (located in the CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

3CS, 5D3, 5S3, 6Z



3CS; 7R

Fresno

ca. 1950

Azteca Theatre (located in the CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

3CS, 5D3, 5S3, 6Z



3CS

Fresno

Fresno

1928

Liberty Laundry

5S1, 6Z



7R, Local Register #262

729 Broadway

Fresno

Fresno

1953

Baskin’s Auto Supply Sign

5S1, 6Z



Local Register #263

362 F Street

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1895

Vartanian Home

3S, 5S1



3S, Local Register #67

Address

City

County

Year Built

Resource Name

956 China Alley

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1900

Haruji Ego Family Building (located in the CEQA-only Chinatown District, which is not eligible for NRHP)

46707201

1536–1542 Kern Street

Fresno

Fresno

1901, ca. 1918

26

46707208

1522–1526 Kern Street

Fresno

Fresno

27

46707206

836–840 F Street

Fresno

28

46828611

1830 Inyo Street

29

46828604

30

46709234



Page 7-8

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Table 7-1 HPSR Survey Population Arranged North to South along the Fresno to Bakersfield Corridor

[table reports Fresno resources only] Map ID#

APN/ Ref #

31

46702013

32

n/a

33

34

Address

Resource Name

CHRSa Code

Section 106 Resource

CEQA Resource

Previous Status

3S, 5S1





7N, Local Register #101

City

County

Year Built

1916 S. Cherry Avenue

Fresno

Fresno

1920s, post- Holt Lumber 1961

2208 S. Van Ness Avenue (vicinity)

Fresno

Fresno

ca. 1925– 1929

South Van Ness Entrance Gate

3S, 5S1





3S, Local Register #82, County Register #136

n/a

Fresno

1878–1880

Washington Colony Canal (eligible component of the Washington Irrigated Colony Historic District)

3D





3D

n/a

Fresno

ca. 1880s

North Branch of Oleander Canal (eligible component of the Washington Irrigated Colony Historic District)

3D





3D

Note: a

CHRS = California Historical Resource Status Code (see Appendix D)

Acronyms: APN = Assessor’s Parcel Number CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act CHRS = California Historical Resource Status HPSR = Historic Property Survey Report

Page 7-9

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

This page intentionally left blank

Page 7-10

Chapter 8 References

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

8.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

References

NB: this section includes references cited in either the text of the HPSR and/or in the DPR 523 forms that are attached to the report in Appendix C. Adams, Frank. 1929. Irrigation Districts in California. Bulletin No. 21.Sacramento, CA: State of California Department of Public Works. Angel, J.L. 1966. “Early Skeletons from Tranquility, California.” Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 2(1): 1–19. Arax, Mark, and Rick Wartzman. 2003. The King of California: J. G. Boswell and the Making of a Secret American Empire. New York: Public Affairs. Architectural Resources Group (ARG). 2006. City of Fresno Chinatown Historic Property Survey. Prepared for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department. April 4. Bailey, Richard C. 1984. Heart of the Golden Empire: An Illustrated History of Bakersfield. Woodland Hills, CA: Windsor Publications, Inc. Becker, Regina. 1989. “A Bundle of Living.” Quoted in V. Neufield, “The Martensdale Colony, 1909–1910.” March 15, 1989. California State University, Bakersfield, Beale Memorial Library, VF-Colonies. Baker, Regina. 1989. “A Bundle of Living.” Quoted in V. Neufield, “The Martensdale Colony, 1909–1910.” March 15, 1989. California State University, Bakersfield, Beale Memorial Library, VF-Colonies. Baker, Thomas A. 1937. Early Bakersfield. Kern County Historical Society, Third Annual Publication.

Bakersfield Californian. 1944a. “Final Rites Set for Kern County Pioneer.” September 11. ———.1944b. “Rites Held for John T. Basye.” September 12. ———.1968a. “Gold-Rich Kentucky Lawyers, SP Agent Mold KCL.” October 15. ———. 1968b. “KCL Reins Change Hands.” October 17. ———. 1975 “Camp Role as Cotton Pioneer Recalled.” August 4, 9:1. Baldwin, George H. 1916. Water Rights on Kern River. Berkeley, CA: MS G4562/D1 Water Resources Center Archives, University of California, Berkeley. Banning, E.B., A.L. Hawkins, and S.T. Stewart. 2006. “Detection Functions for Archaeological Survey.” American Antiquity 71(4): 723–742. Barth, Gunther Paul. 1975. Instant Cities: Urbanization and the Rise of San Francisco and Denver. New York: Oxford University Press. Bean, Walton, and James J. Rawls. 1983. California: An Interpretive History. 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co. Beck, Warren A., and Ynez D. Haase. 1974. Historical Atlas of California. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Page 8-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Bennyhoff, J.A., and R.F. Heizer. 1958. “Cross-Dating Great Basin Sites by Californian Shell Beads.” University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 42:60–92. Benson, R.C. No date. “Irrigation in Kern County, California.” Report filed in the records of the Office of Irrigation Investigations at Berkeley, California. In George H Baldwin, Water Rights on Kern River. Berkeley, CA: MS G4562/D1 Water Resources Center Archives, University of California, Berkeley, 1916. Benté, Vance. 2009. Registered Professional Archaeologist, URS Corporation, Oakland, CA. Letters and maps sent to contacts provided by the Native American Heritage Commission to solicit comments regarding concerns about the HST project, October 18, 2009. Berg, Norman. 1971. A History of Kern County Land Company. Bakersfield, CA: The Kern County Historical Society. Bergman, John. 2009. The Southern San Joaquin Valley, A Railroad History: Fresno to Bakersfield. Visalia, CA: Jostens Printing & Publishing Co. BNSF Railway (BNSF). 2003. Track Chart: Bakersfield Subdivision, Bakersfield, CA (MP 887.7) to Calwa, Ca (MP 994.9). Prepared by BNSF System Maintenance and Planning. Various updates. Bonte, Harmon S. 1930. “Financial and General Data Pertaining to Irrigation, Reclamation, and Other Public Districts in California.” State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Water Resources. Bulletin No. 31. Boyd, William. 1997. Lower Kern River Country, 1850–1950: Wilderness to Empire. Bakersfield, CA: Kern County Historical Society. Britton & Rey.1901a. Bakersfield, Kern County, California (Bird's Eye View). San Francisco: N.J. Stone Co. ———. 1901b. Fresno [Bird's Eye View]. San Francisco: Britton & Rey Photo-Lith. Broadbent, Sylvia. 1974. “Conflict at Monterey: Indian Horse Raiding, 1820–1850.” Journal of Anthropology 1(1). Spring. The UC Merced Library, Merced. Brown, J.L. 1958. The Mussel Slough Tragedy. Bryant, Keith L. 1974. History of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. New York: Macmillan. Burmeister, Eugene. 1969.City Along the Kern: Bakersfield, California, 1869–1969:A Centennial Publication in Limited Edition. Bakersfield, CA: Kern Publishing House. Caltrans. Structures Maintenance. 2006. “Historic Bridge Inventory.” http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/structur/strmaint/historic.htm. Accessed March 2010 and October 2010. California Digital Library. 2001. Historical Census Populations of Counties, Places, Towns, and

Cities in California, 1850–2000.

http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/census-surveys/historical_18502000/. 2001. Accessed April 2010.

Page 8-2

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

California High-Speed Rail Authority and Federal Railroad Administration (Authority and FRA). 2005. Final Program Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for the Proposed California High-Speed Train System. Vol. 1, Report. Sacramento and Washington, DC: California High-Speed Rail Authority and USDOT Federal Railroad Administration.http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/library.asp?p=7226. Accessed August 2010. ———. 2008. Final Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train (HST) Program Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). Sacramento and Washington, DC: Authority and FRA, May. http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/library.asp?p=8052. Accessed August 2010. ———. 2011a. California High-Speed Train Fresno to Bakersfield Historic Architectural Survey Report (HASR). Sacramento and Washington, DC: California High-Speed Rail Authority and USDOT Federal Railroad Administration. ———. 2011b. Section 106 Programmatic Agreement among the Federal Railroad Administration,

the Advisory Council on Historical Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California High-Speed Rail Authority Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

———. 2011c. Fresno-Bakersfield Archaeological Identification and Evaluation Plan. ———. 2011d. Fresno-Bakersfield Historic Architecture Identification and Evaluation Plan. ———. 2011e. California High-Speed Train Fresno to Bakersfield Archaeological Survey Report (ASR). Sacramento and Washington, DC: California High-Speed Rail Authority and USDOT Federal Railroad Administration. California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). 1976. California Inventory of Historic Resources. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation. ———. 1992. California Points of Historical Interest. Sacramento, CA: The Resources Agency, California Department of Parks and Recreation. ———. [1990] 1995.California Historical Landmarks. Sacramento, CA: The Resources Agency, California Department of Parks and Recreation. http://www.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=21386. ———. 2009. Historic Properties Directory Listing by City (through 23 October 2009). Sacramento, CA: State Office of Historic Preservation. Carothers, Alice L. 1934. “The History of the Southern Pacific Railroad in the San Joaquin Valley.” M.A. thesis. University of Southern California, June. Chacon, Ramon D. 1988. “The Beginning of Racial Segregation: The Chinese in West Fresno and Chinatown’s Role as Red Light District, 1870s–1920s.” Southern California Quarterly. 70(4):371–398. Chant, Christopher. 2007. The History of North American Steam. Edison, NJ: Chartwell Books. Chase, Paul G. 1994. Archaeological Survey Report and Extended Survey for the Proposed AMTRAK Station in Bakersfield, California. Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center, Bakersfield, California. June 1994.

Page 8-3

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

City of Corcoran. 2010. “City of Corcoran—History.” http://www.cityofcorcoran.com/about/history.asp. Accessed April 2010. City of Fresno. 2010. “Local Register of Historic Places.” http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDirectory/PlanningandDevelopment/Plan ning/HistoHistoricPreserv/default.html. Accessed August 2010. ———. 2011. “What is Fulton’s future?” http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDirectory/DCR/DowntownRevitalization/f ultonmall.htm. Accessed June 9, 2011. City of Wasco. 2007. “Wasco Festival of Roses.” http://www.ci.wasco.ca.us/public_documents/WascoCA_Chamber/festival. Accessed April 2, 2010. ———. 2010. “History of Wasco.” http://www.ci.wasco.ca.us/Public_Documents/WascoCA_WebDocs. 2010. Accessed April 2, 2010. Clark, Ira G. 1958. Then Came the Railroads. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Cleland, Robert Glass. 1941. The Cattle on a Thousand Hills: Southern California, 1850–1880. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library. Cline, Harry. 2007. “Battle to Preserve SJV Pima Production.” Farm Press. October 6. Clough, Charles W. 1985. Fresno County: The Pioneer Years. Volume 1.2nd printing. Fresno, CA: Panorama West Books. ———. 1986. Fresno County in the 20th Century, From 1900 to the 1980s. Volume 2, An All New History. Fresno, CA: Panorama West Books. Comfort, Herbert G. 1934. Where Rolls the Kern: A History of Kern County, California. Moorpark, CA: The Enterprise Press. Conkling, Roscoe Platt. 1947. The Butterfield Overland Mail, 1857–1869. Glendale, CA: A.H. Clark Co. Cook, Sherburne. 1976. The Conflict between the California Indian and White Civilization. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Correspondence with SHPO. 2010. Correspondence between SHPO, Mayor Swearengin, Fresno City Council, and Karana Hattersley-Drayton regarding NRHP eligibility of Fulton Mall. Cram, George F. 1899. California: Southern Half. Scale: 1:1,711,00. Chicago: George F. Cram. Crampton, Beecher. 1974. Grasses in California. California Natural History Guides. No. 33. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Davis, G.H., J.H. Green, F.H. Olmsted, and Brown, D.W.1959. Ground Water Conditions and Storage Capacity in the San Joaquin Valley. USGS Water Supply Paper, No. 1469. Downtown Association of Fresno. 2010. “The Fulton Mall: A Brief History.” www.downtownfresno.org/fulton-mall.html. Accessed April 2010.

Page 8-4

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Duke, Donald, and Stan Kistler. 1963. Santa Fe: Steel Rails through California. San Marmo, CA: Golden West Books. Durrenberger, Robert W., and Robert B. Johnson. 1976. California: Patterns on the Land. 5th ed. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishing Co. Echeverria, Jeronima. 1999. Home away from Home: A History of Basque Boardinghouses. Reno and Las Vegas, NV: University of Nevada Press. Elliott & Co. 1882 [1973]. History of Fresno County, California. San Francisco, CA: Wallace W. Elliott & Co., Publishers. Fresno, CA: Valley Publishers, reprint, 1973. ———. 1883. History of Kern County, California. San Francisco, CA: Wallace W. Elliott & Co., Publishers. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). 2010. EDR Sanborn Direct. On-line subscription service. http://sanborn.edrnet.com. Accessed May10, 2010. Etcheverry, B.A. 1916. Irrigation Practice and Engineering. Vol. III: “Irrigation Structures and Distribution System.” New York and London: McGraw Book Co., Inc. Everson. D. 1991. Archaeological Site Record, Cultural Resource Facility, CSU Bakersfield, P-15003072. On File at the South San Joaquin Valley Information Center, Bakersfield, CA. Fountain, Steven Michael. 2007. “Big Dogs and Scorched Streams: Horses and Ethnocultural Change in the North American West, 1700–1850.”Ph.D. diss., University of California, Davis. Fox, Charles P. 1905. The Empire of Kern: In Kern County California, in the Delta of the Kern

River, the Crown of the San Joaquin Valley.

Franco, Lalo. 2009. Director of the Cultural Department Santa Rosa Rancheria, Santa Rosa, CA. Personal communication regarding Native American cultural resources in the project area, future monitoring of project activities, and the formulation of an agreement to address Native American burials, November 2, 2009. Fredrickson, David A. 1986. “Buena Vista Lake (CA-KER-116) Revisited.” Symposium: A New Look

at Some Old Sites: Papers from the Symposium Organized by Francis A. Riddell.

Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, March 23–26, 1983, San Diego, California. Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory 6:75–81. http://www.californiaprehistory.com/reports02/rep0029.html. Accessed June 14, 2010. Fredrickson, D.A., and J.W. Grossman. 1977. “A San Dieguito Component at Buena Vista Lake, California.” Journal of California Anthropology. 4:173–190. Frickstad, Walter N. 1909. “Low Cost of Excavating with Fresno Scrapers.” Engineering News. November 3. ———. 1912. “Rules for Estimating the Cost of Excavating Earth with Fresno Scrapers.” Engineering News. May 23. Fulton Mall NRHP Nomination Form. 2008. Prepared by Ray McKnight, Linda Zachritz, Harold Tokmakian. Gates, Paul W. 1975. “Public Land Disposal in California.” Agricultural History. 49(1 [January]): 158–178.

Page 8-5

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Gavin, Camille. 2009. “Generations Working the Land Together.” Bakersfield Californian. November 25. Gerow, Bert. 1974. “Co-Traditions and Convergent Trends in Prehistoric California.” San Luis Obispo County Archaeology Society Occasional Papers. No. 8. San Luis Obispo, CA. Gifford, Edward W., and W. Egbert Schenck. 1926. “Archaeology of the Southern San Joaquin Valley, California.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology. 23(1). Gronberg, Jo Ann M., Neil. M. Dubrovsky, Charles R. Kratzer, Joseph L. Domagalski, Larry R. Brown, and Karen R. Burow. 1998. Environmental Setting of the San Joaquin–Tulare Basins, California. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 974205. Sacramento, California. Gudde, Erwin G. 1998. California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names. 4th ed. Revised and enlarged by William Bright. Berkeley: University of California Press. Harding, S.T. 1960. Water in California. Palo Alto, CA: N-P Publications. Hartzell, L.L. 1992. “Hunter-Gatherer Adaptive Strategies and Lacustrine Environments in the Buena Vista Lake Basin, Kern County, California.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Davis. Harvey, William, Sr. 1907. Map of Fresno County, California. Fresno: Wm. Harvey, Sr. Haslam, Gerald. 1993. “The Lake That Will Not Die.” California History 72(3 [Fall]): 256–271. Hayes, Derek. 2007. Historical Atlas of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Heath, Erle. 1945. Seventy-Five Years of Progress: Historical Sketch of the Southern Pacific. San Francisco, CA: Southern Pacific Bureau of News. Heizer, Robert F. 1951. A Cave Burial from Kern County. Reports of the University of California Archaeological Survey, No. 10. The University of California Archaeological Survey, Berkeley, California. n.d. [1951]. ———. 1964. The Western Coast of North America. In Prehistoric Man in the New World, edited by Jesse D. Jennings and Edward Norbeck, pp. 117-148. University of Chicago Press. Heizer, Robert F., and Mary Anne Whipple. 1971. The California Indians; a source book. Berkeley: University of California Press. Hewes, Gordon W. 1941. “Reconnaissance of the Central San Joaquin Valley.” American Antiquity 7(2): 123–133. Hofsommer, Don L. 1986. The Southern Pacific, 1901–1985. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. Holterhoff, G., Jr. (comp.). 1914. Historical Review of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway

Company (with Particular Reference to California Lines) as Furnished to the Railroad Commission of the State of California in Compliance with its General Order No. 38. Los Angeles, June.

Hoover, Mildred, et al. 1966. Historic Spots in California. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Page 8-6

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Hoover, Mildred Brooke, and Douglas E. Kyle. 1990. Historic Spots in California. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Revised4th edition. Hundley, Norris, Jr. 2001. The Great Thirst: Californians and Water, A History. Rev. ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Hunter, J.M. 1905. “A Business Man’s County Excursion.” Kern County, California, in the Delta of the Kern River, the Crown of the San Joaquin Valley. Promotional pamphlet. Jelinek, Lawrence J. [1979] 1982. Harvest Empire: A History of California Agriculture. 2d ed. San Francisco, CA: Boyd & Fraser Publishing Company, 2d ed., 1982. JRP Historical Consulting Services (JRP). 2000. Water Conveyance Systems in California: Historic Context Development and Evaluation Procedures. Prepared with Caltrans Environmental Program/Cultural Studies Office. Sacramento. ———. 2002. “Historic Property Studies within and near the Truckee Meadows Project Western Area of Potential Effects, Washoe County, Nevada.” JRP Historical Consulting, LLC.

Kern County Recorder. 1893. Map of the Virginia Colony. March 18. ———. 1928. Book 0277, page 339. December 14. Kings County Library. 2005. “Historical Overview of Kings County.” http://www.kingscountylibrary.org/res/hstk2.htm (accessed April 2010). Kraus, George. 1969. High Road to Promontory: Building the Central Pacific across the High Sierra. Palo Alto, CA: American West Publishing Co. Kroeber, Alfred L. 1907. “The Yokuts Language of South Central California.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 2(5): 165–377. ———. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78. New York: Dover Publications, reprint 1976. ———. 1963. “Yokuts Dialect Survey.” University of California Anthropological Records 11(3): 177–252. Kuchler, A.W. 1977. “The Map of the Natural Vegetation of California.” M. Barbour and J. Major, eds., Terrestrial Vegetation of California, 909–938. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Latta, F.F. 1932. “El Camino Viejo.” Tulare Daily Times. ———. 1949. Handbook of Yokuts Indians. ———. 1977. Handbook of Yokuts Indians. 2d ed. Santa Cruz, CA: Bear State Books. Lewis Publishing. 1974. History of the Counties of Fresno, Tulare, and Kern, California. Chicago, IL: Lewis Publishing Company. No place: California Traveler, Inc., reprint of 1892 edition, 1974.

Los Angeles Times. 1898a. “Grand Celebration.” May 29. ———. 1898b. “Valley Road Gobbled.” October 20. ———. 1954. “Kern County Building Activity Spiraling Up.” April 25. Marshall, James L. 1945. Santa Fe: The Railroad That Built an Empire. New York: Random House.

Page 8-7

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Martorana, Dean. 2009. Lead Archaeologist, URS Corporation, Oakland, CA. Letter to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting a search of the sacred land file maintained by the NAHC, April 21, 2009. Matola, Mary. 2009. Cultural Specialist, Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians, Coarsegold, CA. Letter regarding Native American cultural resources in the area of the HST project expressing a wish to be informed regarding potential cultural disturbances, inadvertent discoveries, and the progress of the project, to Vance Benté, URS Corporation, November 12, 2009. McAdie, Alexander, George C. Pardee, and E. A. Sterling. 1905. “Reclaiming the Arid West: Important Results of the Recent National Irrigation Conference at El Paso, Texas.” Sunset Magazine, February 14. McBroome, Delores Nason. 2001. “Harvest of Gold: African-American Boosterism, Agriculture, and Investment in Allensworth and Little Liberia.” Lawrence B. de Graff, Kevin Mulroy, and Quintard Taylor, eds. Seeking El Dorado: African Americans in California, 149–180. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. McDannold, Thomas A. 2000. California’s Chinese Heritage: A Legacy of Places. Stockton, CA: Heritage West Books. Mead, Elwood. 1901. “Report of Irrigation Investigations in California under Direction of Elwood Mead.” Bulletin No.100. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Stations. Washington D.C: Government Printing Office. Meighan, Clement W. 1955. “Archaeology of the North Coast Ranges, California.” University of California Archaeological Survey Reports (30):1–39. Mendenhall, W.C. 1916. Ground Water in the San Joaquin Valley. USGS Water Supply Paper No. 398. Mendenhall, W.C., et al. 1908. Preliminary Report on the Ground Waters of the San Joaquin Valley. USGS Water Supply Paper No. 222. Menefee, Eugene L., and Fred A. Dodge. 1913. History of Tulare and Kings Counties, California. Los Angeles, CA: Historic Record Company. Miller, W.J. 1957. California through the Ages. Los Angeles: Westernlore Press. Moehring, Eugene P. 2004. Urbanism and Empire in the Far West, 1840–1890. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press. Moratto, M. 1984. California Archaeology. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press. Morgan, Wallace M. 1914. History of Kern County, California. Los Angeles, CA: Historic Record Company. Moritz, E.A. 1909. “Low Cost of Excavating with Fresno Scrapers.” Engineering News. November 3, 1909. Munz, P.A. 1968. A California Flora and Supplement. Berkeley: University of California Press. N.J. Stone & Co. 1901. Bakersfield, Kern County, California. San Francisco: N.J. Stone & Co.

Page 8-8

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

National Park Service. 1997. “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Register Bulletin, No.,15.U.S. Department of the Interior. Newman, Stanley S. 1944. “The Yokuts Language of California.” Anthropology. Vol. 2. New York: Viking Fund Publications. Newsom, Samuel, and Joseph C. Newsom. 1978. Picturesque California Homes. Los Angeles: Hennessey and Ingalls. Olsen, W.H., and L.A. Payen. 1968. Archaeology of the Little Panoche Reservoir, Fresno County, California. Archaeological Report No. 11. California Department of Parks and Recreation. ———. 1969. Archaeology of the Grayson Site. Archaeological Report No. 12. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Orfila, R.S. 2010. California Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record 523 Form, P-54004737 (“Stoil”). On file at the South San Joaquin Valley Information Center, Bakersfield, CA. Orsi, Richard. 2005. Sunset Limited: The Southern Pacific Railroad and the Development of the American West. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Owens, Kenneth N. 1990. Historical Context and Typology. Vol. 1, Historical Trails and Roads in California: A Cultural Resource Planning Study. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation, March. Parker, Patricia L., and Thomas F. King. 1990. Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Parks Service. Revised 1992, 1998. http://www.nps.gov/history/NR/publications/bulletins/nrb38/ (accessed June 14, 2010). Peak and Associates, Inc. 1991. Cultural Resource Assessment of Sample Areas of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1, Kern County, California. Sacramento: Peak and Associates, report on file, EG&G Energy Measurements, Inc., Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1, Tupman, California. Perez, Crisostomo N. 1996. Land Grants in Alta California. Rancho Cordova, CA: Landmark Enterprises. Pilas-Treadway, Debbie. 2009. TITLE, Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), CITY, CA. Letter reporting that a search of the sacred land file failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area, May 5, 2009. Pisani, Donald J. 1984. From the Family Farm to Agribusiness: The Irrigation Crusade in California and the West, 1850–1931. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Pomeroy, Earl S. 1957. In Search of the Golden West: The Tourist in Western America. New York: Knopf. Powell, John Edward. 1994. “Supplementary Historic Building Survey, Historic Resources Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California.” Fresno: Department of Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization, City of Fresno Historic Preservation Commission. September 30. Preston, William L. 1981. Vanishing Landscapes: Land and Life in the Tulare Lake Basin. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Page 8-9

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Ptomey, S., and L. Wear. 1989. “Archaeological Site Record, CA-KER-2507.” On file at the South San Joaquin Valley Information Center, Bakersfield, CA. Rand McNally and Company. 1960. Bakersfield Street Map. Randall and Denne. 1901. Index Atlas of Kern County, California. Bakersfield, CA: Randall & Denne. Redmoon, Jim. 2010. Cultural Resources Manager, Dumna Tribal Council, Fresno, CA. Written comments to a March 2010 letter from the HRA regarding the desire of the Dumna WoWah to participate in the Section 106 process as an interested party, April 18, 2010. Rice, Richard B., William A. Bullough, and Richard J. Orsi. 1988. The Elusive Eden: A New History of California. New York: Knopf. Riddell, Francis A. 1951. “Excavations of Site KER-74.” University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 10:1–29. Riddell, F.A., and W.H. Olsen. 1969. “An Early Site in the San Joaquin Valley, California.” American Antiquity 34: 121–130. Rintoul, William. 1976. Spudding In: Recollections of Pioneer Days in the California Oil Fields. San Francisco, CA: California Historical Society. Roberts, Robin M. 2005. Hanford: Images of America. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing. Robinson, David Laughing Horse. 2009. Chair of the Kawaiisu Tribe, Bakersfield, CA. Written communication to Vance Benté, URS Corporation, voicing appreciation for letter regarding project progress, October 30. 2009. Robinson, William Wilcox. 1976. Spudding In: Recollections of Pioneer Days in the California Oil Fields. San Francisco, CA: California Historical Society. Rondeau, Michael F., Jim Cassidy, and Terry L. Jones. 2007. “Colonization Technologies: Fluted Projectile Points and the San Clemente Island Woodworking/Microblade Complex.” Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, eds., California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press. Pp. 63-70. Royal, Alice. 2008. Allensworth, The Freedom Colony: A California African American Township. Berkeley, CA: Heyday.

San Joaquin Light and Power Magazine. 1915. “Valley Development and Progress.” San Joaquin Light and Power Magazine 3(11 [November]). Sanborn Map and Publishing Company (Sanborn).1885. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1888. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1889a. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. 1889. ———. 1889b. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1890. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1892. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited.

Page 8-10

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

———. 1898. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1899a. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1899b. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1905. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1906. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1912. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1912–1951. “Bakersfield.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1918–1919. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1918–1948. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. ———. 1918–1950. “Fresno.” New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Limited. Sandoval-Stausz, A.K. 2007. Hotel: An American History. New Haven: Yale University Press. Schiffman, Robert A., and Alan P. Garfinkel. 1981. Prehistory of Kern County: an overview. Bakersfield College publications in archaeology, no. 1. [Bakersfield, Calif.]: Bakersfield College. Secretary of War. 1873. Map of the San Joaquin, Sacramento and Tulare Valleys, State of California. Prepared under the direction of the Board of Commissioners on Irrigation, appointed by Congress. U.S. Army, Secretary of War. Shinn, Charles H. 1885. Mining Camps: A Study of American Frontier Government. New York: Charles Scribner's Son. Shipley, William. 1978. “Native Languages in California.” Robert F. Heizer, ed., Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California, 80–90. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Siefkin, Nelson. 1999. “Archaeology of the Redtfeldt Mound (CA-Kin-66), Tulare Basin, California.” Master’s thesis, California State University, Bakersfield. Siefkin, Nelson, Gerrit L. Fenenga, and Jay C. von Werlhof. 1996. “Early Salvage Archaeology in Kern County: Investigations at the Buena Vista Golf Course Site (CA-Ker-240), California.” Kern County Archaeological Journal 7:15–35. Small, Kathleen Edwards, and J. Larry Smith. 1926. History of Tulare County and Kings County, California. Chicago: S.J. Clarke Publishing Company. Smith, Richard H. 1976. “Towns along the Tracks: Railroad Strategy and Town Promotion in the San Joaquin Valley, California.” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Los Angeles. Smith, Wallace. 1939. Garden of the Sun: A History of the San Joaquin Valley, 1772–1939. Los Angeles, CA: Lyman House. Snell, Joseph W., and Don W. Wilson. 1968. “The Birth of the Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Railroad.” Kansas Historical Quarterly, no. 4, Summer and Fall.

Page 8-11

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Spier, R.F.G. 1978. “Foothill Yokuts.” In Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8: California. W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, R.F. Heizer, ed. Pp. 471–484. Washington, DC.: Smithsonian Institution. Storey, W.B. 1940. “William Benson Storey: Civil Engineer and Railroad Executive.” Journal of the Western Society of Engineers, no. 45(February). Stratton, Susan. 2010. State Historic Preservation Officer, State of California, Sacramento, CA. Letter response to David Valenstien, FRA regarding the delineation of the APE and Section 106 compliance for the four proposed alignments of the California High-Speed Train Project, June 28, 2010. Sutton, Mark, Q. 1996. “A Charmstone Cache from the Southern San Joaquin Valley.” Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 32(4):41–54. Taylor, Frank J. 1954. “World's Most Fabulous Farm.” The National Business 42, no. 2 (February). Thickens, Virginia E. 1946a. “Pioneer Agricultural Colonies of Fresno County.” California Historical Society Quarterly 25(1[March]). ———. 1946b. “Pioneer Agricultural Colonies of Fresno County (Concluded).” California Historical Society Quarterly 25(2 [June]). Thompson, Thomas H. 1891. Official Historical Atlas Map of Fresno County. Tulare, CA: Thomas H. Thompson. Tinkham, George H. 1923. History of San Joaquin County, California. Los Angeles, CA: Historic Record Company. Urbana Preservation and Planning. 2006. City of Fresno Arts-Cultural District Historic Property

Survey Report.

URS Corporation (URS). 2010. Draft Fresno to Bakersfield Archaeological Survey Report. Prepared for the California High-Speed Rail Authority. On file. Sacramento, CA: California HighSpeed Rail Authority. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1975. Water Resources Development in California. Sacramento, CA: VTN Sacramento. U.S. Bureau of Land Management. 1893. Patent to John J. Basye; Document No. 7029; Serial No. CACAAA131522. United States Bureau of Land Management. U.S. Census Bureau. 1850–1880. ———. 1850–1930. ———. 1910. Population schedules: Kern, Kings, Tulare, and Fresno counties. U.S. Census Bureau. ———. 1920. Population schedules: Kern, Kings, Tulare, and Fresno counties. U.S. Census Bureau. ———. 1930. Population schedules: Kern, Kings, Tulare, and Fresno counties. U.S. Census Bureau.

Page 8-12

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

U.S. Cotton Field Station. 1959. California’s Cotton Research Center. Booklet. Shafter, CA: U.S. Cotton Field Station. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2009. “USDA and Cotton in Kern County.” Presentation by Lyle Carter, Agricultural Engineer. http://www.ars.usda.gov/sp2UserFiles/Place/53030000/KernCot.pdf (accessed April 2010). U.S. Geological Survey. 1970. Allensworth Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1970. Alpaugh Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1954. Gosford Quadrangle. 1:24,000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1955. Burris Park Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1964. Caruthers Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1979. Conejo Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1970. Corcoran Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1970. Delano West Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1993. Edison Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1923. Fresno Quadrangle. 1:31,680. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1946. Fresno South Quadrangle. 1:24,000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1963. Fresno South Quadrangle. 1:24,000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1981. Fresno South Quadrangle. 1:24,000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1982. Fresno South Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1954. Gosford Quadrangle. 1:24,000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1974. Gosford Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1955. Hacienda Ranch NE Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1955. Hanford Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1993. Lamont Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1954. Laton Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1982. Malaga Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1993. Oil Center Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1974. Oildale Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1955. Remnoy Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1974. Rio Bravo Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS.

Page 8-13

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

———. 1974. Rosedale Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1974. Stevens Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1982. Taylor Weir Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1974. Wasco NW Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. ———. 1955. Waukena Quadrangle. 1:24000. Washington, DC: USGS. Vandor, Paul E. 1919. History of Fresno County, California. Los Angeles, CA: Historic Record Company. Vaught, David. 1999. Cultivating California. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Walker, Edwin F. 1947. Excavation of a Yokuts Indian Cemetery: Elk Hills, Kern County, California. Bakersfield, California: Kern County Historical Society. Reprinted in 1963. Wallace, W.J. 1954. “The Little Sycamore Site and the Early Millingstone Cultures of Southern California.” American Antiquity 20:112–123. ———.1978a. “Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C.” W.C. Sturtevant, general editor. Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8, R.F. Heizer, ed.,California,25–36. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. ———. 1978b. “Southern Valley Yokuts.” W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8, R.F. Heizer, ed., California, 448–461. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Wallace, W.J. 1978c. “Northern Valley Yokuts.” W.C. Sturtevant, general editor, Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 8, R.F. Heizer, ed., California, 462–470. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution. Wallace, William J., and Francis Riddell. 1988. “Archaeological Background of Tulare Lake, California.” Judith A. Willig, C. Melvin Aikens, and John L. Fagan, eds., Early Occupations in Far Western North America: The Clovis-Archaic Interface,87–101. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers No. 21. Waters, L.L. 1950. Steel Trails to Santa Fe. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press. Wedel, W.R. 1941. “Archaeological Investigations at Buena Vista Lake, Kern County, California.” Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin. No. 130. Washington, DC. [Cited in Hartzell 1992] Wheeler, Gordon B. 2006. “Allensworth: California's African American Community.” Wild West. February. Willison, Paul H. 1980. Past, Present, and Future of the Fresno Irrigation District. [No place]: California State University, Fresno, Special Collections. Zonlight, Margaret Aseman [Cooper]. 1979. Land, Water and Settlement in Kern County, California, 1850–1890. New York: Arno Press. Zubiri, Nancy. 1998. A Travel Guide to Basque America: Families, Feasts, and Festivals. Reno, NV: University of Nevada Press.

Page 8-14

Chapter 9 Preparer Qualifications

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

9.0

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Preparer Qualifications

The cultural resources study presented in this HPSR was conducted by or under the supervision of persons who qualify as archaeologists, historians, and/or architectural historians under the Professional Qualification Standards of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior (as defined in 36 CFR Part 61). The following staff meet the standards for “Qualified Investigator” as defined in the Section 106 PA (Authority and FRA 2011b). Archaeological Properties Mr. Brian Hatoff holds a master’s degree in anthropology and is a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA). He has over 30 years of experience in the management of cultural resources, with specialized expertise in the prehistoric archaeology and ecology of California and the Great Basin. During his tenure with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, he held primary responsibility for the management of cultural resources on 5.5 million acres of public lands in western Nevada and eastern California. Mr. Hatoff will serve as the principal archaeologist for this project. Dean Martorana, RPA, holds a master’s degree in anthropology from California State University, Long Beach. He served as the lead archaeologist on the project. Mr. Martorana has 10 years of experience in prehistoric archaeology, including 6 years of experience in cultural resources management in Northern California. Mr. Martorana specializes in GIS and geophysical techniques applied to archaeology. Vance G. Benté, RPA, provided peer review. Mr. Benté holds a master’s degree in anthropology from California State University, Northridge, and has over 30 years of professional experience in archaeology and cultural resources management in California. Jay Rehor, RPA, holds a B.A. in anthropology from the University of California, Santa Cruz, and a master’s degree in cultural resources management from Sonoma State University. He has 10 years experience in California archaeology, with 8 years experience in cultural resources management. Mr. Rehor specializes in geoarchaeological studies and landscape evolution as it relates to archaeology. Maureen Kick, RPA, holds a B.A. in anthropology from Bryn Mawr College, Pennsylvania, and a master’s degree in anthropology from the City University of New York, Hunter College. She has 10 years experience in North American archaeology, including 7 years in cultural resources management and 3 years in California archaeology. Ms. Kick specializes in historical archaeology. Historic Architectural Properties Rebecca Meta Bunse (M.A., history–public history, California State University, Sacramento) prepared this HPSR and meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for both Historian and Architectural Historian. Ms. Bunse is a partner at JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, has more than 21 years of experience as a consulting historian on a wide variety of historical research and cultural resource management projects, and has conducted research and field evaluation for historic architectural surveys throughout California. For this project, she served as the task manager for the surveys; directed QI staff; conducted research, reconnaissance, documentation for streamlined documentation properties, and intensive-level fieldwork; and authored and directed the delineation of the historic architectural resources APE, the preparation of the DPR 523 forms for the HPSR, the HASR, the Finding of Effect, and the CEQA impacts analysis. Christopher McMorris (M.S. in historic preservation, Columbia University) reviewed and edited this HPSR. Mr. McMorris is a partner at JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, and has 12 years of experience conducting a wide variety of historical research, public history, and historic preservation projects.

Page 9-1

CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT EIR/EIS FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION

HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT

Because of his education and experience, he qualifies as a Historian and Architectural Historian under the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (as defined in 36 CFR Part 61). Toni Webb (B.F.A., historic preservation, Savannah College of Art & Design) was the Lead Historian / Architectural Historian for this project. Ms. Webb conducted research and field surveys, data management and graphics production, and preparation of property evaluations. Ms. Webb has more than 10 years of experience in public history and historic preservation with JRP. Because of her level of experience and education, Ms. Webb qualifies as an Architectural Historian under the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (as defined in 36 CFR Part 61). Cheryl Brookshear (M.S., historic preservation, University of Pennsylvania) conducted field surveys and field research, prepared DPR forms for this project, and contributed to the HPSR. Ms. Brookshear is an Architectural Historian with JRP Historical Consulting, LLC. She meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for both Historian and Architectural Historian, and has conducted research and field evaluation for historic architectural surveys throughout California. Joseph Freeman (M.A., history, University of California, Riverside) has nearly 3 years of experience in cultural resource management and historical research projects and is a Historian at JRP Historical Consulting, LLC. Mr. Freeman has performed field surveys at locations throughout California and has conducted research on primary and secondary source material. He has also helped produce various historic architectural survey and evaluation reports. Mr. Freeman qualifies as a Historian under the Secretary of the Interior’s standards. His tasks for this project include field survey, primary and secondary research, DPR 523 form preparation, and contributions to the HPSR. Heather Norby (M.A., history, University of California, Berkeley) meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for Historian. Ms. Norby, a staff Historian at JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, has 2 years of experience as a consulting historian on a variety of historical research and cultural resource management projects and has conducted research and field evaluation for historic architectural surveys throughout California. Before joining JRP, her experience included 4 years of teaching U.S. history at community colleges in the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento areas. For this project, she conducted fieldwork, field research, prepared DPR 523 forms, and contributed to the HPSR. Polly S. Allen contributed to the HPSR and reviewed and edited DPR 523 forms. Ms. Allen received an M.S. in historic preservation from Columbia University and has over 3years of experience in public history and historic preservation. She has conducted a wide variety of historical research and historic preservation projects. Ms. Allen qualifies as an Architectural Historian under the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (as defined in 36 CFR Part 61). Additional JRP technical staff and research assistants who assisted in the preparation of the DPR 523 forms, illustrations, data management, and production of this HPSR include Rebecca Flores, Heather Miller, Chandra Miller, Karen Clementi, Claudia Piacente, David Riggs, and Kara Brunzell.

Page 9-2

Appendix A Area of Potential Effects

} · 41

} · 99

Redding

Fresno

Map area

} ·

2

3 4

Sacramento

} ·

1

180

180

5 6

San Francisco Fresno

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Sanger

Bakersfield

Los Angeles

San Diego

19 20

} ·

21

99

22 23 24 25

} · 41

Parlier

26 27 28

Selma

29 30

Fresno County

31

Tulare County

32 33 34

Orosi

35 36

} ·

} ·

43

37 38

201

39 40 41

42 43

44 45

46 47

} ·

48

99

49 50 51 52 53

Fresno County

54 55

Kings County

56 57 58 59 60

Hanford

61 62 63

64 65

Visalia

66 67

Lemoore

} ·

68

198

69 70 71 72 73

Lemoore Station

74 75 76 77 78

79

80

Tulare

81

} ·

82 83

137

84

85

86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108

Corcoran

109

110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011; USGS National Elevation Dataset, 90-m hillshade

July 26, 2011

Architectural APE

0

$

2

Index sheet County boundary 4

Miles 0

4 Kilometers

8

Appendix A-1 Index sheet A Cultural Resources APE

118 119 120 121 Redding

122 123 124

Map area

} ·

125

Sacramento

99

126

San Francisco

127

Fresno

128 129 Bakersfield

130 131

Los Angeles

132 133

San Diego

134 135 136

137

Earlimart

138 139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

} ·

152

153

65

154

155

156

157

158

159

Tulare County

160

161

162

163

Kern County

164

165

166

167

Delano

168

169

} · 155

170

171

172

173

174

175

176 177

178

179 181 183

180 182 184 185 186 187

McFarland

188 189 190 191 192 193 194

Wasco

195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 211 210

} · 46

213

212

215

214

217

216

219

218 220 222

221 224 223 226 225 229 227 228 231 230 233 232 234 235 236 238 239 241 242 244

237 240 243 245

246

Shafter 250

§ ¦ ¨

248

247 249 251

252

253

254

255

256 258

5

257 259 260 261 262

} ·

263

58

} ·

264 265

178

266 267 268 269 271 276 278 280 282 284 270 272 273 274 275 277 279 281 283 285

} · 43

Bakersfield

} · 99

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011; USGS National Elevation Dataset, 90-m hillshade

} · 184

July 26, 2011

Architectural APE

0

2

$

Index sheet County boundary 4

Miles 0

4 Kilometers

8

Appendix A-1 Index sheet B Cultural Resources APE

1

5 2 6

3 4

7

8

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

1 2

400

3

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

4

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

5 6

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 1 Cultural Resources APE

12 PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

SHEET INDEX 1 2

3 4

400

5

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

6

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

7

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 2 Cultural Resources APE

9

10

14

20

13

19 PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

1 2

3 4

400

5

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

6

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

7

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 3 Cultural Resources APE

11

18 17 24

15 23 16 21

25

22 26

27

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

1 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

2

3 4

5 6

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

7

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

8

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 4 Cultural Resources APE

28 29

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

1 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

2

3 4

5 6

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

7

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

8

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 5 Cultural Resources APE

30

31

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

2 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

SHEET INDEX

3 4

5 6 7

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

8

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

1

9

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 6 Cultural Resources APE

32

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

3 4

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

SHEET INDEX

5 6 7 8

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

9

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

2

10

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 7 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

5

SHEET INDEX

6 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

7 8 9

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

10

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

4

11

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 8 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

7 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

8 9 10

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

11

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

6

12

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 9 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

8 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

9 10 11

400

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

12

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

7

13

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 10 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

9 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

10 11 12

400

13

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

8

100 Meters

200

14

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 11 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

July 26, 2011

9

SHEET INDEX

10 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

11 12 13

400

0

100 Meters

200

15

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

14

Feet

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

16

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 12 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

11 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

12 13 14

400

15

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

10

100 Meters

200

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE

16 17

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 13 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

12 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

13 14 15

400

16 17

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

11

100 Meters

200

18

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 14 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

13 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

14 15

16 17

400

18

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

12

100 Meters

200

19

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 15 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

13 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

14 15

16 17

400

18

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

12

100 Meters

200

19

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 16 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

SHEET INDEX

14 Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

15

16 17 18

400

Feet 0

July 26, 2011

13

19 100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 17 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

July 26, 2011

14 15

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

16 17 18 19

400

Feet

20 0

100 Meters

200

SHEET INDEX CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 18 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

July 26, 2011

15

16 17

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

400

18 19 20

Feet

21 0

100 Meters

200

SHEET INDEX CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 19 Cultural Resources APE

33

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

18

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

400

19 20 21

Feet

22 0

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 20 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

400

July 26, 2011

19 20 21 22

Feet

23 0

100 Meters

200

SHEET INDEX CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 21 Cultural Resources APE

34

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

400

July 26, 2011

SHEET INDEX

20 21 22 23

Feet

24 0

100 Meters

200

CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 22 Cultural Resources APE

PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Data source: URS, 2011; JRP, 2011 Imagery source: Microsoft Corporation, 2009

$ 0

Note: The historic properties shown reflect built environment resources; no archaeological properties have been identified within the archaeological APE.

200

400

July 26, 2011

21 22 23 24

Feet

25 0

100 Meters

200

SHEET INDEX CEQA-Only Historical Resource

At-grade alignment

Section 106 Historic Property

Elevated alignment

Section 106 Historic Property (canal)

Architectural APE Archaeological APE Parcel boundary

Appendix A-1 Sheet 23 Cultural Resources APE

Appendix B Interested Parties Correspondence





41

Madera County

168

Fresno

Redding

180

Kerman

180

Map area

Sacramento

Sanger

San Francisco

Fresno County

145

Fresno

Orange Cove Parlier Selma Reedley--Dinuba Orosi

69

Bakersfield Palmdale

198Los Angeles

201 63

41

Ivanhoe Visalia

Lemoore Hanford

216

Huron

Woodlake

198

99

Lemoore Station

198

San Diego

65

Lindsay

Tulare 137

Kings County

Tulare County

43

Corcoran

Porterville

Pixley

Terra Bella

41

Earlimart Richgrove Delano 65

McFarland 46

5

Wasco

Kern County Shafter

San Luis Obispo County

178

Bakersfield

58

99 184 PRELIMINARY DRAFT/SUBJECT TO CHANGE - HST ALIGNMENT IS NOT DETERMINED Source: URS, 2010

0

10

0

20 Kilometers

40

May 10, 2010

Alternative alignments

Preferred HST station

Highway

Potential Kings/Tulare regional station

Urban area

20

Miles

County boundary

Arvin

Stream/River

Figure 1-2 Fresno to Bakersfield Project Location

Appendix C Site Location and DPR 523 Forms [For Fresno abridged version - only includes forms for properties within the City of Fresno]





State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CD,

Page 1 of

2

5D3, 5S3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN

466-204-07

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 1560  

H Street  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 466-204-07

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 2006. (Photograph 1)

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP6 *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

- 1-3 story commercial building Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA

95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *B10. Significance:

John Edward Powell of the California State University, Fresno Foundation inventoried and evaluated this building in 1994 as a part of the “Supplementary Historic Building Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California” (see attached). Wendy Tinsley and Nicole Purvis of Urbana Preservation and Planning conducted a second inventory and evaluation of this property in 2006 for the “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” Powell concluded that the property appeared eligible for the local register and the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) for its architecture and association with prominent people in agriculture. In 2006 Tinsley and Purvis re-evaluated the property. They found the property appeared to be eligible as a contributor to a California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligible Historic Warehouse District (HWD), as well as eligible for listing in the Local Register of Historic Resources in Fresno, both individually, and as a contributor to HWD. This property is being re-evaluated to clarify its current historic status and because the earlier surveys did not evaluate the property by applying specific NRHP criteria. This building is only one of several used by Budd and Quinn as the company developed into a major agricultural implement supplier. The significance of their association with this specific property is not direct or important, nor does it represent their first or longest association with a site. Therefore, the building does not appear to meet Criterion A for listing in the NRHP (or CRHR Criterion 1). This building does not meet NRHP Criterion B (or CRHR Criterion 2) because it is not the primary location associated with important contributions of a historically significant individual. This building is not significant for possessing distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction and it is not an important example of a general architectural style – specifically Spanish Mission Revival. The building is not important within the context of architectural design and does not, therefore, meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3. Under Criterion 4 or D, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. Alterations to the building since the 1994 evaluation, including nearly complete residing with metal panels, has diminished the integrity of design, workmanship, feeling, and materials of the building. Integrity of location, setting, and association, however, has remained intact. Despite the lack of general architectural importance and the substantial loss of integrity, the Tinsley and Purvis evaluation occurred after the modifications, and concluded that the property was a contributor to the CRHR-eligible HWD and was eligible for the local register. Although this property does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP, the 2006 evaluation still appears to be valid. The building appears to be eligible as a contributor to the CRHR-eligible Warehouse District as well as individually eligible. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code and because of the local designation is a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

DPR 523L (1/95)

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010 *Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CD,

Page 2 of

2

5D3, 5S3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN

466-204-07

†    _Update  



Photograph 1: 1560 H Street; facing east, April 20, 2010 (P006).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 1 of

1

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-204-06

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 1514-1518

H Street Parcel Number: 466-204-06

   !   " #Assessor *P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and it appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 2006.

(Photograph 1) *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

– 1-3 story commercial building; HP8- Industrial building Webb & Claudia Piacente, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:Toni

*B10. Significance: Wendy L. Tinsley of Urbana Preservation & Planning evaluated this property in 2006 for the report entitled “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report,” and concluded that this property does not appear to be individually eligible for either the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). This conclusion still appears to be valid. Although the building’s location and setting have remained the same, by the time of the 2006 report the building had been altered by the infilling of storefront windows and replacement or infilling of original warehouse doors, both of which has diminished its integrity of design, workmanship, materials, feeling, and association, and the building does not appear to be individually eligible for the CRHR. Nevertheless, the 2006 report did identify the building as a potential contributor the Historic Warehouse District, which is eligible for inclusion in the CRHR and as a City of Fresno Local Historic District under Local Historic District Criteria 1, 3, and 4 (Urbana 2006: 32). While the 2006 report listed this building as a potential contributor to a CRHR-eligible district, the accompanying form omitted the corresponding “3CD” status code for the property. This update form includes “3CD” among the status codes that reflect that the property is a contributor to a district that is both eligible for the CRHR, and eligible for local designation, as well as the status code indicating that it is not individually eligible under NRHP or CRHR criteria. Consequently, this building is considered an historical resource for the purposes of CEQA only. The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. B12. References:

Urbana Planning & Preservation. 2006. “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” Fresno: Planning & Development Department, City of Fresno. *B14. Evaluator:Toni

Webb; Heather Norby

*Date of Evaluation:June

2010

Photograph 1: View of northwest and southwest facades, facing southeast, May 18, 2010 (P840). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California — The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary#: HRI#:

PRIMARY RECORD

Trinomial #:

Review Code

Reviewer

N/A NRHP Status Code: Other Listings: None

5D3

Date

Page 1 of 2 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 1514-1518 H Street 1514-1522 H Street P1. Other Identifier: *P2. Location: † Not for Publication ; Unrestricted *a. County Fresno Date: 1978 T ; R ; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; B.M. *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Fresno South City: Fresno Zip: 93721 c. Address: 1514-1518 H Street d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11 , mE/ mN e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) Parcel #466-204-06 Arts Culture District Survey Block # 2

*P3a.

Description: (Describe resource and its major elements.

Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)

The 1514-1518 H Street warehouse is believed to have been originally constructed in 1922 under Fresno Building Permit No. 2288, and then enlarged in c.1936 through the addition of the northernmost volume. The brick structure was built in a general rectangular plan with a low front parapet, and an asymmetrical façade featuring a simple brick cornice treatment, vertically placed frieze panels, and quoins that frame the three modified storefront spaces. Each storefront contains a wide drive-in bay, a single-entry door, and a display window; all three storefronts have been altered. Overall the building appears to be in fair exterior condition. A rectangular blade sign id mounted to the roof of the building between the 1514 and 1516 storefronts. The sign does not appear to be an artistically significant example, and appears to be in poor condition.

*P3b. *P4.

Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP8 Warehouse Resources Present: ;Building †Structure †Object †Site †District ;Element of District †Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #)

View North/Northeast Photo Date: October 2005

*P6. Date Constructed/Age and Source:

;Historic, c. 1922 City of Fresno Building Permit #2288 † Prehistoric † Both

*P7. Owner and Address: Robert & Helena Ragsdale 5482 E. Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93721

*P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address)

Wendy Tinsley & Nicole Purvis Urbana Preservation & Planning 248 3rd Street, #841, Oakland, CA 94607 1518 Myrtle Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103 *P9. Date Recorded: February 2006

*P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Pre-1961 properties - Intensive Post-1960 properties – Reconnaissance

*P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Urbana Preservation & Planning, City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report, July 2006.

*Attachments: †NONE †Location 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):

DPR 523A (1/95)

*Required information

State of California — The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary #: HRI #:

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 2 *NRHP Status Code: 5D3 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 1514-1518 H Street Budd & Quinn, Inc. Warehouse B1. Historic Name: Not Identified B2. Common Name: B4. Present Use: B3. Original Use: Automotive Warehouse / Warehouse Utilitarian with Revival Façade Details *B5. Architectural Style: *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations)

Warehouse – Unknown Use

Built in 1922 by contractor A. Allen under Fresno Building Permit #2288; storefront alterations and partition changes between 1925-1935 under Building Permit #’s 3314, 4495, 3359 & 4715; warehouse addition (approx. 50 x 100 ft.) in 1936 for $4,000 by general contracing co. FisherMcNulty under Building Permit #6462.

*B7. Moved? ;No †Yes †Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Not Identified (1922 volume) / Fisher-McNulty (1936 volume) b. Builder: A. Allen (1922) / Fisher-McNulty (1936) *B10. Significance: Theme: Social & Architecture Area: Fresno Property Type: Warehouse Applicable Criteria: LHD 1/3/4 Period of Significance: c.1922-c.1950s (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)

The 1514-1518 H Street property appears eligible as a contributing element to a potential Fresno Warehouse District under the City of Fresno Municipal Code Section 13-406(b) for its association with the industrial development of Fresno and as an example of a warehouse as a property type. The property does not appear to be individually eligible for inclusion on any local, state or national historic sites register. Past occupants of the 1514 H Street storefront include: Johnston Pump Company (from 1927 through 1928), Owl Transfer Company (from 1926 through 1933), Hobbs Battery Company (from 1934 through 1944), and Melvin E. Wilson Fertilizer Company (1937 through at least 1944). After c.1947, the 1514 H Street property ceased to be listed in subsequent Fresno City Directory publications. Past occupants of the 1516-1518 H Street storefront include: Budd & Quinn Inc. (from at least 1926 through 1936), City of Fresno Water Department (1937 through at least 1944), and Crockett Brothers Auto Body Repair Department & Parts (from at least 1947 through at least 1960).

B11. *B12.

Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) No additional resource attributes References:

City of Fresno Planning & Development Department City of Fresno Municipal Code Fresno City & County Historical Society Fresno County Library *See report bibliography for complete list of references

B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: Wendy L. Tinsley, Principal: Urbana Preservation & Planning, 248 3rd Street, #841, Oakland, CA 94607, 1518 Myrtle Avenue, San Diego, CA 92103 *Date of Evaluation: February 2006

(This space reserved for official comments.)

Ç N DPR 523B (1/95)

*Required information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 1 of

2

3CD, 5D3,6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

 P1. Other Identifier: 1454

466-205-14

†    _Update

H Street

   !   " #Assessor *P3a.

Description:

Parcel Number: 466-205-14 This property has been field checked and appears unaltered since its last recordation in 2006.

(Photograph 1) *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

– 1-3 story commercial building; HP8- Industrial building K. Caradonna, 268 W. Vermont, Fresno, CA 93711 Date Constructed/Age and Sources: 1944, newspaper article, historic aerials, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

*P7. Owner and Address:Bess *P6.

*P8. Recorded by:T.

Webb & K. Clementi, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Urbana Preservation & Planning evaluated this property in 2006 for the report entitled “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” No DPR 523 form was prepared for this building as part of that study and it included by reference recent documentation completed by Architectural Resource Group (ARG) for the report entitled “City of Fresno Broadway Row Historical Resource Survey” (2004). Urbana concluded that this property appears to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) as a contributor to the proposed Historic Warehouse District, which is locally significant under CRHR Criteria 1 and 3. The potential district, which includes fourteen contributing resources, is generally bounded by Amador, H, Tuolumne and Broadway streets. Its period of significance is noted between ca. 1911 through the 1950s. Urbana Preservation & Planning also concluded that the property appears to be eligible for listing in the City of Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources as a contributor to the locally eligible Historic Warehouse District, which appears to meet local historic district criteria 1, 2 and 4. This property is being reevaluated because the earlier surveys did not evaluate it using National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) criteria. *B10. Significance:

The Urbana survey stated that this building was constructed in 1930, but it was actually built in 1944 by H. E. Jaynes & Son, an automotive repair business that was started in Bakersfield by Harris E. Jaynes. Jaynes established a general body and fender repair shop in Fresno in the 1400 block of Broadway (across the alley from this location) in 1928 with partners Walter Jaynes (his son), Nick Draklich, Ray H. Lewis, and Carroll Baird. By the early 1930s, the company grew to include the building at 1452 H Street (Map Ref# APN 466-205-13), which housed the painting and refinishing departments and eventually purchased its original buildings on Broadway in 1943. The following year it built a new building at 1454 H Street, which was connected to 1452 H Street and both buildings appeared to once have had a continuous façade (see Figure 1). Since 1928 the company had expanded from 7,500 square feet of space and five employees, to more than 30,000 square feet of space and a staff of 47. The building at 1454 H Street was completed for $28,000 and housed the truck and glass departments, frame and axel, and paint shop, while the main office was located at 1445 Broadway. By this time the Jaynes’ sold their interest in the company to the other partners. In 1952 the company was reorganized and a new automotive parts building was constructed on M Street and in 1967 the company relocated its Broadway and H streets facilities to North Thorne Avenue (Fresno Bee 1932, 1934, 1944, 1952; Miller 1970, Sanborn 1919, 1948; USAAA 1937; USDA 1950). The only known alteration to the building appears to be the replacement of storefront windows along its Stanislaus façade. (Figure 1) While it appears to generally retain integrity of location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling, and association, it does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP either individually or as a contributor to a historic district because it is not historically significant. H. E. Jaynes & Son was a successful automotive repair shop, but it does not appear that it played an important role within the context of this industry or within the commercial or industrial development of Fresno (NRHP Criterion A). It does not appear that any of the known owners or employees of H. E. Jaynes & Son gained individual significance within this context (NRHP Criterion B). Architecturally, this building is a typical example of mid twentieth century warehouse and does not appear to embody distinctive characteristics of style, type, or method of construction, nor does it appear to be the work of a master (NRHP Criterion C). The building is a common and architecturally unremarkable example of warehouse design that is not important within the context of this type or method of construction. Because this building appears to have been unaltered since its 2006 evaluation, and the conclusions of that DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of

2

3CD, 5D3,6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-205-14

†    _Update



survey still appear to be valid, this building is a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is the legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Toni

Webb

*Date of Evaluation:June

2010

B12. References: Fresno Bee. 1932 October 12. Advertisement. Fresno Bee; 1. 1934 August 1. Advertisement. Fresno Bee; 7A 1944 October 20. “H. E. Jaynes & Son.” Fresno Bee; 8A. 1952 August 24. “Supplies Company Buildings Parts Store.” Fresno Bee. Miller, Howard. September 27, 1970. “Body by Jaynes, Repairs or Custom.” Fresno Bee. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company. 1919, 1948, 1950. Fresno. New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Co., Ltd. United States Agricultural Adjustment Administration: 1937. Fresno County Aerial Photographs. United States Department of Agriculture. 1950. Fresno County Aerial Photographs.

Photographs: Figure 1: Drawing of 1454 H Street; continuous façade with adjacent building (1452 H Street) shown at far right (Fresno Bee 1944).

Photograph 1: View of northwest and southwest facades, facing southeast, May 18, 2010 (P842). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 1 of

2

 P1. Other Identifier: 1452

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-205-13

†    _Update

H Street

   !   " #Assessor

Parcel Number: 466-205-13

This property has been field checked. The building appears to have been altered within the last few years by the installation of new storefront windows as well as the application of modern stucco siding over the entire façade.

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6 *P7. Owner and Address:Public

– 1-3 story commercial building; HP8- Industrial building Properties Inc., P.O. Box 45019, Fresno, CA 93718

*P8. Recorded by:T.

Webb & K. Clementi, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P11. Report Citation:JRP

*B10. Significance: Urbana Preservation & Planning evaluated this property in 2006 for the report entitled “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” No DPR 523 form was prepared for this building as part of that study and it included by reference recent documentation completed by Architectural Resource Group (ARG) for the report entitled “City of Fresno Broadway Row Historical Resource Survey” (2004). Urbana concluded that this property appears to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) as a contributor to the proposed Historic Warehouse District, which is locally significant under CRHR Criteria 1 and 3. The potential district, which includes fourteen contributing resources, is generally bounded by Amador, H, Tuolumne and Broadway streets. Its period of significance is noted between ca. 1911 through the 1950s. Urbana Preservation & Planning also concluded that the property appears to be eligible for listing in the City of Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources as a contributor to the locally eligible Historic Warehouse District, which appears to meet local historic district Criteria 1, 2 and 4. This property is being reevaluated because the earlier surveys did not evaluate it using National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) criteria.

This building appears to have been constructed in 1928. H. E. Jaynes & Son, an automotive repair business that was started in Bakersfield by Harris E. Jaynes. The company used the building at least as early as 1932. Jaynes established a general body and fender repair shop in Fresno in the 1400 block of Broadway (across the alley from this location) in 1928 with partners Walter Jaynes (his son), Nick Draklich, Ray H. Lewis, and Carroll Baird. The building documented on this form housed the painting and refinishing departments. The company eventually purchased its original buildings on Broadway in 1943 and the following year built a new building at 1454 H Street (Map Ref# APN 466-205-14), which was connected to 1452 H Street. Both buildings appeared to once have had a continuous façade (see Figure 1). Since 1928 the company had expanded from 7,500 square feet of space and five employees, to more than 30,000 square feet of space and a staff of 47. The new building on H Street was completed for $28,000 and housed the truck and glass departments, frame and axel, and paint shop, while the main office was located at 1445 Broadway. By this time the Jaynes’ sold their interest in the company to the other partners. In 1952 the company was reorganized and a new automotive parts building was constructed on M Street and in 1967 the company relocated its Broadway and H streets facilities to North Thorne Avenue (Fresno Bee 1932, 1934, 1944, 1952; Miller 1970, Sanborn 1919, 1948; USAAA 1937; USDA 1950). As originally constructed, this building included a central drive-in bay flanked on either side by a storefront window (multiple lights above a large plate glass fixed sash). The storefront windows were infilled in the latter half of the twentieth century. The façade, which was once continuous with the building at 1454 H Street and included a pointed parapet over the north storefront window, was removed and lowered. Recent modifications to the building include the installation of in-kind replacement windows, as well as the application of modern stucco. These alterations have somewhat compromised the integrity of design, workmanship, and materials of this early twentieth building, however the integrity of location, setting, feeling and association remain intact. Although H. E. Jaynes & Son was a successful automotive repair shop, it does not appear that it played an historically important role within the context of this industry, or within the commercial or industrial development of Fresno (NRHP Criterion A). It does not appear that any of the known owners or employees of H. E. Jaynes & Son gained individual significance within this context (NRHP Criterion B). Architecturally, this building is a typical example of an early twentieth century warehouse and does not embody distinctive characteristics of style, type, or method of construction, nor does it DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of

2

3CD, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-205-13

†    _Update



appear to be the work of a master (NRHP Criterion C). The building is a common and architecturally unremarkable example of warehouse design that is not important within the context of this type or method of construction. Although the building has been altered since its 2006 evaluation, it appears to retain enough integrity to convey its significance as a contributor to a local historic district that is potentially eligible for the CRHR as found by the previous surveys and the building is a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Toni

Webb

*Date of Evaluation:June

2010

B12. References: Sanborn Map and Publishing Company. 1919, 1948, 1950. Fresno. New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Co., Ltd. United States Agricultural Adjustment Administration: 1937. Fresno County Aerial Photographs. United States Department of Agriculture. 1950. Fresno County Aerial Photographs. Miller, Howard. September 27, 1970. “Body by Jaynes, Repairs or Custom.” Fresno Bee. Fresno Bee. 1932 October 12. Advertisement. Fresno Bee; 1. 1934 August 1. Advertisement. Fresno Bee; 7A 1944 October 20. “H. E. Jaynes & Son.” Fresno Bee; 8A. 1952 August 24. “Supplies company Buildings Parts Store.” Fresno Bee.

Photographs: Figure 1: Drawing of 1454 H Street showing the continuous façade with 1452 H Street, which is shown at far right (Fresno Bee 1944).

Photograph 1: View of southwest facade, facing southeast, May 18, 2010 (P843). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 1 of

2

5D3, 5S1, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-202-19

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: Parker

Nash Building/ 1460-62 Broadway, Fresno, CA Parcel Number: 466-202-19

   !   " #Assessor

*P3a. Description: This property has been field checked and the building exterior appears relatively unaltered since its last recordation in 2004 (Photograph 1). Ramps have been added to the interior to create an indoor parking area and the side and upper windows filled with metal bars. The main façade windows have been covered with plywood. *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building Brookshear & Garrett Root, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:C.

*B10. Significance: This building has been subject to at least two previous studies, and is being re-evaluated to address its individual eligibility for the CRHR and NRHP, which was not fully addressed in previous evaluations. The previous studies include one by John Edward Powell of the CSU Fresno Foundation who inventoried and evaluated this building in 1994 as a part of the “Supplementary Historic Building Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California” (see attached). Wendy L. Tinsley of Architectural Resources Group conducted a second inventory and evaluation of this property in 2004 for the “Broadway Row Historical Resource Survey” (also attached). The 2004 evaluation was also included in the 2006 “City of Fresno ArtsCulture District Historic Property Survey Report” prepared by Urbana Preservation & Planning. The 1994 Powell evaluation concluded that the property appeared eligible for the local register for its architecture and association with automotive history in Fresno. Information provided within that evaluation implies a period of significance from 1934 to 1969, based upon the date the building was reconfigured to its current design aesthetic and the date automotive related activity ended. This evaluation also stated that additional research was necessary to ascertain eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).

Subsequently, the building was listed in the Local Register of Historic Resources in Fresno as Historic Property #226, although the second survey of this building, in 2004, erroneously stated that the building was listed in the CRHR as well as the local register. While Fresno is a Certified Local Government, buildings included in a local register are not automatically included in the CRHR. When the 2004 evaluation was included in the 2006 Urbana report, the building was identified as a contributor to a potential, but as yet unsubstantiated thematic Automotive Historic District (AHD), with a period of significance from 1911 through the 1950s. The 2006 report found that this thematic district appeared eligible for designation as a City of Fresno Local Historic District, but that it did not appear eligible for inclusion on the NRHP or CRHR (Urbana 2006: 33). Significance Update: This update form was prepared to clarify the NRHP and CRHR eligibility of the Parker Nash Building, which was not fully addressed in previous evaluations. Under NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1, the building is not significant for associations with automotive or urban development in Fresno. National Register guidelines caution that “mere association with historic events or trends is not enough, in and of itself, to qualify under Criterion A,” as is the case with this example. Individually, the building was one of several automotive sales and service businesses established in this portion of Fresno in the early twentieth century, and it housed a succession of automotive ventures that were generally successful, but none were demonstrably important within this context. Furthermore, the re-design of the building in 1934 was undertaken in response to the widening of Broadway and this project was not a significant event in the development of Fresno and it was the second such widening to occur. Under NRHP Criterion B and CRHR Criterion 2, the building is not significant for associations with individuals important to history. Again, while it served as the location for profitable businesses, neither the owners nor occupants of the building made demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level. Under NRHP Criterion C and CRHR 3, the building is a late example of Mediterranean inspired architecture. This style developed out of the academic eclectic movement which studied historic architectural styles and applied their underlying principles of logic, symmetry, and DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of

2

5D3, 5S1, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

466-202-19

†    _Update

proportion to the architectural requirements of modern life. Spanish Revival styles, beginning in the 1880s, led to the adoption of other Mediterranean architectural influences. While adhering to the adaptation of underlying principles, the Parker Nash building makes little use of the available Mediterranean architectural vocabulary beyond the use of tile roofs, arched loggias and tile (now missing). The building is not significant as the work of a master architect. A consortium of architects in Fresno known as Allied Architects designed the building. Some of the individual member architects produced individually significant designs, but those works occurred largely in the period prior to or following their work with Allied Architects. The significant work performed by Allied Architects, notably Fresno Fire Station 3, Fresno Memorial Auditorium, Fresno School Administration Building, and Fresno County Hall of Records, all employed forward-looking Moderne and Streamline styles. The Mediterranean influenced Parker Nash building does not reflect this aesthetic and is instead an unremarkable example of a revival style and does not meet NRHP or CRHR criteria for architectural merit. Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. In addition to lacking historical significance, the building also lacks integrity. Throughout the building windows and decorative elements, such as the tiles between the first and second levels, have been removed, which has diminished its integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. In summary, this property does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP or CRHR, individually, or as a contributor to a historic district. Nevertheless, the building is considered an historical resource for the purposes of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is listed in the Local Register of Historic Resources in Fresno (Historic Property #226) and because it is a possible contributor to the AHD, a potential local thematic historic district. As such, the boundary of this historical resource is its legal parcel. This property was evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. B12. References:

Urbana Planning & Preservation. 2006. “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” Fresno: Planning & Development Department, City of Fresno. *B14. Evaluator: Cheryl

Brookshear; Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:June

2011



Photograph 1: 1460-62 Broadway, camera facing east, June 15, 2011 (P34). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CD,

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5D3, 6Z 466-202-07

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 1416  

Broadway, Fresno, CA  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 466-202-07

This property has been field checked. Since it was last recorded in 2004 the windows have been replaced and the overhead door at the southern end of the façade was infilled by a window. In addition, a fixed cantilevered canopy has been added across the front. (Photograph 1)

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building Brookshear & G. Root, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:C.

This update has been prepared in part to correct an error pertaining to this resource found in a 2006 report, as well as to clarify the historic status of the resource.

*B10. Significance:

Wendy L. Tinsley of Architectural Resources Group evaluated this property in 2004 for the report entitled “Broadway Row Historical Resource Survey,” and concluded that it did not appear to be individually eligible for either the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). Although, this conclusion still appears to be valid, she also indicated the building could be a contributor to an undocumented (not fully identified) possible automotive warehouse historic district with potential for eligibility in the CRHR. In a 2006 study, “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report,” prepared by Urbana Preservation & Planning, the notion of an “automotive warehouse historic district” was refined and two potential districts were defined, a Historic Warehouse District (HWD), and a Thematic Automotive Historic District (AHD). This 2006 report found that the HWD appears potentially eligible, at a local level of significance, for inclusion in the CRHR under Criteria 1 and 3 and that it appears eligible for designation as a City of Fresno Local Historic District under Local Historic District Criteria 1, 3, and 4. That report identified the building at 1416 Broadway as a contributor to the potential HWD, which has a period of significance from 1911 through the 1950s. The report also mistakenly ascribed the address “1416 Broadway” to another building, the Parker-Nash Building at 1462 Broadway. The Parker-Nash building is a possible contributor to the AHD (Urbana 2006: 15). This error was also reflected in a table at the end of the report that lists 1416 Broadway as a possible contributor to both districts, the HWD and AHD. It appears that the 2006 report intended to show the building at 1416 Broadway, which is addressed on this update form, as a contributor to the potential HWD. The conclusion that the building is not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR remains valid, partly because changes to the fenestration and doors have further diminished the integrity of the building’s design, materials, and workmanship since the 2004 survey. Nevertheless, the building is considered an historical resource for the purposes of CEQA because it is a possible contributor to the HWD, a historic district potentially eligible for inclusion on the CRHR and potentially eligible for designation as a City of Fresno Local Historic District (Urbana 2006: 32-33). As such, the boundary of this historical resource is its legal parcel. This property was evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. B12. References:

Urbana Planning & Preservation. 2006. “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” Fresno: Planning & Development Department, City of Fresno. *B14. Evaluator: Cheryl

DPR 523L (1/95)

Brookshear; Heather Norby, Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:June

2011

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CD,

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5D3, 6Z 466-202-07

†    _Update



Photograph 1: 1416 Broadway, camera facing northeast, June 15, 2011 (P38).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CS,

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5S3, 6Z 466-205-05

†    _Update  P1. Other Identifier: 1415-1417

Broadway, Fresno, CA Parcel Number: 466-205-05

   !   " #Assessor *P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and the building has minor alterations since it was last recorded in 1994. The building is vacant and all windows, as well as the recessed front entrance, have been covered with plywood. The neon sign and sprinklers, non-historic alterations, have been removed. (Photograph 1) *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP3

- Multi-family property Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St., Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Architectural Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by: Cheryl

B10. Significance: Although subject to previous study, this building has not been evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and this analysis is provided below. A previous evaluation was prepared by John Edward Powell of the California State University, Fresno Foundation in 1994 for the report entitled “Supplementary Historic Building Survey, Historic Resources Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California” (see attached). Mr. Powell identified this building as eligible for local listing, although it has not yet been listed, and the report was not submitted to the California State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). A 2006 study, “City of Fresno Arts-Culture Historic Property Survey Report,” prepared by Urbana Preservation & Planning found that this building appears individually eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and appears individually eligible for local designation (Urbana 2006: appendix B). That report did not produce a DPR 523 form or include a previous form in an appendix; however it referred to a form prepared in 2004.This conclusion still appears to be valid.

This property is being re-evaluated to apply the NRHP significance criteria. Under NRHP Criterion A, the building is not significant for its association with the early twentieth century development of Fresno. Constructed in 1917, the Mayflower Apartments was one of several apartment and hotel buildings constructed in the city in the early twentieth century and it is not significance within this trend or development. Other earlier examples included the Crackler Apartments at 2429-2439 E. Belmont Avenue (built in 1900), Hotel Fresno at 1241 Broadway Street (built in 1912), and Kern Kay Hotel at 906-912 Van Ness Avenue (built in 1912). Additional examples were constructed through the 1920s. The historic record does not indicate that the property at 1415-1417 Broadway Street played a significant role in this pattern of development. Under NRHP Criterion B, this building does not have any significant associations with the lives of persons important to history. It does not appear that the individuals related to the development and use of this resource made demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level. According to the 1994 study, the building housed largely single, white-collar workers, and was a temporary residence of George Schorling, a long-term Fresno resident. The building is not associated with the period of his life in which Schorling made significant contributions to the development of Fresno, nor does the historic record show that the various other residents of the building made any historically significant achievements. Under NRHP Criterion C, this building is does not possess the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. It is not an important example of a general architectural style – specifically Streetcar Commercial with period revival influences – nor is it attributable to a specific master architect, nor a master craftsman in the case of the builder, R. Pederson & Company (Longstreth 2002: 24). The Mayflower Apartments lack the architectural detail provided to other similar properties in the city; including the locally listed Hotel Virginia at 2125-2139 Kern Street (built in 1920) or Kern Kay Hotel at 906-912 Van Ness Avenue (built in 1912). The building is not important within the context of architectural design and does not, therefore, meet NRHP Criterion C. Under Criterion D, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. Minor window and door replacements have lightly impacted the integrity of materials. The building remains in a mixed use urban setting, although neighboring buildings have been demolished affecting its setting. The integrity of location, design, DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CS,

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5S3, 6Z 466-205-05

†    _Update 

materials, workmanship, feeling and association remain largely intact. Although the building generally retains integrity to its original construction, it does not meet any of the significance criteria necessary for eligibility for listing in the NRHP. It is, nevertheless, considered a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it has been found eligible for local listing in the City of Fresno and individual listing in the CRHR. The boundary of this historical resource is its legal parcel. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. B12. References:

Clough, Charles W. 1986. Fresno County in the 20th Century: From 1900 to 1980s. Sacramento: Panorama West Books. Longstreth, Richard. 2002. The Buildings of Main Street: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Updated Edition. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Powell, John Edward 1994 Sep 30. “Supplementary Historic Building Survey, Historic Resources Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California.” Fresno: Department of Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization, City of Fresno Historic Preservation Commission. Urbana Planning & Preservation. 2006. “City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report.” Fresno: Planning & Development Department, City of Fresno. *B14.

Evaluator:

Cheryl Brookshear; Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation: April 2010

Photograph 1: 1415-1417 Broadway Street; facing west, April 20, 2010 (P019).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey July 2006 – Final Report

Cover Photo: Aerial View of the Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Area Showing H Street, Broadway Street, Fulton Street, and Van Ness Avenue Intersected by Tuolumne Street, Stanislaus Street, and Calaveras Street. Photo Date: c.1940. Image Courtesy of the Fresno City & County Historical Society

City of Fresno Arts-Culture District Historic Property Survey Report

Presented To: The City of Fresno Planning & Development Department 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 & The Fresno County Library – Funding Partner The Fresno Metropolitan Museum – Funding Partner The Fresno City & County Historical Society – Funding Partner

Final Report July 2006

URBANA PRESERVATION & PLANNING

248 3rd Street #841 ΠOakland, CA 94607, 510-663-7443/Phone 1518 Myrtle Avenue ΠSan Diego, CA 92103, 619-543-0693/Phone www.urbanapreservation.com

Fulton

Fulton

1625-1627

1629-1631

Urbana Preservation Planning

Fulton Fulton

H H H H Broadway Broadway

1730 1742 1776 1720-1726 1724 1760

1605-1615 1619-1623

Broadway

1755

Broadway

Broadway

1725

1636

Broadway Broadway H H H Broadway Broadway Calaveras H H Broadway

1501 1559 1506 1514-1518 1560 1625 1659 1821 1600-1612 1636-1650 1709

Fulton

H

1420-1432

Fulton Fulton Broadway

Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway H H H

1427 1433 1449 1461 1408 1452 1454

1725 1759 1608

Broadway

1415

1703-1715

Street

Address

City of Fresno

Street

Street

Street Street

Street

Street Street Street

Street

Street Street Street Street Street Street

Street

Street

Street Street Street Street Street Street Street Street Street Street Street

Street

Street Street Street Street Street Street Street

Street

Suffix

466-193-03

466-193-04

466-193-09 466-193-08

466-193-10

466-192-16 466-192-01 466-193-06

466-192-03

466-195-05 466-195-06 466-195-07 466-195-04 466-192-06 466-192-10

466-195-01

466-195-02

466-204-09 466-204-10 466-204-05 466-204-06 466-204-07 466-196-03 466-196-01 466-196-05 466-196-04 466-196-04 466-195-03

466-205-11

466-205-04 466-205-03 466-205-24 466-205-23 466-205-18 466-205-13 466-205-14

466-205-05

APN

6

6

6 6

6

5 5 6

5

4 4 4 4 5 5

4

4

2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

ACD Block #

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial Commercial

SF Residence

Warehouse Commercial Commercial

Commercial

Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Commercial Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Commercial

Warehouse

Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse Commercial Warehouse Warehouse Warehouse

MF Residential

Property Type

1950

1945-1949

1966 1964

1911

1950 1945 1946-1965

1946

1928 1920s-1930s 1920-1925 1920-1925 1940 1954

1935

1 of 4

Streamline Moderne

Streamline Moderne

Commercial Commercial

Colonial Revival

Utilitarian Commercial Commercial

Streamline Moderne

Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Deco Façade Commercial

Spanish Eclectic

Spanish Revival

Commercial Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Spanish Revival Commercial Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Streamline Moderne

1940 1987 1946 1922 1929 / 1937 1936 1981 1946 1920s 1920 1940 1918

Utilitarian

Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian Period Revival Utilitarian Utilitarian Utilitarian

Streetcar

Architectural Style

1913 / 1937

1918 1919 1919 1919 1913 1928 1930

1917

Year Built (Approx.)

Good

Good

Good Fair

Good

Fair Good Good

Good

Poor Poor Good Good Good Poor

Good

Good

Poor Good Fair Fair Good Good Fair Poor Fair Fair Good

Poor

Good Fair Fair Fair Good Good Good

Fair

Condition

Arts-Culture District (ACD)

None

None

Intensive

Intensive

Reconnaissance Reconnaissance

Intensive

Caltrans 180 Gap Survey (1991) None None

6Z 6Z 6Z

5D3

5D3

7R / 6Z 7R / 6Z

5S3

5D3

Intensive

6Z 6Z 5D3 / 3CD 6Z 3CD / 5D3 6Z

3CD / 5B

Intensive Intensive Intensive

None

Intensive Intensive Intensive Intensive Intensive Intensive

Intensive

5S1

6Z 7R / 6Z 6Z 5D3 3CD / 5B 5D3 7R / 6Z 6Z 5D3 / 3CD 5D3 / 3CD 5D3

Intensive Reconnaissance Intensive Intensive Intensive Intensive Reconnaissance Intensive Intensive Intensive Intensive Update

5S1 / 5B / 3CD

5D3 / 3CD 5D3 / 3CD 5D3 / 3CD 5D3 / 3CD 6Z 3CD / 5D3 3CD / 5D3

5S3 / 3CS

CRHS Status Code

None

None None None None None None None

None

ACD Survey DPRs

None None None

None None None None None None

None

City of Fresno HP #61

None None None None Ratkovich Survey (1994) None None None None None None

Ratkovich Survey (1994) Broadway Row (2004) City of Fresno HP #247

Broadway Row (2004) Ratkovich Survey (1994) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004) Broadway Row (2004)

Previous Listings / Documentation

July 2006 (Final)

n/a n/a potential Fulton Street commercial district potential Fulton Street commercial district

potential heritage property architecure & important persons

potential warehouse district n/a potential Fulton Street commercial district n/a n/a n/a

potential warehouse district potential individually eligible n/a n/a potential warehouse district

potential civic, arts, culture district

n/a n/a n/a potential warehouse district potential warehouse district potential automotive district n/a n/a potential warehouse district potential warehouse district potential automotive district

locally designated potential warehouse district

potential Individual Architecture/Social potential warehouse district potential warehouse district potential warehouse district potential automotive district n/a potential warehouse district potential warehouse district

Significance Theme

Historic Property Survey Report

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5S1;

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

466-205-11

†    _Update  P1. Other Identifier: 1420

H Street

   !   " #Assessor

Parcel Number: 466-205-11

*P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be relatively unaltered since its last recordation in 1994. Alterations include a store window at the easternmost end of the façade that has been infilled with stucco and inset with two smaller decorative window grates. The recessed pedestrian entrance has a metal security gate installed. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building, HP8-Industrial building *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. John Edward Powell of the California State University, Fresno Foundation, inventoried and evaluated this property in 1994 for the report entitled “Supplementary Historic Building Survey, Historic Resources Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California” (see attached). Mr. Powell identified this building as eligible for local listing for its contribution to the local commerce (Criterion i) and architectural significance (Criterion iii). The property, building, and sign have been added to the Local Register of Historic Resources in Fresno. Formal evaluation of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility, or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), was not provided on the previous recordation.

*B10. Significance:

This property is being re-evaluated both because of the time passed since its last recordation and because the earlier survey did not evaluate the property using specific NRHP or CRHR criteria. Under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1, the building is not significant for its association with the early twentieth century development of Fresno businesses. Constructed in 1913 as the Benham Ice Cream Plant, it replaced the previous plant on Van Ness Avenue in Fresno. The Benham Ice Cream Company became the largest manufacturer in the Central Valley during this period and then sold out to Standard Creameries in Oakland in 1927. Ten years later, Dale Brothers Coffee bought the building and used it to roast coffee. Dale Brothers held about eighty percent of coffee accounts in the San Joaquin Valley at that time. The roasting company was sold in 1972. Although both were successful Fresno-based businesses, neither introduced new methods of production or distribution, new technology in manufacturing, nor made other historically significant contributions within their respective fields at either the local, state, or national level. Therefore, the property does not have significance within the context of either industry and does not meet NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1. This building does not have any significant associations with the lives of persons important to history under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2. It does not appear that the individuals related to the development and use of this resource made demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level within their respective fields. Under NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3, this building is not significant for possessing distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction and is, instead a relatively common commercial plant design. The property is a concrete, industrial-style building constructed in 1912-1913, designed by the master architect firm R.F. Felchlin Company. Although it is a relatively early date for the use of reinforced concrete construction, this building is not important within this context and there are other examples in California that better represent this method of construction. The property is not an important example of a general architectural style, nor is it attributable to a specific master architect. Other buildings, such as the Bank of Italy Building (1918) and Pacific Southwest Building (1923) in Fresno, are better examples of work produced by the firm and other architectural firms designed and built subsequent additions and alterations in 1923, 1937, and 1946. As a result, the building no longer retains the appearance of its original construction as a Felchlin design for the Benham Ice Cream Plant; rather, it reflects the later period of ownership under the Dale Brothers from 1937 to 1972. The alterations dating to the Dale Brothers occupancy do not have design importance in their own right and the building does not, therefore, meet NRHP Criterion 3 or CRHR Criterion C. Under NRHP Criterion D or CRHR Criterion 4, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5S1;

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

466-205-11

†    _Update 

Alterations since its previous recordation have affected the integrity of design, materials, and workmanship. The building still retains integrity of location, setting, feeling and association, but because it does not meet any of the significance criteria, it does not appear to be eligible for listing in either the NRHP or CRHR. Nevertheless, this property is listed on the local register and is, therefore, considered to be an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010





Photograph 1: 1420 H Street; facing east, April 20, 2010 (P013).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

PRIMARY RECORD

Trinomial _____________________________________ NRHP Status Code 3S, 5S1 Other Listings _______________________________________________________________ Review Code __________ Reviewer ____________________________ Date ___________

Page 1 of

5

*Resource Name or #      APN:

P1. Other Identifier: Hotel

466-214-01

Fresno

*P2. Location: † Not for Publication _ Unrestricted and   !   )  

*a. CountyFresno

South, CA Date T___6R___6___¼ of Sec___6_____ B.M. Broadway Fresno793721

*b. USGS 7.5’ QuadFresno  1257

8)# $ 9       ;     7  _____;______________9   %9 %   %   %? %  %  

Hotel Fresno is a seven-story, nearly cubic building (Photograph 1). A light well hollows out the center and allows light to enter from the west (Photograph 2). The steel frame building is clad in concrete block, with the eastern and northern sides including specifically cast decorative elements. The first two floors of the building form the base. Boarded shop windows form the first floor on the east side, with transoms above. Wide molding separates the base from the upper stories. Additional shop windows are located along the north side. The second through sixth stories are clad in smooth concrete block with vertical detailing at the corners. Windows are evenly spaced along the façade and grouped on the north and south sides, indicating interior room arrangement. Each window has a concrete sill. On the façade, decorative metal balconies are located at the center window of the third and sixth floors and to either side of center on the fourth floor (see Continuation Sheet.) *P3b. Resource Attributes:!     HP5 - Hotel *P4. Resources Present:_+ †*   † .  †* †"  †  %  @"     #Q X% %   =Photograph 1. 911 H

@  "X   [   %   % .  

Street; facing east, April 20, 2010. (P070) *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: _Z †  †+ 

1903, Fresno County Assessor Records *P7. Owner and Address:

EIE Alpha LLC/Jason & Kimberly Geil 9334 North Winery Avenue Fresno, CA 93740 *P8. Recorded by:(9 %  % 

Cheryl Brookshear & David Riggs JRP Historical Consulting, LLC 2850 Spafford Street Davis, CA 95618 *P9. Date Recorded:April

20, 2010

*P10. Survey Type:"   

Intensive

*P11. Report Citation: $        %   &  'JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *Attachments:†(  †!   )†* )_    *

_+ %*   % .  3  †

 3   † "  3  † ! 5   3  † ) *   3  † 3  3  †   3  †  3   _   Historic Resources Inventory form: Hobbs Parsons Warehouse, 903 H St., Prepared by William E. Patnaude, 1978 DPR 523A (1/95) *Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of

5

5S1, 6Z 467-040-24S

*NRHP Status Code *Resource Name or #      APN:

+\Z (9 #Hobbs-Parsons

Produce Warehouse

+ 99 (9 #___________________________ +]  8 #Warehouse

+^   8 #Fresno

Fire Department headquarters and museum *B5. Architectural Style:Utilitarian with classical revival details *B6. Construction History:      %   %     Constructed 1903; many alterations undated; major remodeling project 2006-2007 *B7. Moved?_No†Yes†Unknown *B8. Related Features:

Date:

Original Location:

________

+_  #unknown + # *B10. Significance: Theme

unknown n/a Area n/a n/a Property Type

Period of Significance n/a Applicable Criteria n/a "9    9       `     9 %  %

      

This building is #169 on the City of Fresno Local Register of Historic Resources. It does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) because it has lost historic integrity. However, it is listed in the Fresno local register of historical resources, and is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. The boundary of this historical resource is its legal parcel. The Central Pacific Railroad platted Fresno in 1872 and soon thereafter became the Southern Pacific Railroad. As irrigated agriculture spread through the surrounding area, Fresno became a center of trade for the raisin, fig, and cotton crops produced in this region and shipped from Fresno’s train station. The county seat moved to Fresno shortly after the city was established, and major growth in the late nineteenth century expanded the city beyond its original platted boundaries (Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1898 and 1906). (See Continuation Sheet.) +\\  3     #!      *B12. References: See  +\]3 9#  *B14. Evaluator:Cheryl

Continuation Sheet.

Brookshear; Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010

   $    99   

DPR 523B (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

CONTINUATION SHEET

Trinomial

Page 3 of

5

*Recorded by 



*Resource Name or #      APN:

C. Brookshear & D. Riggs

" #April

20, 2010

467-040-24S

_    †8 

B10. Significance (continued): Agriculture, particularly irrigated agriculture, was a major factor of this growth. The first of the agricultural colonies, Central California Colony, began producing crops in 1877 and soon investors and land speculators established several other similar colonies in the open land around the railroad town. Farmers grew a variety of crops, including wheat, orchards, and grapes, which were grown for raisin production and wine. Early large agricultural ventures generally packed and sold their own produce; however, as small operators purchased land and established orchards and vineyards, they required the assistance of packinghouses and wholesale dealers to get their crops to market (Clough and Secrest 1984). Hobbs-Parsons Produce Company was a partnership between A.L. Hobbs of Fresno and S.S. Parsons of Oakland. By 1898, they established a business in Fresno, with offices at 1838 Tulare and a warehouse at Mono and G streets (Cearley 1898). A.L. Hobbs then established a separate enterprise, Hobbs & Company, to distribute dry raisins and fruit and this company would occupy the Mono and G streets building (Hedges 1900; Husted 1901). Hobbs-Parsons Produce Company built the subject warehouse at 903 H Street in 1903 in place of an earlier building to provide space for Hobbs’ dried fruit business. The company provided produce for restaurants and hotels in the growing city, as well as shipping to other markets. The building was located one block away from the Southern Pacific rail line, and had its own rail siding along the freight dock platform on the long southwestern side of the building. Wagons, and later trucks, accessed the building via the at grade freight doors originally located on the H Street side of the warehouse. The single story brick building had high trussed roofs with cooling fans, and wide awnings sheltered three sides of the building (east, west, and north). The building itself was divided into two sections, with a firewall between and the southern end was often leased to other enterprises (Sanborn 1906). The business continued to grow through the twentieth century and by 1936 the company had several locations in Fresno, offering a variety of goods. Agricultural goods such as seed and pet supplies were offered from a location on Van Ness and an office at the warehouse at Tulare and H streets offered guano fertilizer. The company also opened an office at the Produce and Growers market at 1608 El Dorado Street (Polk 1936; Polk 1937). Hobbs-Parsons operated through the 1960s, providing fresh produce for the growing number of restaurants in the city; the southern end of the building continued to be leased to other businesses (Polk 1936; Polk 1939; Polk 1947). At the end of the twentieth century the property was vacated and within a few years the neighboring Grizzly Stadium revitalized the area and drew attention to the building. When it was rehabilitated in 2006, work included replacement of all existing windows with modern anodized framed glass, reconstruction of the loading dock along the west side, construction of a handicapped access ramp, construction of window openings on the west and south sides, alteration of the door and window openings on the east side (along H Street), and restoration of trim on the Tulare Street pediment (Fresno Bee 2006 Aug 21). Today it houses the City of Fresno’s Fire Department Headquarters, Training, and Museum. This building had potential significance for its association with important historic events (NRHP Criterion A and CRHR Criterion 1), specifically the fruit packing industry that supported regional agricultural production at the turn of the last century; however, it no longer retains sufficient historic integrity to its potential period of significance (1903). The HobbsParsons company was associated with the packing and shipping of local agricultural crops, and this building was one of several facilities operated by Hobbs-Parsons as part of its agricultural supplies and services business. Although the building appears to have had direct important association with this significant local pattern of development and retains integrity of location, the building has been substantially altered and has lost historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. Furthermore, its integrity of setting has been diminished by changes in its neighborhood, including the construction of Chukchansi Park (baseball) across H Street. It no longer conveys its historical association and does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR under this criterion. The building also had potential significance for architectural merit, but the loss of integrity of design, materials, and workmanship, feeling and association has diminished its ability to convey this association as well. The brick construction and truss roofing of the warehouse was common at the turn of the century and it featured some attention to detail in the decorative classical elements of its Tulare Street façade. This building would have been a good example of late Victorian Era industrial architecture, but many of its original design features have been lost or altered and it does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion C or Criterion 3. The original warehouse featured awnings DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

CONTINUATION SHEET

Trinomial

Page 4 of

5

*Recorded by 



*Resource Name or #      APN:

C. Brookshear & D. Riggs

" #April

20, 2010

467-040-24S

_    †8 

along both the long sides of the building and the Tulare Street side, all of which were removed in subsequent decades. The awning long the west side dates to the 2006-2007 remodeling project. The building retains integrity of location, but has lost substantial integrity of design, materials, and workmanship in this renovation work that included installation of modern anodized framed glass windows, addition of modern ramps and staircases, alteration of the freight openings and windows on the east side, and insertion of new window and door openings. This building is not significant for its association with the lives of persons important to history under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2. The individuals related to the development and use of this resource did not make demonstrably important contributions to history at the local, state, or national level while working in this building. The historic record does not indicate that the contributions of Albert Hobbs or Samuel Parsons to the fruit packing industry can be directly attributed to this property. This building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history (NRHP Criterion D or CRHR Criterion 4), and it does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. Although the Hobbs-Parsons Warehouse does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR, it is listed in the local register as one of the few remaining examples of an early warehouse in Fresno. As such it is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

B12. References (continued): Cearley, C.T. 1898. Fresno City and County Directory. Fresno, CA: Fresno Republican Print. Clough, C.W. and W.B. Secrest, Jr. 1984. Fresno County – The Pioneer Years: From the Beginning to 1900. CA: Panorama West Books. Fresno Bee. “Vintage building to get new visage Fresno ‘redeveloper’ takes on 103-year-old edifice near stadium,” by George Hostetter. 2006 Aug 21, Fresno Bee: A1. Fresno County Assessor. n.d. Current property data. Accessed via First American Real Estate Solutions. Hedges, C., F. Tiernan, G.A. Burns, A. Rose, and R. Todd. 1900. Fresno City and County Directory. Hedges, C., F. Tiernan, G.A. Burns, A. Rose, and R. Todd, Compilers and Publishers. F.M. Husted & Co. 1901. Directory of Fresno City and County. Oakland, CA: F.M. Husted & Co. Longstreth, Richard. 2002. The Buildings of Main Street: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Updated Edition. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press: 93. R.L. Polk & Company. Fresno City Directory. 1930s-1960s. Los Angeles, CA: R.L. Polk & Company. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company. 1898, 1906, 1918, 1950. Fresno. New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Co., Ltd.

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

CONTINUATION SHEET

Trinomial

Page 5 of

5

*Recorded by 



*Resource Name or #      APN:

C. Brookshear & D. Riggs

" #April

20, 2010

467-040-24S

_    †8 

Photographs (continued):

Photograph 2: Altered window and former freight door openings on Kern Street façade (left), and H Street side (right),facing northwest, April 20, 2010 (P067).

Photograph 3: Remodeled loading dock with new awning, ramps, stairs, and railing, facing north from Kern Street, April 20, 2010 (P065).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3S,

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5S1

468-281-01

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 959  

Fulton Mall, Fresno, California  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 468-281-01

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be largely unaltered, but for replacement of storefront glass since its last recordation in 1978 (Photograph 1).

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP7 *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

– 3+ Story Commercial Building Brookshear & Garret Root, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA

95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. William Patnaude of Allen Y. Lew & William Patnaude, Inc inventoried and evaluated the Radin-Kamp Department Store building in 1978 (see attached). As a result of that survey, the building was listed in Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources as site no. 124 and subsequently assigned status code 3S (appears to be individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places) in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). The building is adjacent to the Fulton Mall, which is a separate property that has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. 1 The Radin-Kamp Department Store building is located outside the mall’s historic property boundary and it is not a contributing feature of the Fulton Mall (Fulton Mall NRHP Nomination Form 2008; Correspondence with SHPO 2010; City of Fresno 2011). While no specific National Register criteria was cited in the 1978 HRI form, the building is presumably eligible for the National Register under Criterion C, as an example of early twentieth century commercial architecture, with restrained Beaux Arts details at the frieze and cornice. The building was vacant in March 2011 at the time of survey, but generally retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association with minor modifications to the front windows that have been replaced in kind. The building still appears to be eligible for the National Register, and, consequently, the California Register, and it is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of this historic property is its legal parcel boundary. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. *B10. Significance:

*B12. References:

City of Fresno. 2011. “What is Fulton’s future?” http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDirectory/DCR/DowntownRevitalization/fultonmall.htm. Accessed June 9, 2011. Correspondence with SHPO. 2010. Correspondence between SHPO, Mayor Swearengin, Fresno City Council, and Karana Hattersley-Drayton regarding NRHP eligibility of Fulton Mall. Fulton Mall NRHP Nomination Form. 2008. Prepared by Ray McKnight, Linda Zachritz, Harold Tokmakian. *B14. Evaluator: Cheryl

Brookshear

*Date of Evaluation:March

2011

1

In August 2010, SHPO concurred that Fulton Mall is eligible for listing on the NRHP and it was listed on the CRHR. Because a majority of Fulton Mall property owners objected to its listing on the NRHP, it is not likely that the mall will be listed on the NRHP. DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3S,

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

5S1

468-281-01

†    _Update



Photograph 1: 959 Fulton Mall; facing southwest, March 15, 2011 (P065).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5B,

Page 1 of

1

3CS, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

467-074-02

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 942  

Fagan Alley  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 467-074-02

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 2006. Note: this building is located on the same legal parcel as the Peacock Department Store.

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP3

– Multiple Family Property Brookshear & Garret Root, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

J. Stock and L. MacDonald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated this property in 2006 for the “Chinatown Historic Resources Survey” produced for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (see attached; also see the previous inventory and evaluation of the Peacock Department Store, which is located on the same legal parcel). The previous survey of 942 Fagan Alley concluded that this property did not appear to be eligible for individual listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). However, they did find that the building was eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and the local register. The correct California Historical Resources Status Code indicating its eligibility for the CRHR was not included on the form. This update rectifies that omission by the addition of status code 3CS. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. This property does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP, but appears eligible for the CRHR and local register. As a result, it is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

*B10. Significance:

*B14. Evaluator: Cheryl

Brookshear; Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2011

Photograph 1: 942 Fagan Alley; facing north, May 11, 2011 (P1010131).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5D3,

Page 1 of

3

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

467-071-16

†    _Update  P1. Other Identifier: 938-952

F Street Parcel Number: 467-071-16

   !   " #Assessor *P3a. Description:

There are two buildings on this legal parcel. The building at the southern end of the property, fronting F Street, has been field checked and appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 2006 (Photograph 1). The building at the northern end of the property, at the east corner of F Street and Tulare Street, was not previously evaluated. It is a one-story rectangular brick building with four storefronts facing Tulare Street, as well as a corner storefront at the intersection of Tulare and F streets (Photograph 2). The corner store has a parapet with brick dentils and small decorative recessed panel. Below the parapet the wall is covered with vertical wood panel siding. A metal frame canvas awning shelters the store front windows on F and Tulare streets, and is badly damaged along the F Street side. The metal and glass double door at the main entrance at the corner of the building is recessed and flanked by fixed-pane store windows. Many of the large, fixed-pane storefront windows are boarded over. Three of the four storefronts along Tulare Street have been infilled with concrete block with store entrances and smaller windows, which are covered with security bars. The fifth storefront at the northeastern end of the property has a flush façade that has been stuccoed over with a single door and window, both with security bars. *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6 *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

- 1-3 story commercial buildings Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA

95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *B10. Significance: There are two buildings located on one legal parcel at 938-952 F Street. J. Stock and L. MacDonald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated the southern building on the parcel in 2006 for the “Chinatown Historic Resources Survey” produced for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (see attached). They concluded that it did not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), nor was it individually eligible for Fresno’s local register. However, they concluded that the property appeared to be eligible as a part of a potential district under Fresno Register Criterion “ i ” for association with Fresno’s Chinatown. As a result, the southern building is considered an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation concurs with the 2006 conclusions and the integrity remains intact.

The northern building is evaluated herein through application of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) criteria. Under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1, the northern building is not significant for its association with the early twentieth century development of Fresno. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps reveal a construction date between 1898 and 1906. Over the years the building housed a variety of businesses, including a shooting gallery, restaurants, saloons, and stores. Similar businesses were located throughout Fresno and the region, and the historic record does not indicate that the property made a significant contribution to events, trends, or patterns of development within the context of commercial development in Fresno during the turn of the last century. Under NHRP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2, this building does not have any direct important associations with the life of a historically significant individual. It does not appear that the people involved with the development and use of this resource made demonstrably important individual contributions to history at the local, state, or national level. The northern building is not significant for possessing distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction under NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3. It is not an important example of a specific architectural style, nor is it attributable to a specific master architect, nor a master craftsman. Built between 1898 and 1906, the brick one-story building was modified between 1920 and 1948, with additional alterations made since then and does not meet NRHP Criteria 3 or CRHR C. NRHP Criterion D or CRHR Criterion 4, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5D3,

Page 2 of

3

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

467-071-16

†    _Update 

information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. This northern building does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP or CRHR because it lacks historic significance. Furthermore, it has lost substantial integrity through modifications, such as storefronts infilled with concrete block, replaced windows and doors, applied siding materials, simplification of the façade with application of stucco, and other alterations. As a result, the building no longer appears as it did during the period of its original construction and has lost integrity of design, materials, feeling, and workmanship. Integrity of location, setting, and association, however, has remained intact. The northern building on this parcel property has also been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code and it is not an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, the boundary of the historical resource is the southern 95 feet of the legal parcel. B12. References:

Clough, Charles W. 1986. Fresno County in the 20th Century: From 1900 to 1980s. Sacramento: Panorama West Books. Longstreth, Richard. 2002. The Buildings of Main Street: A Guide to American Commercial Architecture. Updated Edition. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company. Fresno. 1898, 1906, 1918-19, 1918-48, 1918-50. New York: Sanborn Map and Publishing Co., Ltd. *B14. Evaluator:

Chandra Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010

Photograph 1: 938 F Street; facing north, May 11, 2011 (P1010129).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5D3,

Page 3 of

3

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

467-071-16

†    _Update 

Photograph 2: Building at the corner of F Street and Tulare Street; facing southeast, April 20, 2010 (P040).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5B,

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

467-071-02

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 956

China Alley Parcel Number: 467-071-02

   !   " #Assessor

This property has been field checked since it was last recorded in 2006. The aluminum awning has been removed from the southwestern end and the northeastern end has been covered in stucco. (Photograph 1 and Photograph 2) 

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP5 *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

- Hotel/motel Brookshear & Claudia Piacente, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St., Davis, CA

95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. J. Stock and L. Mac Donald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated this property in 2006 for the report entitled “City of Fresno Chinatown Historic Property Survey.” They concluded that 956 China Alley was not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Under local criteria the survey identified the building as a contributor to Fresno’s local Chinatown Historic District. The district is eligible under criterion (i) for its representation of the development of Fresno’s Chinatown. Individually, the property has been listed as a Fresno Heritage Property. Distinct from the local register this designation merits consideration in planning processes. At the time of this survey, the building had not yet been added to the local register as recommended by the previous evaluation. After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation concurs that the property does not meet the criteria for listing in either the NRHP or CRHR; however, as a property determined eligible for local listing or designation, it is an historical resource for the purpose of CEQA. The building retains integrity of location, setting, design, workmanship, feeling and association as noted in the previous evaluation. Addition of stucco to the northeast side and removal of the aluminum awning have further altered the materials. The boundary of this historical resource is its legal parcel.

*B10. Significance:

*B14. Evaluator:Cheryl

DPR 523L (1/95)

Brookshear

*Date of Evaluation:June

2010

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5B,

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

467-071-02

†    _Update

Photographs:



Photograph 1: View of southwest façade; facing northeast, May 19, 2010 (P546).

Photograph 2: View of southeast façade; facing northwest, May 19, 2010 (P546).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 1 of

2

3CS, 5S1, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

467-072-01

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 1536-1542

Kern Street Parcel Number: 467-072-01

   !   " #Assessor

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 2006. (Photograph 1 and Photograph 2)

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building, HP5 - Hotel/motel *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. J. Stock and L. MacDonald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated this property in 2006 for the “Chinatown Historic Resources Survey” produced for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (see attached). They concluded that the property did not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); however, they concluded that it appeared eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 1, as well as for listing on the Fresno local register under Criterion “i” for its association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. The building is listed in the Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and is also eligible for listing as a contributor to a potential historic district. After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation concurs with the 2006 conclusions. The building also retains the level of integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association it had at the time of last recordation.

*B10. Significance:

This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. This property does not appear to meet the eligibility criteria for listing in the NRHP, but is eligible for the CRHR and local listing, and is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

DPR 523L (1/95)

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code

Page 2 of

2

3CS, 5S1, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

467-072-01

†    _Update

Photographs:



Photograph 1: 1536-1542 Kern Street; facing south, April 26, 2010 (P047).

Photograph 2: 1536-1542 Kern Street; facing east, April 26, 2010 (P050).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CS,

Page 1 of

1

5D3, 5S3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

467-072-08

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 1522-1526  

Kern Street  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 467-072-08

*P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in

2006. *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA

*P8. Recorded by: Cheryl

95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP

Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. J. Stock and L. MacDonald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated this property in 2006 for the “Chinatown Historic Resources Survey” produced for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (see attached). They concluded that the property did not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); however, they concluded that it appeared eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 1, as well as Fresno’s local register under Criterion “i” for its association with the development of Fresno’s Chinatown and post-World War II growth. Under the Fresno local register Criterion “i,” the building is also eligible for listing as a contributor to a potential historic district. After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation concurs with the 2006 conclusions and the integrity remains intact.

*B10. Significance:

This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. This property does not appear to meet the eligibility criteria for listing in the NRHP, but is eligible for the CRHR and local listing, and is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010

Photograph 1: 1524-1526 Kern Street; facing south, April 20, 2010 (P052). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3CS,

Page 1 of

1

5S3, 5D3, 6Z

*Resource Name or #      APN:

467-072-06

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: 836-840  

F Street  !   " #Assessor Parcel Number: 467-072-06

*P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in

2006. *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP10

- Theater Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St., Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

J. Stock and L. MacDonald of Architectural Resources Group inventoried and evaluated this property in 2006 for the “Chinatown Historic Resources Survey” produced for the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department (see attached). They concluded that the property did not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); however, they concluded that it appeared eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 3, as well as Fresno’s local register under Criteria “iii” for its distinctive characteristics as a single-screen neighborhood theater in the Art Deco style. Their evaluation also concluded that the property is eligible as a contributor to a potential historic district under Fresno Criterion “i” for its association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history, specifically the history of Fresno’s Chinatown. After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation and concurs with the 2006 conclusions and the integrity remains intact. *B10. Significance:

This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. This property does not appear to meet the eligibility criteria for listing in the NRHP, but is eligible for the CRHR and local listing, and is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010





Photograph 1: 836-840 F Street; facing east, April 20, 2010 (P055). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5S1,

Page 1 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

468-286-11

†    _Update  P1. Other Identifier: 1830

Inyo Street Parcel Number: 468-286-11

   !   " #Assessor

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in 1994. (Photograph 1)

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St., Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *B10. Significance: John Edward Powell of the California State University, Fresno Foundation inventoried and evaluated this property in 1994 for the report entitled “Supplementary Historic Building Survey, Historic Resources Survey (Ratkovich Plan) Fresno, California” (see attached). Mr. Powell identified this building as eligible for local listing for its contribution for social (Criterion i) and architectural significance (Criterion iii). The property has been added to the Local Register of Historic Resources in Fresno. Formal evaluation of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) was not provided on the previous recordation, so this property is being reevaluated to account for the passage of time since its last recordation and because the earlier survey did not evaluate the property using NRHP or CRHR criteria.

Under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1, the building is not significant for its association with the early twentieth century development of Fresno businesses. The building was used for towel, apron, and uniform laundry services relating to the cosmetic, hotel, restaurant, and auto repair industries in the area beginning in 1928. This use continued until 1964, when it became a furniture warehouse. Although it was a long term service-based business in the area, there is no demonstrable evidence that it played a historically significant role in the laundry service industry, or commercial development of Fresno at either the local, state, or national level, and it does not meet the NRHP or CRHR criteria for listing. This building does not have any direct important associations with the lives of persons important to history under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2. It does not appear that the individuals related to the development and use of this resource made demonstrably significant contributions to the laundry industry or Fresno commercial development at the local, state, or national level. Under NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3, this building is not significant for possessing distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The property is not an important example of a specific architectural style, nor is it attributable to a specific master architect. The 1928 property is a brick industrial building constructed by general contractors Yarnell & Garges, who were primarily residential builders. The building is not important within the context of commercial or industrial construction and does not meet NRHP Criterion 3 or CRHR Criterion C. Under Criterion D or CRHR Criterion 4, this building is not significant as a source (or likely source) of important information regarding history. It does not appear to have any likelihood of yielding important information about historic construction materials or technologies. Though the building generally retains integrity to its period of construction in regards to location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling and association, it lacks historical significance and does not meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP and CRHR. Nevertheless, the property is listed on the local register, and is considered an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. The boundary of the historical resource is its legal parcel. *B14. Evaluator:Chandra

DPR 523L (1/95)

Miller & Meta Bunse

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5S1,

Page 2 of

2

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

468-286-11

†    _Update 



Photograph 1: 1830 Inyo Street; facing southeast, April 20, 2010 (P063).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 5S1,

Page 1 of

1

*Resource Name or #      APN:

6Z

468-286-04

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: Baskin’s

Auto Supply Sign; 729 Broadway Parcel Number: 468-286-04

   !   " #Assessor *P3a. Description:

This property has been field checked and the building appears to be unaltered since its last recordation in

2007. *P3b. Resource Attributes:HP6

- 1-3 story commercial building *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford St., Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. Caitlin Harvey of Page & Turnbull Inc., inventoried and evaluated the property at 729 Broadway in 2007 (see attached). Ms. Harvey concluded that the building was not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), nor was it determined to be an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the Local Register of Historic Resources of Fresno. However, the original 1953 neon blade sign attached to the front of the building was found to be eligible for the Local Register of Historic Resources of Fresno and has subsequently been listed on the local register as Historic Property #263.

*B10. Significance:

After review of the previous recordation and current field check, the present evaluation concurs with the 2007 conclusions. The building does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the NRHP or the CRHR, but the neon blade sign does appear to be an historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Both the building and the sign have been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. The integrity of the neon blade sign of location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling and association remains intact from the last recordation. The boundary of the historical resource is the footprint of the neon blade sign. *B14. Evaluator:Karen

Clementi & Cheryl Brookshear

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010



Photograph 1: 729 Broadway; facing south, April 20, 2010 (P059). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3S,

Page 1 of

3

5S1

*Resource Name or #      467-092-34

†    _Update P1. Other Identifier: Vartanian  

Home  !   " #362 F Street, Fresno, CA

The property has been field checked, and while the buildings appear to be unaltered since their last recordation in 1978, the property has been altered by the addition of a concrete masonry perimeter fence, as well as an above-ground pool, which is sited between the residence and barn. (Photographs 1 – 4)

*P3a. Description:

*P3b. Resource Attributes:HP2

- Single family property, HP4 - Ancillary Buildings Brookshear & David Riggs, JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, 2850 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 *P11. Report Citation:JRP Historical Consulting, LLC, “California High Speed Train Historic Property Survey Report: Fresno to Bakersfield Section,” 2011. *P8. Recorded by:Cheryl

*B10. Significance: The Vartanian House was surveyed by Ilene J. Marcum in 1978 on a historic resource inventory (HRI) form (see attached). As a result of that survey, the structure was listed in the Fresno Local Register of Historic Resources and was subsequently assigned the status code 3S (appears to be individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places) in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). While no specific National Register criteria was cited in the 1978 HRI form, Marcum noted that the house was important for its Queen Anne architecture and “because the complex of buildings-barn, water tank and out-house, have survived to provide a graphic illustration of the living style of the 1880’s” (NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3), and for its association with Hwovageem (Henry) Vartanian, one of the original Armenian settlers in the area (NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2). The only known alterations to the property consist of the addition of a concrete masonry fence around the complex and an above-ground pool, neither of which detract from the overall integrity of the individual buildings or the complex as a whole in relation to location, setting, design, workmanship, materials, feeling, and association. This property has been evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code. This property still appears to be eligible for listing in the NRHP and the CRHR, and is an historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The boundary of this historic property consists of the area enclosed by the concrete block fence to the northeast, northwest, and southwest, and a modern warehouse on the southeast side. *B14. Evaluator:Toni

Webb

*Date of Evaluation:April

2010





Photograph 1: Overall view of complex; facing east, April 21, 2010 (P109). DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3S,

Page 2 of

3

5S1

*Resource Name or #      467-092-34

†    _Update

Photograph 2: View of north and west sides of residence; facing east, April 21, 2010 (P102)

Photograph 3: View of north and east sides of residence; facing south, April 21, 2010 (P104).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

UPDATE SHEET

Trinomial  NRHP Status Code 3S,

Page 3 of

3

5S1

*Resource Name or #      467-092-34

†    _Update

Photograph 4: Outbuildings; facing southeast, April 21, 2010 (P105).

DPR 523L (1/95)

*Required Information

State of California – The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

Primary # _____________________________________ HRI # ________________________________________

PRIMARY RECORD

Trinomial _____________________________________ NRHP Status Code 3S, 5S1 Other Listings _______________________________________________________________ Review Code __________ Reviewer ____________________________ Date ___________

Page 1 of

5

P1. Other Identifier: 1916

*Resource Name or #

APN: 467-020-13

South Cherry Avenue

*P2. Location: † Not for Publication _ Unrestricted and   !   )  

*a. CountyFresno

South, CA Date T___6R___6___¼ of Sec___6_____ B.M.  1916 South Cherry Avenue  Fresno793721 

*b. USGS 7.5’ QuadFresno

8)# $ 9       ;     7  _____;______________9   %9 %   %   %? %  %  

This industrial property consists of seven buildings sited on a three-acre triangular-shaped parcel. The oldest is a one-story Italian Renaissance Revival building constructed in the 1920s. The building is sited on the northeast corner of the parcel and fronts South Cherry Avenue with a landscaped setback. The rectangular brick building (Photographs 2-3) has a truncated hip roof covered in mission tiles, narrow boxed eaves with modillions, and a dentiled frieze. Brick is laid in the common bond. A formal recessed entrance, accessed by concrete steps, is centered on the main (east façade), and highlighted by an arched opening with surrounding square pilasters. A “Holt Lumber” sign, flanked by tiles with pine tree reliefs, is located above the arch. Wood-frame double doors with fixed transoms give access to the interior of the building. Fenestration consists of one-over-one, double-hung, wood windows evenly spaced throughout the building and topped by brick arches with stone keystones and voussoirs and brick sills. Windows are evenly spaced on each side of the building. A small, modular trailer building (Photograph 3) has been added to the south side, likely within the last twenty years. The remaining buildings on the site include wood- and metal-frame warehouses with metal siding and were constructed after 1961. *P3b. Resource Attributes:!     HP6 - 1-3 story commercial building; HP8- Industrial building *P4. Resources Present:_+ †*   † .  †* †"  †   . >   … *    [}   p  9‹‚ X9  . >   $    (  

)X 9       *5+ 

($ }