DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 3
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 9445 Jericho Road City: La Mesa Zip: 91942
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500626 mN 3627638 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-670-15
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 9445 Jericho Road is a one-story rectangular plan single-family residence clad with board-and-batten siding located on the north side of Amaya Drive (Photograph 1). The residence has a low-pitch composition shingle crossgable roof with an overhang and closed eaves. An attached garage is featured on the primary (east) elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a single-leaf wooden door painted white, and a board-and-batten garage door. A brick wall encloses the front lawn surrounding the south and primary (east) elevations and a concrete driveway leads to the garage from Amaya Drive. Landscaping consists of grass, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (east) and south elevations were visible from the public right-of-way during the survey on February 12, 2024. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (east) and south
elevations, view looking northwest
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1973
(ParcelQuest)
*P7. Owner and Address:
CABS Family Trust
9445 Jericho Road
La Mesa, CA 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9445 Jericho Road DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 9445 Jericho Road:
▪ 1974: Construct 5' retaining wall, 115' long (Permit #37863) ▪ 1976: Construction of free-standing wall (Permit # 37863) ▪ Uknown date: Replacement window frames (observed)
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Herman E. Kirk
*B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 9445 Jericho Road was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 9445 Jericho Road. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Ranch Style (1930-1975)
Ranch-style houses in California reflect a national trend of fascination with the “Old West” and were a building style of choice for tract housing. Ranch homes were originally developed in the western and southwestern United States, but quickly gained national popularity through the dissemination of do-it-yourself manuals and plans in national magazines such as Sunset, Better Homes And Gardens, and House Beautiful. Later, Ranch houses were popular as a custom-built type of housing, which was especially common in the later 1940s and 1950s. During the 1940s, the style was one of the few built under FHA financing guidelines. Ranch houses built in the 1940s were smaller in size than later versions after builders lobbied for higher loan limits and FHA guidelines were revised in the 1950s. In the San Diego region examples of the style were abundant as it became the most prevalent type of post-World War II suburban tract-style housing (McAlester 2015: 597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75).Many Tract Ranch homes were erected as the San Diego region experienced rapid suburban growth in the mid and late 1950s. Tract Ranch homes differ from “Custom Ranch” homes, which were typically single instances, unique designs, and created by an architect for a specific customer. Tract Ranch houses were more conservative in design, offering a limited number of customizable exterior finishes and interior amenities for each residential development. They can come in variations, often called “Styled Ranches,” that include elements and ornamentation that can be placed in the following categories: Storybook/Chalet, Colonial Revival, Contemporary, Spanish Colonial, and Western Ranch style (McAlester 2015:
597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75; Grimes and Chiang 2009: 44; Horak et.al. 2015: 21-26).
Character-defining features include:
• Rambling, elongated plans with a horizontal emphasis
• One to two stories in height
• Low-pitched gabled or hipped roofs with overhanging, open eaves • General asymmetry
• Cladding featuring stucco, board and batten, shingles, clapboard, or a combination of materials • Brick or stone chimneys details
• Attached garages often linked to residence by breezeways • Stone, brick, board and batten, clapboard, or horizontal wood siding used for accent on walls, secondary cladding types, and planters
• Functional and non-functional shutters details as trim around windows • Fenestration may include a picture window
• May have decorative features such as wood shutters and dovecotes Property History
The single-family residence at 9445 Jericho Road (APN 486-670-15) was constructed in 1973 (ParcelQuest 2024). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the builder of 9445 Jericho Road was the home’s first owner, Herman E. Kirk. Research, including through Newspapers.com, Ancestry.com, Calisphere, and the American Institute of Architects Historical Directory, did not indicate that Kirk was a registered architect.
The following section presents a timeline and information on the identified owners and occupants of 9445 Jericho Road since its construction in 1973 (Table 1).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 9445 Jericho Road Years Name Notes Source
1973 –1975 Herman E. Kirk Herman Kirk (1926-1987) was born in Corsicana, Texas and attended San Diego High School. In 1964, he worked as a foreman and by 1972 he was working as a machinist
operator in San Diego.
City of La Mesa
Permit #33003
Ancestry.com
1976 E. Doris Ward Research did not identify information on E. Doris Ward City of La Mesa Building Permit
#37863
2013 - present Bruce S. and Cheryl A.
Potocki/CABS Family Trust
Bruce Potocki appears to be an attorney; research did not identify additional information on Cheryl Potocki.
City of La Mesa
Building Permit
#P13-023
City of La Mesa
Building Permit
#2023-0055
LawLink ND
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 9445 Jericho Road under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The single-family residence at 9445 Jericho Road was constructed in 1973, which is near the end of this significant residential development trends in La Mesa. Therefore, it is not directly associated with the post-World War II decades and only has a mere association with La Mesa’s development. However, mere association with a broad trend is not enough to reach the threshold of eligibility. The property is not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred at the property. Therefore, 9445 Jericho Road is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Herman E. Kirk, who was also listed as the property’s architect. Kirk (1926-1987) was born in Corsicana, Texas, and attended San Diego High School. In 1964, he worked as a foreman and by 1972 he was working as a machinist operator in San Diego (Ancestry.com). Kirk owned the residence until 1975. Subsequent owners include E. Dors Ward (1976) and Bruce S. and Cheryl A. Potocki (2013-present). Research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on these individuals. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our past and the property is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion
2.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
This property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a tract Ranch house built in 1973. While the property does display character-defining features of the Ranch style (e.g., its horizontal emphasis and one-story height), this is a ubiquitous style applied to residences throughout the neighborhood, La Mesa, San Diego County, and California. Due to its simple form and easy replicability, the Ranch style was widely applied to houses in the post-World War II decades throughout San Diego County (City of San Diego 2007: 70). The subject property is an unremarkable example of a ubiquitous style and there are many similar examples.
According to its original building permit, the builder of 9445 Jericho Road was the home’s first owner, Herman E. Kirk.
Research, including through Newspapers.com, Ancestry.com, Calisphere, and the American Institute of Architects Historical Directory, did not indicate that Kirk was a registered architect; in 1972, the year before the construction of the subject property, his profession was described as a machinist operator in city directories (Ancestry.com). As such, it appears unlikely that the properties were constructed by a master architect or builder.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 9445 Jericho Road lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 9445 Jericho Road is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1973 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous 1970s Ranch style house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Because 9445 Jericho Road lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys. *B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012. 1973San Diego, California, City Directory.
ARG (Architectural Resources Group). 2016. City of Arcadia: Citywide Historic Context Statement. Prepared by ARG for the City of Arcadia, Development Services, Planning Division. January 11, 2016. https://www.arcadiaca.gov/Shape%20Arcadia/Development%20Services/historic%20preservation/Arcdia%20HCS _11-16_FINAL.pdf.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmentalanalysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2007.p df.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement:
Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources.
http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf LawLink. ND. "Bruce Stephen Potocki." Accessed March 2024. https://lawlink.com/attorney/12153/bruce-stephen-potocki.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 6
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 5954 Amaya Drive City: La Mesa Zip: 91942
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500647 mN 3627676 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-05
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 5954 Amaya Drive is a one-story L-plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the north side of Amaya Drive (Photograph1). The residence has a low-pitch composition tile cross-gable roof with an overhang and closed eaves. An attached garage is featured on the primary (south) elevation. Fenestration consists of double-hung vinylframe windows, a single-leaf wooden door painted black, and a garage door. A CMU wall encloses a front lawn along the south elevation of the attached garage and a concrete driveway leads to the garage from Amaya Drive. Landscaping consists of grass, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (south) elevation was visible from the public right-of-way during the survey. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (south) elevation,
view looking north
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1968 (City of
La Mesa Permit #25493)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Ian Allen
5954 Amaya Drive
La Mesa, CA 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation:
Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 5954 Amaya Drive DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 5954 Amaya Drive:
▪ 1968: Construct privacy fence (Permit #225493)
▪ Ca. 1997: reroofing (NETR 2024b)
▪ Unknown date: Replacement window frame
See Continuation Sheet, page 4.
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 5954 Amaya Drive was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 5954 Amaya Drive. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 11
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Construction History (continued from page 2):
▪ Uknown date: Replacement primary entrance door on south elevation (observed) ▪ Unknown date: Replacement garage door (observed)
▪ Unknown date: Fence around the west and south elevations (observed) ▪ Unknown date: Re-stuccoing (observed)
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Ranch Style (1930-1975)
Ranch-style houses in California reflect a national trend of fascination with the “Old West” and were a building style of choice for tract housing. Ranch homes were originally developed in the western and southwestern United States, but quickly gained national popularity through the dissemination of do-it-yourself manuals and plans in national magazines such as Sunset, Better Homes And Gardens, and House Beautiful. Later, Ranch houses were popular as a custom-built type of housing, which was especially common in the later 1940s and 1950s. During the 1940s, the style was one of the few built under FHA financing guidelines. Ranch houses built in the 1940s were smaller in size than later versions after builders lobbied for higher loan limits and FHA guidelines were revised in the 1950s. In the San Diego region examples of the style were abundant as it became the most prevalent type of post-World War II suburban tract-style housing (McAlester 2015: 597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75).Many Tract Ranch homes were erected as the San Diego region experienced rapid suburban growth in the mid and late 1950s. Tract Ranch homes differ from “Custom Ranch” homes, which were typically single instances, unique designs, and created by an architect for a specific customer. Tract Ranch houses were more conservative in design, offering a limited number of customizable exterior finishes and interior amenities for each residential development. They can come in variations, often called “Styled Ranches,” that include elements and ornamentation that can be placed in the following categories: Storybook/Chalet, Colonial Revival, Contemporary, Spanish Colonial, and Western Ranch style (McAlester 2015:
597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75; Grimes and Chiang 2009: 44; Horak et.al. 2015: 21-26).
Character-defining features include:
• Rambling, elongated plans with a horizontal emphasis
• One to two stories in height
• Low-pitched gabled or hipped roofs with overhanging, open eaves • General asymmetry
• Cladding featuring stucco, board and batten, shingles, clapboard, or a combination of materials • Brick or stone chimneys details
• Attached garages often linked to residence by breezeways • Stone, brick, board and batten, clapboard, or horizontal wood siding used for accent on walls, secondary cladding types, and planters
• Functional and non-functional shutters details as trim around windows • Fenestration may include a picture window
• May have decorative features such as wood shutters and dovecotes
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1968 (City of La Mesa Permit #25493). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Amaya Drive was Nick Di Meglio.
De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971:
2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 7-11). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Table 1 presents a timeline and information on the identified owners and occupants of 5954 Amaya Drive since its construction.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 5954 Amaya Drive Years Name Notes Source
1968 Patrick Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 San Diego
directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego Directory. Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these
individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map IDs 7-11.
City of La Mesa
Permit #25493
Ancestry.com
1977 Bosworth No first name is listed on the building permit; research did not identify information on this owner.
City of La Mesa
Permit #39461
1995 –2005 Edward and Maria Paris/
Joe Paris (2005 only)
Edward Paris (1925-2008) was a World War II veteran
married to Maria Paris (1923-2004). Joe Paris is their son.
Research did not identify additional information on the Paris family.
City of La Mesa
Permit #P97-
00240, #E-05-084,
and #P-05098
Ancestry.com
2005-present Ian Allen Research did not identify information on Ian Allen. ParcelQuest 2024 NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 5954 Amaya Drive under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family Ranch style residence at 5954 Amaya Drive was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property.
Therefore, 5954 Jericho Road is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego director and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map IDs 7-11, indicating he was a developer in the neighborhood.
Subsequent owners/occupants of the subject property include Bostworth (1977; no first name identified); Edward and Maria Paris (1995-2005) and their son Joe Paris (2005); and Ian Allen (2005-present). Research identified that Edward Paris was a World War II veteran; however, research did not identify additional biographical or professional information on any of these occupants. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our past. Due to a lack of identified significant associations with any persons important in our past, 5954 Amaya Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a tract Ranch house built in 1968. While the property does display character-defining features of the Ranch style (e.g., its horizontal emphasis and one-story height), this is a ubiquitous style applied to residences throughout the neighborhood, La Mesa, San Diego County, and California. Due to its simple form and easy replicability, the Ranch style was widely applied to houses in the post-World War II decades throughout San Diego County (City of San Diego 2007: 70). The subject property is an unremarkable example of a ubiquitous style and there are many similar examples.
According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Amaya Drive was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio.
As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map IDs 7-11. These properties also have the same
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood. However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 9445 Jericho Road lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 5954 Amaya Drive is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous 1970s Ranch style house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 5954 Amaya Drive lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B12. References (continued from page 2):
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files for APNs: 486-740-05. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 7
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 5955 Broadmoor Drive City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500622 mN 3627691 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-06
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The property at 5955 Broadmoor Drive is a two-story irregular plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the south side of Broadmoor Drive (Photograph 1). The residence has a low-pitch composition tile side-gable roof with an overhang and closed eaves and a composition tile shed roof covering an entrance porch on the primary (north) elevation. An attached single-story garage with a composition tile hipped roof is featured on the primary (south) elevation of the residence.
A brick chimney is location on the east elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a single-leaf wooden door painted white, and paneled garage door. A CMU wall encloses a front lawn along the primary (north) and west elevations of the attached garage, and a concrete driveway leads to the garage from Broadmoor Drive. Landscaping consists of grass, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (north) elevation was visible from the public right-of-way during the survey. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (north) elevation,
view looking south
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1967 (City of
La Mesa Permit #23777)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Maryann Fowler Revocable Trust
5955 Broadmoor Drive
La Mesa, CA 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 5955 Broadmoor Drive DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Undifferentiated
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 5955 Broadmoor Drive:
▪ 2016: Solar Panel Installation (Permit #B16-667)
▪ Uknown date: Replacement window frames (observed)
▪ Unknown date: Possible residential addition or enclosure of existing garage on primary (north) elevation (observed) ▪ Unknown date: Fencing at west and south elevations (observed) *B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 5955 Broadmoor Drive was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 5955 Broadmoor Drive. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1968 (City of La Mesa Permit #25493). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Amaya Drive was Nick Di Meglio.
De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971:
2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 7 and 8-11). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Research revealed limited information on the identified owners and occupants of 5955 Broadmoor Drive (Table 1).
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 5955 Broadmoor Drive Years Name Notes Source
1967 Patrick Leo Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 San Diego
directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego Directory. Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these
individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map ID 6 and Map
IDs 8-11.
City of La Mesa
Permit #23777
Ancestry.com
2016 –2024 Fowler Family Trust Research did not identify information on the Fowler Family Trust.
City of La Mesa
Permit #M21-206
and #B16-667
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 5955 Broadmoor Drive under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family residence at 5955 Broadmoor Drive was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, The single-family residence at 5955 Broadmoor Drive was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property.
Therefore, 5955 Broadmoor Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map ID 6 and Map IDs 8-11, indicating that he likely developed the entire block.
The only other identified owner of the property was the Fowler Family Trust (2016-2024); however, research was unable to identify information on this entity. It does not appear that Patrick Ryan or the Fowler Family Trust made significant contributions to our past and therefore 5955 Broadmoor Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a late 1960s single-family tract residence with no particular style. It is a ubiquitous example of its type and there are many similar examples in La Mesa, San Diego County, and California. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5955 Broadmoor Drive was Nick Di Meglio.
De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971:
2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map ID 6 and Map IDs 8-11. These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood.
However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 5955 Broadmoor Drive lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 5055 Broadmoor Drive is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
A. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous, stylistically undifferentiated late 1960s tract house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
B. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
C. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 5955 Broadmoor Drive lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys. *B12. References (continued from page 2):
ARG (Architectural Resources Group). 2016. City of Arcadia: Citywide Historic Context Statement. Prepared by ARG for the City of Arcadia, Development Services, Planning Division. January 11, 2016. https://www.arcadiaca.gov/Shape%20Arcadia/Development%20Services/historic%20preservation/Arcdia%2 0HCS_11-16_FINAL.pdf.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
Petitions for Naturalization from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1897-1944; Series: M1972; Roll: 904;1934; Nicholas Di Meglio.
1940 United States Federal Census. Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Roll: m-t0627-00432; Page: 9A; Enumeration District: 60-1280; Nick Di Meglio.
1959 San Diego, California, City Directory.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
Rogers, Elizabeth Barlow. 2001. Landscape Design: A Cultural and Architectural History. Abrams Publishing, New York, 2001.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
San Pedro News-Pilot. 1971. "Rosary Friday for Di Meglio." Newspapers.com: San Pedro News-Pilot (San Pedro, California). Page 2.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
Vidovich, Elise. 1950. "Di Meglio, Moreno Win Senior Posts." February 17, 1950. Newspapers.com: San Pedro NewsPilot (San Pedro, California). Page 3.
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 8
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 5954 Broadmoor Drive City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500582 mN 3627711 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-22
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The property at 5954 Broadmoor Drive (APN 486-740-22) is a two-story irregular plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the north side of Broadmoor Drive (Photograph 1). The residence has a low-pitch red-clay tile cross-gable roof with an overhang and closed eaves. An attached garage is featured on the primary (south) elevation. A brick chimney is located on the west elevation. Fenestration consists of single-light and multi-light horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a fully glazed sliding door, a double-leaf wooden door painted white, and a paneled garage door. See Continuation Sheet, Page
4. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property *P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (south) and west
elevations, view looking north
(Dudek IMG_4282)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1968 (City of
La Mesa Permit #24560)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Maximillian F. Duenas
2821 Van Tuyl Place
Modesto, CA 95356
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 5954 Broadmoor Drive DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Undifferentiated
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) See Continuation Sheet, page 4.
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 5954 Broadmoor Drive was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 5954 Broadmoor Drive. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
* P3a. Description (continued from page 2):
A CMU wall encloses landscaping along the primary (south) elevation, and a concrete driveway leads to the garage from Broadmoor Drive. Landscaping consists of drought tolerant plantings, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (south) elevation was visible from the public right-of-way during the survey on February 12, 2024. *B06. Construction History (continued from page 2)
Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 5954 Broadmoor Drive:
• 1973: Add sun deck (Permit #33780)
• 1975: Add pool (Permit #36536)
• 1982: Add sun deck (Permit # not included)
• 1992: Room addition and retaining wall (Permit #67013) • 2013: Reroof (Permit #B12-505)
• Ca. 2014: addition of solar panels to roof (NETR 2024b) • Uknown date: Replacement window frames (observed)
• Unknown date: Additions on the south elevation (observed) *B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1968 (City of La Mesa Permit #24560). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Broadmoor Drive was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 6, 7, and 9-11). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Research identified the original owner of the subject property and several others including the current owner. Table 1 summarizes what information was uncovered about the property owners.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 5954 Broadmoor Drive Years Name Notes Source
1968 Patrick L. Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976
San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose
occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San
Diego Directory. Research could not definitively
confirm whether either of these individuals is the
same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original
owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map IDs 6 and 7
and Map IDs 9-11.
City of La Mesa Permit
#24560
Ancestry.com
1973 –1993
2004
2013
Hugh G. Sikes
Peng S. Sikes
Mary Sikes
Hugh G. Sikes (1931-2001) served in the United
States Navy from 1948 until 1973. He was married
to Peng S. Sikes. Mary Sikes is their daughter.
Research did not identify additional information on
the Sikes.
City of La Mesa Permit
#33780;
#67013 ; #B-04-098;
#B12-505
Ancestry.com
2021 William K. Scarvie III
and Anne Isaaks
Research did not identify information on William
Scarvie or Anne Isaaks.
City of La Mesa Permit
#P21-070
2023-present Maximillian F.
Duenas
Research did not identify information on Maximilian
Duenas.
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 5954 Broadmoor Drive under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family residence at 5954 Broadmoor Drive was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property.
Therefore, 5954 Broadmoor Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map IDs 6 and 7 and 9-11, indicating that he likely developed the entire block.
Subsequent owners/occupants of the subject property include the Sikes family, consisting of Hugh, Peng, and Mary Sikes who occupied the property from 1974 until circa 2013. High Sikes served in the United States Navy from 1948 until 1973 and was married to Peng Sikes. Subsequent occupants include William K. Scarvie and Anne Isaaks (2021) and Maximilian Duenas (2023-present); however, research did not identify additional biographical or professional information on any of these occupants. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our pas past and therefore, 5954 Broadmoor Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
While the residence may have once exhibited elements of the Ranch style, it has been substantially altered and is now stylistically undifferentiated. It is a ubiquitous example of its type and there are many similar examples in La Mesa, San Diego County, and California.
According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Broadmoor Drive was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio.
As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map IDs 6 and 7 and Map IDs 9-11.These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood.
However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 5954 Broadmoor Drive lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 5954 Broadmoor Drive is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a heavily altered, stylistically undifferentiated residence.
It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous, stylistically undifferentiated late 1960s tract house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements,
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 5954 Broadmoor Drive lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys. *B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
Petitions for Naturalization from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1897-1944; Series: M1972; Roll: 904;1934; Nicholas Di Meglio.
1940 United States Federal Census. Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Roll: m-t0627-00432; Page: 9A; Enumeration District: 60-1280; Nick Di Meglio.
1959, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1976 San Diego, California, City Directories.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
San Pedro News-Pilot. 1971. "Rosary Friday for Di Meglio." Newspapers.com: San Pedro News-Pilot (San Pedro, California). Page 2.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
Vidovich, Elise. 1950. "Di Meglio, Moreno Win Senior Posts." February 17, 1950. Newspapers.com: San Pedro NewsPilot (San Pedro, California). Page 3
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 9
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 9407 Broadmoor Place City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500570 mN 3627731 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-20
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The property at 9407 Broadmoor Place (APN 486-740-20) is a two-story L-plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the west side of Broadmoor Place (Photograph 1). It has a low-pitch composition tile side-gable roof with an overhang and closed eaves. A single-story attached garage with a composition tile clad hipped roof is featured on the primary (east) elevation. A brick chimney is located on the north elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a fully glazed sliding door, a partially glazed double-leaf wooden door, and a garage door. See Continuation Sheet,
*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (east) elevation,
view looking west (Dudek
IMG_4192)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1967 (City of
La Mesa Permit #23777)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Eugene E. Strand
9407 Broadmoor Place
La Mesa 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9407 Broadmoor Place DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Undifferentiated
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 9407 Broadmoor Place:
1968: Swimming pool (Permit #25273)
1994: Tear off and reroof with plywood (Permit #69095)
Unknown date: Replacement window frames (observed)
Unknown date: Possible addition of exterior patio on primary (east) elevation (observed) *B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 9407 Broadmoor Place was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 9407 Broadmoor Place. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1967 (City of La Mesa Permit #23777). According to its original building permit, the architect of 9407 Broadmoor Place was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 6-8, 10, and 11). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Research identified the original owner of the subject property and two other owners including the current owner. Table 1 summarizes what information was uncovered about the property owners.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 9407 Broadmoor Place Years Name Notes Source
1967 Patrick Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the
1976 San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan
whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the
1973 San Diego Directory. Research could not
definitively confirm whether either of these
individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the
residence’s original owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map IDs 6 -8
and Map IDs 10 and 11.
City of La Mesa Permit #23777
Ancestry.com
1968 –1994
2012-2024
Sylvester E. Strand
Eugene H. Strand
Sylvester Strand (1918-2011) was born in
Minnesota and was a Master Technical Sergeant in
the Marine Corps, serving for three years during
World War II. In the 1964 San Diego City Directory,
his profession is listed as assemblyman. Eugene is
Sylvester’s son.
City of La Mesa Permit #25273
and #69095
Los Angels Times 1945: 17
Ancestry.com
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 9407 Broadmoor Place under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family residence at 9407 Broadmoor Place was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property.
Therefore, 9407 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map IDs 6-8 and Map IDs 10 and 11, indicating that he likely developed the entire block.
Subsequent owners/occupants of the subject property include Sylvester E Strand (1968- at least 1994) and his son, Eugene H. Strand (at least 2012 – present). Sylvester Strand (1918-2011) was born in Minnesota and was a Master Technical Sergeant in the Marine Corps, serving for three years during World War II. In the 1964 San Diego City Directory, his profession is listed as assemblyman (Ancestry.com; Los Angeles Times 1945: 17). However, research did not identify additional biographical or professional information on the Strand family. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our past and therefore, 9407 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a late 1960s single-family tract residence with no particular style. It is a ubiquitous example of its type and there are many similar examples in La Mesa, San Diego County, and California.
According to its original building permit, the architect of 9407 Broadmoor Place was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career,
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio.
As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map IDs 6-8 and Map IDs 10 and 11. These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood. However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 9407 Broadmoor Place lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 9407 Broadmoor Place is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous, stylistically undifferentiated late 1960s tract house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 9407 Broadmoor Place lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
Petitions for Naturalization from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1897-1944; Series: M1972; Roll: 904;1934; Nicholas Di Meglio.
1940 United States Federal Census. Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Roll: m-t0627-00432; Page: 9A; Enumeration District: 60-1280; Nick Di Meglio.
1959, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1976 San Diego, California, City Directories.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
San Pedro News-Pilot. 1971. "Rosary Friday for Di Meglio." Newspapers.com: San Pedro News-Pilot (San Pedro, California). Page 2.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
Vidovich, Elise. 1950. "Di Meglio, Moreno Win Senior Posts." February 17, 1950. Newspapers.com: San Pedro NewsPilot (San Pedro, California). Page 3
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 10
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 9405 Broadmoor Place City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500548 mN 3627738 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-10
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The property at 9405 Broadmoor Place (APN 486-740-10) is a one-story L-plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the west side of Broadmoor Place (Photograph 1). The residence has a low-pitch composition tile hipped roof with an overhang and closed eaves. An attached garage is featured on the primary (east) elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a single-leaf door obscured by security screen, and a garage door. A concrete driveway leads to the garage from Broadmoor Place. Landscaping consists of drought tolerant plantings, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (east) elevation was visible from the public right-of-way during the survey on February 12, 2024. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary ((east) and south
elevations, view looking west
(Dudek IMG_4197)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1967 (City of
La Mesa Permit #23362)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Frazier Revocable Living Trust
5995 Broadmoor Drive
La Mesa 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation:
Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9405 Broadmoor Place DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Ranch
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa and observations during the site survey identified the following exterior alterations to 9405 Broadmoor Place:
• 1969: Addition of patio slab for future enclosure (Permit #26847) • Unknown date: addition of security screen door to main entrance (observed) • Unknown date: Replacement window frames (observed)
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 9405 Broadmoor Place was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 9405 Broadmoor Place. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Ranch Style (1930-1975)
Ranch-style houses in California reflect a national trend of fascination with the “Old West” and were a building style of choice for tract housing. Ranch homes were originally developed in the western and southwestern United States, but quickly gained national popularity through the dissemination of do-it-yourself manuals and plans in national magazines such as Sunset, Better Homes And Gardens, and House Beautiful. Later, Ranch houses were popular as a custom-built type of housing, which was especially common in the later 1940s and 1950s. During the 1940s, the style was one of the few built under FHA financing guidelines. Ranch houses built in the 1940s were smaller in size than later versions after builders lobbied for higher loan limits and FHA guidelines were revised in the 1950s. In the San Diego region examples of the style were abundant as it became the most prevalent type of post-World War II suburban tract-style housing (McAlester 2015: 597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75).Many Tract Ranch homes were erected as the San Diego region experienced rapid suburban growth in the mid and late 1950s. Tract Ranch homes differ from “Custom Ranch” homes, which were typically single instances, unique designs, and created by an architect for a specific customer. Tract Ranch houses were more conservative in design, offering a limited number of customizable exterior finishes and interior amenities for each residential development. They can come in variations, often called “Styled Ranches,” that include elements and ornamentation that can be placed in the following categories: Storybook/Chalet, Colonial Revival, Contemporary, Spanish Colonial, and Western Ranch style (McAlester 2015:
597; City of San Diego 2007: 70-75; Grimes and Chiang 2009: 44; Horak et.al. 2015: 21-26).
Character-defining features include:
• Rambling, elongated plans with a horizontal emphasis
• One to two stories in height
• Low-pitched gabled or hipped roofs with overhanging, open eaves • General asymmetry
• Cladding featuring stucco, board and batten, shingles, clapboard, or a combination of materials • Brick or stone chimneys details
• Attached garages often linked to residence by breezeways • Stone, brick, board and batten, clapboard, or horizontal wood siding used for accent on walls, secondary cladding types, and planters
• Functional and non-functional shutters details as trim around windows • Fenestration may include a picture window
• May have decorative features such as wood shutters and dovecotes Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1967 (City of La Mesa Permit #23362). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 9405 Broadmoor Place was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 6-9 and 11). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Research identified the original owner of the subject property and three others, including the current owner. Table 1 summarizes what information was uncovered about the property owners.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of Map ID 10: 9405 Broadmoor Place Years Name Notes Source
1967 Patrick L. Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an
engineer in the 1973 San Diego Directory. Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original
owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map IDs 6-9 and Map
ID 11.
City of La Mesa Permit #23362
Ancestry.com
1969 Ralph W. Graves Ralph Graves (1924-2015) served in the army during World War II.
City of La Mesa Permit #26847
Ancestry.com
2016 Cynathia C. Maina Research did not identify information on Cynathia C. Maina City of La Mesa Permit #M16- 053
2021-
present
Frazier Revocable
Living Trust
Research did not identify information on the Frazier
Revocable Living Trust
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 9405 Broadmoor Place under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family residence at 9405 Broadmoor Place was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property.
Therefore, 9405 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to the original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map IDs 6-9 and Map ID 11, indicating that he likely developed the entire block.
Subsequent owners/occupants of the subject property include Ralph G. Graves (1969) who served in the army during World War II; Cyanthia C. Maina (2016); and the Frazier Revocable Living Trust. Research did not identify additional biographical or professional information on these individuals and entity. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our past and therefore, 9405 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a tract Ranch house built in 1968. While the property does display character-defining features of the Ranch style (e.g., its horizontal emphasis and one-story height), this is a ubiquitous style applied to residences throughout the neighborhood, La Mesa, San Diego County, and California. Due to its simple form and easy replicability with prefabricated components, the Ranch style was widely applied to houses in the post-World War II decades throughout San Diego County (City of San Diego 2007: 70). The subject property is an unremarkable example of a ubiquitous style and there are many similar examples.
According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Broadmoor Drive was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio.
As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map IDs 6 and 7 and Map IDs 9-11.These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood.
However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 5896 Amaya Drive lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 9405 Broadmoor Place is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous 1970s Ranch style house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 9405 Broadmoor Place lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys. *B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
Find-a-Grave. El Camino Memorial Park: Ralph W. Graves
Petitions for Naturalization from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1897-1944; Series: M1972; Roll: 904;1934; Nicholas Di Meglio.
1940 United States Federal Census. Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Roll: m-t0627-00432; Page: 9A; Enumeration District: 60-1280; Nick Di Meglio.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
1959, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1976 San Diego, California, City Directories.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
San Pedro News-Pilot. 1971. "Rosary Friday for Di Meglio." Newspapers.com: San Pedro News-Pilot (San Pedro, California). Page 2.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
Vidovich, Elise. 1950. "Di Meglio, Moreno Win Senior Posts." February 17, 1950. Newspapers.com: San Pedro NewsPilot (San Pedro, California). Page 3
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 11
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 9403 Broadmoor Place City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500519 mN 3627767 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-740-18
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 9403 Broadmoor Place (APN 486-740-18) is a two-story L-plan single-family residence clad with stucco siding located on the west side of Broadmoor Place (Photograph 14). The property has a low-pitch composition tile cross-gable roof with an overhang and closed eaves. An attached garage with a composition tile side-gable roof is featured on the primary (south) elevation. A brick chimney is located on the east elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows, a fully glazed double-leaf door, and a garage door. All of which are replacements. A concrete driveway leads to the garage from Broadmoor Place. Landscaping consists of drought tolerant plantings, bushes, and trees. Only the primary (south) elevation was visible from the public right-of-way during the survey on February 12, 2024. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (primary (south)
and east elevations, view looking
west (Dudek IMG_4200)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1967 (City of
La Mesa Permit #22864)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Carlos E. & Vicki L. Drago
9403 Broadmoor Place
La Mesa 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9403 Broadmoor Place DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Undifferentiated
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) N/A
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Nick Di Meglio b. Builder: Patrick Ryan *B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 9403 Broadmoor Place was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 9403 Broadmoor Place. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 14
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The single-family residence was constructed in 1967 (City of La Mesa Permit #22864). Prior to its construction, the lot on which it sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5954 Amaya Drive was Nick Di Meglio.
De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). His family moved to San Pedro, and he was elected class president of San Pedro High School in 1950 (Vidovich 1950: 3). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971:
2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career, any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio. The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of at least five adjacent properties (Map IDs 6-10). These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan likely developed the entire block.
Research identified the original owner of the subject property and two other owners, including the current owner. Table 1 summarizes what information was uncovered about the property owners.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 9403 Broadmoor Place Years Name Notes Source
1967 Patrick L. Ryan Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an
engineer in the 1973 San Diego Directory. Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original
owner/developer.
Patrick Ryan also owned/developed Map IDs 6-10.
City of La Mesa Permit
#22864
Ancestry.com
1981 Ward-Steinman There was no first name listed on the building permit; however, research identified a David Ward-Steinman, a
musician, composer, and professor of music at San Diego State University from 1961 to the 1980s. Research could not definitively confirm if this individual was the owner of the subject property.
City of La Mesa Permit
#45292
Herman 1984: 57
Times-Advocate 1968:
9 2013-present Carlos E. and Vicki L.
Drago
Research did not identify information on Carlos E. or Vicki L.
Drago
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 9403 Broadmoor Place under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The single-family residence at 9403 Broadmoor Place was constructed in 1968. Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The subject property was thus part of the La Mesa’s growth post-World War II to accommodate the needs of an influx of new residents. While the post-World War II growth was an important trend regionally and in California, this property did not play a significant role in this trend. It was one of many constructed during this period of growth and did not influence this trend. It is also not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property..
Therefore, 9403 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
According to its original building permit, the residence was originally owned by Patrick Ryan, who was also listed as the property’s contractor. Research identified a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as real estate broker in the 1976 City of San Diego directory and a Patrick L. Ryan whose occupation is listed as an engineer in the 1973 San Diego City Directory.
Research could not definitively confirm whether either of these individuals is the same Patrick Ryan as the residence’s original owner/developer (Ancestry.com). Ryan was also listed as the owner/contractor for Map IDs 6 -10, indicating that he likely developed the entire block.
Per a building permit from 1981, the owner of the property was Ward-Steinman; however, this permit did not include a first name. Research identified a David Ward-Steinman who was a musician, composer, and professor of music at San Diego State University from 1961 to the 1980s (Times-Advocate 1968: 9; Herman 1984: 57). While Ward-Steinman appears to have been a prolific musician, research could not confirm that he was the resident of the subject property or that any of his work was produced at the subject property. Subsequent owners/occupants of the subject property include Carlos E. and Vicki L. Drago (2013 - present); however, research did not identify additional information on these individuals. It does not appear that these individuals made significant contributions to our past and therefore, 9403 Broadmoor Place is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property is a modest and architecturally undistinguished example of a late 1960s single-family tract residence with no particular style. It is a ubiquitous example of its type and there are many similar examples in La Mesa, San Diego County, and California.
According to its original building permit, the architect of 9403 Broadmoor Place was Nick Di Meglio. De Meglio was born circa 1933 in New York to Sicilian immigrants (Ancestry.com). In 1959, Di Meglio’s occupation was listed as Draftsman in the City of San Diego directory (Ancestry.com). He resided in La Jolla as of 1971 (San Pedro News Pilot 1971: 2). While it appears that De Meglio had experience working in the architecture field, research did identify additional information on his career,
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
any memberships in professional architecture organizations, or additional architectural projects associated with Di Meglio.
As such, it does not appear that he was a master architect.
The contractor is listed as the home’s owner, Patrick Ryan. While research did not identify substantive biographical or professional information on Ryan, he was also the original owner of Map ID 6 and Map IDs 8-11. These properties also have the same original permit number associated with them, indicating Ryan developed many homes in the neighborhood.
However, it does not appear that Ryan was a master builder or contractor.
The subject property appears to have been constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods and does not appear to possess high artistic values by articulating a particular concept of design to the extent that it expresses an aesthetic ideal. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, which is defined as a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. The subject property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Overall, 9403 Broadmoor Place lacks sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 9403 Broadmoor Place is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1 and C/3, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1968 during a period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is a common Ranch style single-family residence. It is constructed of already well-documented materials and techniques and is not a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C.
D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property is not representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. It is a ubiquitous, stylistically undifferentiated late 1960s tract house constructed with already well documented materials. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. While the subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences constructed in the same time period, with many being developed by the same person, there are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 9403 Broadmoor Place lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
Petitions for Naturalization from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1897-1944; Series: M1972; Roll: 904;1934; Nicholas Di Meglio.
1940 United States Federal Census. Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Roll: m-t0627-00432; Page: 9A; Enumeration District: 60-1280; Nick Di Meglio.
1959, 1963, 1964, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1976 San Diego, California, City Directories.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
Herman, Kenneth. 1984. "Ward-Steinman Felt an Early Urge to Compose." September 20, 1984. Newspapers.com:
Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, California). Page 57.
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
San Pedro News-Pilot. 1971. "Rosary Friday for Di Meglio." Newspapers.com: San Pedro News-Pilot (San Pedro, California). Page 2.
Times-Advocate. 1968. "Concert is Friday at SD State." April 16, 1968. Newspapers.com: Times-Advocate (San Diego, California). Page 9.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
Vidovich, Elise. 1950. "Di Meglio, Moreno Win Senior Posts." February 17, 1950. Newspapers.com: San Pedro NewsPilot (San Pedro, California). Page 3
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 12
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 9330 Earl Street City: La Mesa Zip: 91942 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500473 mN 3627775 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-670-05
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
A gate restricts access to the property from Early Street and obscures the view of the property from the public-right-of-way.
Therefore, the building was not visible during the survey on February 12, 2024 (Photograph 1). The following description is based on aerial imagery. The property at 9330 Earl Street (APN 486-670-05) contains one two-story building. It has a flat roof and a U-shape footprint with what appears to be a courtyard at its center. There is an ancillary structure at the north of the lot that has a rectangular footprint and gable roof (Exhibit 3). See Continuation Sheet, page 4. *P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2. Single Family Property
*P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Exterior gate at the
located on the west of the parcel
(Dudek IMG_6955)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1940
(ParcelQuest 2024)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Robert L. & Nancy K. Busley Living
Trust
9330 Earl Street
La Mesa 91942
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 9330 Earl Street DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: N/A
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa identified that in 1984, the construction of an aluminum patio cover screen enclosure (Permit #48187; visible in historic aerial photographs at the southwest corner of the property) was permitted.
*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: N/A b. Builder: N/A
*B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 9330 Earl Street was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 9330 Earl Street. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 9
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
* P3a. Description (continued from page 2):
Historic aerial photographs indicate that the subject property’s footprint, configuration, roadways, and ancillary structure have remained consistent since 1953 (NETR 2024a). The property is bounded by multi-family residences to the south, west, and north, as well as two single family residences (9401 and 9403 Broadmoor Place) and Cavalry Church at 9407 Jericho Road to the east.
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The single-family residence located at 9330 Earl Street was constructed in 1940 (ParcelQuest 2024). The earliest available photograph of the subject property from 1953 shows it retains the same overall footprint, roadway configuration, and general landscaping as the present day. The property was originally surrounded by undeveloped land until circa 1964, when single and multi-family residences began to proliferate in the area (including Map ID 14: 9320 Earl Street which abuts the subject property to the west) (NETR 2024a). Research did not identify the original architect, builder, or contractor of 9330 Earl Street and the City of La Mesa did not have the original building permit on file.
Research revealed that the same family has owned the property since 1984 (Table 1). No other owners or occupants were identified.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 9330 Earl Street Years Name Notes Source
1984-2018
2019-2024
Robert M. Busley
Robert L. and Nancy K.
Busley Living Trust
Robert M. Busley (1926-2016) was
discharged from the United States Navy
circa 1942. Robert L. Busley is his son.
Research did not identify additional
information on the Busley family.
City of La Mesa Permits
#48187 and #P18-139
Ancestry.com
ParcelQuest 2024
NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 9330 Earl Street under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
Archival research did not identify and such any direct associations. The subject property was not visible from the public rightof-way at the time of the survey. It is not included on the City of La Mesa Historic Resources Inventory and Landmarks Table, which documents properties that were identified as part of a survey in 1985, nor is it a designated City of La Mesa landmark.
The single-family residence at 9330 Earl Street was constructed in 1940 (ParcelQuest 2024). By 1930, the city of La Mesa’s population was approximately 2,500, expanding to 3,912 by 1940 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). While single-family residences such as the subject property were developed sporadically throughout La Mesa to accommodate this population increase, “little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers” (City of
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
La Mesa 2012: HP-3). As such, the subject property represents the beginning of a decades long period of residential construction in La Mesa and the neighborhood that predominately began after World War II. However, mere association with a broad trend is not enough to reach the threshold of eligibility and the property is not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred on the property. Therefore, 9330 Earl Street is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
Research did not identify the original owner of the subject property; the only identified occupants of the property were Robert M. Busley (1984-2018), who was discharged from the United States Navy in 1942 (Ancestry.com) and teh Robert L. and Nacy K. Busley Living Trust (2019-2024), operated by Robert M. Busley’s son and daughter in-law (City of La Mesa Permits #48187 and #P18-139). Research did not identify additional biographical or professional information on these individuals. Due to a lack of identified significant associations with any persons important in our past, 9330 Earl Street is not eligible under NRHP Criterion B or CRHR Criterion 2.
Criterion C/3: [Properties] 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.
The subject property was not visible at the time of the field survey, so its architectural style could not be observed. It is not included on the City of La Mesa Historic Resources Inventory and Landmarks Table, which documents properties that were identified as part of a survey in 1985, nor is it a designated City of La Mesa landmark, indicating that it has not previously been recognized for its architecture. Based on available information, it does not appear that the subject property likely embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type or period.
Aerial photographs from 1953 to 2022 show that the subject property’s footprint, orientation, landscaping, roadway configuration, and ancillary structure have all remained consistent since 1953, except for the enclosure of a patio on the southwest elevation in 1984 (City of La Mesa Permit #HERE; NETR 2024a). Archival research did not identify an architect, designer, or builder, and there was no original building permit on file for the property. Based on available imagery and archival research, it does not appear that the subject property was the work of a master builder or architect. Research did not identify any information that would indicate the subject property was not constructed through already well-documented and common construction techniques and methods. The last portion of Criterion C refers to a district, and the property does not contribute to the significance of a potential or existing historic district. Based on available information, 9330 Earl Street appears to lack sufficient design and construction value to meet NRHP Criterion C or CRHR Criterion 3.
Criterion D/4: [Properties] that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4, 9330 Earl Street is not significant as a source, or likely source, of important historical information, nor does it appear likely to yield important information about historic construction methods, materials, or technologies. This technology is well understood through contemporary trade journals and scientific monographs. As such, the subject property lacks significance under NRHP Criterion D and CRHR Criterion 4.
City of La Mesa Evaluation
A cultural resource may be recommended for designation as a landmark or historic district, if it meets one or more of
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
the following criteria:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria A/1, the subject property does not exemplify or reflect special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history. It was constructed in 1940 at the onset of a multi-decade period of rapid residential development throughout La Mesa. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria B/2, the subject property is not associated with a significant person or events in local, state, or national history. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property was not visible during the field survey. Based on available information, the subject property does not appear to embody the distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction. Research did not indicate that the property is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria C D. It is representative of the notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property does not appear to be a representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer, or architect. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria D.
E. It is identified with a person or persons or groups who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2, the subject property is not associated with a person or group who significantly contributed to the culture and development of the City. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria E.
F. It embodies elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria C/3, the subject property was not visible at the time of the survey. However, based on available aerial imagery and research, it does not appear embody elements of outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria F.
G. It is an archeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria D/4, the subject property is not an archaeological or paleontological site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria G.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
H. It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
As discussed under NRHP/CRHR Criteria 3, a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of associated buildings or sites is most applicable to districts. The subject property is located in a neighborhood of residences predominately constructed in the 1960s and 1970s. There are many such neighborhoods throughout La Mesa and research did not identify this neighborhood as having significant historical associations. As such, the subject property is recommended not eligible under City of La Mesa Criteria H.
Integrity Considerations
Because 9330 Earl Street lacks sufficient significance to meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark, an integrity analysis was considered immaterial. To be eligible for listing in either register, a resource must first meet one or more of the significance criteria outlined above before a determination can be made as to whether the resource retains its historic character and can convey its significance.
Summary of Evaluation Findings
The subject property was evaluated in consideration of NRHP, CRHR, and City of La Mesa criteria and integrity requirements.
As a result of the evaluation, the subject property is recommended not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or as a City of La Mesa Historic Landmark under all listing criteria due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property is not currently designated or listed under any national, state, or local landmark programs, nor has it been previously identified as eligible for local designation by any historical resource surveys. *B12. References (continued from page 2):
Ancestry.com [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2012.
WWII Draft Registration Cards For California, 10/16/1940-03/31/1947; Record Group: Records of the Selective Service System, 147; Box: 249; Robert Merton Busley.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2011. “Tract Housing in California, 1945-1975: A Context for National Register Evaluation.” Sacramento, CA. 2011. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/ser/tract-housing-in-ca-1945-1973-a11y.pdf.
City of La Mesa Building Permits. 2024. Permit files. Received February 27, 2024.
City of La Mesa. 2012. City of La Mesa General Plan: Historic Preservation Element. https://www.cityoflamesa.us/DocumentCenter/View/6201/07LaMesaGPHistoricPreservation-CD?bidId=.
City of San Diego Planning Department. 2007. “San Diego Modernism Historic Context.” Submitted for the State of California Office of Historic Preservation. San Diego, CA. October 17, 2007. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/modernism_2 007.pdf.
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Horak, Katie E., Andrew Goodrich, Alan Hess, and John English. 2015. Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement: Architecture and Engineering; Theme: The Ranch House, 1930-1975; Theme: Housing the Masses, 1880-1975; Sub-Theme: Ranch House Neighborhoods, 1938-1975. Prepared for City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning, Office of Historic Resources. http://preservation.lacity.org/sites/default/files/The%20Ranch%20House%2C%201930-1975.pdf McAlester, V.S. 2015. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture. New York City, New York: Alfred A Knopf.
Morgan, W. 2004. The Abrams Guide to American House Styles. New York City, New York: Harry N Abrams Inc.
NETR (National Environmental Title Agency). 2024a. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Aerial Photographs: 1953, 1964, 1966, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1985, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2019.
Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
NETR. 2024b. “Historic Aerials Online.” Historic Topography Maps: 1893, 1897, 1901, 1903, 1909, 1916, 1930, 1941, 1942, 1947, 1955, 1956, 1959, 1964, 1969, 1975, 1976, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2012, 2015, 2018, and 2021. Accessed February 5, 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.
ParcelQuest. 2024. Accessed March 4, 2024. https://pqweb.parcelquest.com/#home.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI). 2002. “National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Accessed December 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf.
DPR 523A (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
P1. Other Identifier: Map ID 13
*P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted
*a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d.
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad San Bernardino Date 2023 T 16S; R 1W; ☐ of ☐ of Sec 16; San Bernardino B.M. c. Address: 5810 Amaya Drive City: La Mesa Zip: 91942
d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone 11N mE/ 500484 mN 3627573 e. Other Locational Data: APN 486-670-38
*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries)
The subject property at 5810 Amaya Drive (APN 486-670-38) is located on the north side of Amaya Drive and contains 19 two-story multi-family residential buildings. Each building is rectangular in plan with stucco siding and composition tile mansard roofs with an overhangs and closed eaves (Photographs 1 and 2). Brick quoins are included on the corners of each elevation. Fenestration consists of horizontal sliding vinyl-frame windows and fully glazed sliding doors. Fencing encases the southern boundary of the property. An asphalt driveway leads to parking lots on the property. Landscaping consists of grass, bushes, and trees. Only the rear (south) elevations of four of the buildings were visible from the public right-of-way during the survey on February 12, 2024.
*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP3. Multiple Family Property *P4. Resources Present: ☒ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☐ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other P5b. Description of Photo 1:
Photo 1: Primary (south)
elevation, view looking north
(Dudek IMG_6919)
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: ☒ Historic. 1970 (City
of La Mesa Permit #27604)
*P7. Owner and Address:
Universe at Serena Vista D E LLC
1875 Century Park E. #1800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
*P8. Recorded by:
Katie Ahmanson, MHC
Dudek
225 S Lake Ave, Suite M210
Pasadena, CA 91101
*P9. Date Recorded:
February 12, 2024
*P10. Survey Type: Intensive
*P11. Report Citation: Dudek. 2024. Built Environment Inventory and Evaluation Report for 9407 Jericho Road Project.
Prepared for the City of La Mesa.
*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 ☒Sketch Map ☐Other (List):
P5a. Photograph 1.
*Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 5810 Amaya Drive DPR 523B (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
(This space reserved for official comments.)
(Sketch Map with north arrow required.)
B1. Historic Name: N/A
B2. Common Name: N/A
B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Single-family residence *B5. Architectural Style: Undifferentiated
*B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) Building permits provided by the City of La Mesa identified the following exterior alterations to 5810 Amaya Drive:
• 1976: Fire damage repairs (Permit #37100)
• 1980: Fire damage repair (Permit #43945)
• 1992: Deck repairs (Permit #66680)
• 2016: Install new vinyl retrofit windows and doors and remove existing vents and fixed glazing on all apartment buildings (Permits #B16-652; #B16-653; #B16-769 through #B15-784) • 2021: Vehicle collision damage repair for apartment 2J (Permit #B21-417) *B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features: None.
B9a. Architect: Robert T. Peters b. Builder: N/A
*B10. Significance: Theme N/A Area N/A
Period of Significance N/A Property Type N/A Applicable Criteria N/A (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)
The single-family residence at 5810 Amaya Drive was evaluated for historical significance in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and City of La Mesa Historic Landmark designation criteria. The subject property was found not eligible due to a lack of significant associations and architectural merit. The subject property was also evaluated in accordance with Section 15064.5(a)(2)-(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines using the criteria outlined in Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) and found not to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. As such, this evaluation assigns a 6Z California Historical Resources Status Code to 5810 Amaya Drive. See Continuation Sheet, Page 4.
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
*B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, Page 9
B13. Remarks: None
*B14. Evaluator: Claire Cancilla, MSHP
*Date of Evaluation: March 18, 2024
*Map Name: El Cajon Quadrangle *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of map: 2021 DPR 523J (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
*B10. Significance (continued from page 2):
Historic Contexts
The City of La Mesa’s 2012 General Plan Historic Preservation Element includes a historical overview of the city’s establishment and development. This overview is reproduced below to provide sufficient context through which to evaluate the subject property:
Founded in 1869, the lands comprising present-day La Mesa were initially within the boundaries of Rancho Mission San Diego de Alcala. The area was first settled in the American Period, in approximately 1868, when Robert Allison purchased property for use as a sheep ranch and other animal husbandry activities. In 1887 Allison purchased construction bonds and granted a right-of-way to the new San Diego, Cuyamaca, and Eastern Railroad Company. By 1895, newspapers and periodicals referenced La Mesa as “Allison Springs,” “La Mesa Springs,” and “La Mesa Colony.” Into the early twentieth century the local economy expanded to include agriculture and citrus orchards with packing warehouses, health resorts and limited film production facilities. By 1912, at the time of incorporation, the city’s population had reached 700 (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-2).
Construction of El Cajon Boulevard, around the time of World War I, provided for an alternative transportation route between San Diego and La Mesa. By 1930 La Mesa’s population increased to 2,500, however, because of the Great Depression, little growth occurred until the onset of World War II and beyond, when La Mesa and municipalities throughout the entire State experienced tremendous growth in the form of new residential tracts and suburban commercial centers (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3).
By 1940 the city’s population reached 3,912. Subsequent to WWII, La Mesa’s population increased exponentially, and the municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region.
Infrastructure demands and land annexations characterize the post-World War II period of La Mesa’s history, with the development of comprehensively constructed residential tracts improved with dwellings in modernistic Ranch style, replete with new schools and shopping centers to support the growing population. Housing stock and forms changed to reflect the rise of modernistic residential subdivision tracts. These new communities were connected by major transportation corridors developed in the mid-to-late 1950s, including SRs 94 and 125 (City of La Mesa 2012:
HP-3).
By the early 1950s, the student population in La Mesa and the surrounding jurisdictions had peaked with a record enrollment of 3,000 at Grossmont High School. The overcrowding demanded an immediate solution in the form of two new schools opening in 1952, La Mesa Junior High School and Helix High School. New commercial developments were similarly plentiful, culminating in the 1961 opening of Grossmont Shopping Center, the second regional mall built in San Diego County (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
As economical vacant land was consumed by new single-family neighborhoods; rising land costs in the older parts of La Mesa created a demand for higher-density cost-effective housing which, in the 1950s and 1960s, resulted in the development of infill apartment buildings in and around established historic-era neighborhoods. Inconsistent in appearance and form from the preceding historic-era neighborhoods, these infill projects were constructed in a mix of minimal and Modernistic styles, which contributed to the erosion or replacement of some older neighborhoods and buildings. This trend was reversed in the 1970s as citizens of La Mesa initiated historic preservation efforts culminating in the adoption of the city’s inaugural Historic Preservation Program in the mid-1980s, including adoption of the city’s first Historic Preservation Element (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-4).
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Post-World War II Tract Housing (1945-1975)
During World War II, manufacturing jobs were abundant in California while housing was lacking, resulting in many workers living in vehicles, tents, and other temporary shelters. Despite the passing of the Lanham Act in 1940, which appropriated $1.3 billion for the construction of 700,000 homes, the War Production Board prohibited non-essential construction during wartime including market-driven housing in 1942. This resulted in an enormous lack of housing, with construction being limited to single-family tracts for industry workers and cheap and quickly built multi-family housing intended to be temporary (Caltrans 2011: 5).
The government programs intended to assist working-class families and veterans to purchase a house contributed to a postWorld War II development boom. These included the G.I. Bill created to help veterans of World War II pay for additional education and Veterans Affairs (VA) loans for purchasing homes. These benefits were disproportionately given to white veterans due to systemic racism and unfair government practices. In 1950, the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) attempted to address this racial discrimination by deciding to refuse insuring mortgages on properties subject to restrictive covenants (Mead & Hunt and Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2012: 56). In November of 1962, President Kennedy issued an Executive Order prohibiting racial discrimination in all housing that received federal aid, including FHA and VA mortgage guarantees (Caltrans 2011: 30). California passed its owns open-housing legislation known as the Unruh Act in 1959. This was followed by the Rumford Act in 1963, which specifically prohibited racial discrimination by banks, real estate brokers and mortgage companies. With the government programs and new housing opportunities, racial residential patterns slowly began to change in California.
Two popular trends in post-World War II housing development were tract housing and cluster planning. Residential tracts allowed for builders to defray the cost of providing utilities resulting in many cities growing not one house at a time, but rather by adding entire new subdivisions (Caltrans 2011: 43-48). Developers started to hire architects not to design a single home but rather a set of stock plans, resulting in new communities of 300-400 nearly identical homes (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 36-39). Tract communities display common elements in design, creating clusters of similar houses having the same basic architectural detailing, scale, style, and setting usually around curvilinear streets. Between 1949 and 1966, Eichler Homes, Joseph Eichler’s company, created neighborhoods that were planned communities with concentric circle street plans and shared amenity spaces such as parks, community centers, and pools. These subdivisions influenced the designs of other developers to include modern design, livability, and economy (City of Palo Alto 2018: 33-36). Frequently the architectural styles of Tract Ranch and Contemporary were employed, with developers typically offering four or five models each with customizable features (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 39). Customizable features could include, rooflines, exterior cladding materials, light fixtures, cabinetry, and kitchen finishes. In the 1960s, the concept of cluster planning became popular which involved setting aside a portion of green space with the surrounding housing being more densely grouped on the remaining land. Cluster planning provided public spaces such as parkland, pedestrian and bicycle paths. This allowed developers to move less earth and remove fewer trees, which local governments often supported. It was a trend supported by local governments and environmentalists. It was also economically beneficial for developers because they could avoid areas where it would be costly to develop and reduced their costs for infrastructure like water and sewer lines (Caltrans 2011: 49).
La Mesa’s residential development history reflects a combination of the tract housing development type and the cluster planning. Within the API, all of the subject properties are located in Tract 5572 in the Northmont neighborhood La Mesa followed a similar design aesthetic to the nearby neighborhood of Clairemont in that it contains Tract Ranch and Contemporary master-planned neighborhoods, which became ubiquitous in the region’s post-World War II era. Some of the most common examples of multi-family residences are townhomes, apartment buildings, condominium complexes, and duplexes. Popular
*Recorded by Ahmanson, Dudek *Date February 12, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (9/2013) *Required information
State of California - The Resources Agency Primary#
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
architectural styles employed to design residential properties include Tract Ranch and Contemporary (City of San Diego Planning Department 2007: 40-49)
Property History
The multi-family residential complex was constructed in 1970 (City of La Mesa Permit #27604). Prior to its construction, the lot on which the property sits was undeveloped. According to its original building permit, the architect of 5810 Amaya Drive was Robert T. Peters. Research, through Newspapers.com, Calisphere, Ancestry.com, and the American Institute of Architects Historical Directory, did not identify additional information on Robert T. Peters.
Because this is a multi-family residential complex it has had numerous owners and occupants since it was constructed in 1970. Table 18 provides a summary of the identified owners and occupants of 5810 Amaya Drive since its construction in 1970 (Table 18). Research did not provide additional information on these owners and occupants.
Table 1. Identified Owners/Occupants of 5810 Amaya Drive Years Name Source
1970 PRC Development Corp. City of La Mesa Permit #27604 1975-1977 Vista Amaya Apartments City of La Mesa Permits #36802 and #39590 1976 Monarch Properties City of La Mesa Permit #37100
1980 CBS Realtors City of La Mesa Permit #44001
1992 Walters Management Co. City of La Mesa Permit #66832 1992 Home Fed. Bank City of La Mesa Permit #66680
1996-2007 Vista Amaya L.P. City of La Mesa Permits #P96-00083 and #B07- 487
2016 5810 Amaya LLC City of La Mesa Permit #B16-652
2020-2024 Universe at Serena Vista D. E. LLC. ParcelQuest 2024 NRHP/CRHR Evaluation
The following section provides an evaluation of the single-family residence at 5810 Amaya Drive under NRHP and CRHR significance criteria and integrity considerations.
Criterion A/1: [Properties] that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
Following World War II's conclusion in 1945, La Mesa's population increased dramatically and the "municipality was soon regarded as one of the fastest growing suburban cities in the San Diego region" (City of La Mesa 2012: HP-3). The multifamily apartment complex at 5810 Amaya Drive was constructed in 1970, which is near the end of this significant residential development trends in La Mesa. Therefore, it is not directly associated with the post-World War II decades and only has a mere association with La Mesa’s development. However, mere association with a broad trend is not enough to reach the threshold of eligibility. The property is not known to be directly associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the history of the City of La Mesa, California, or the nation. Research also did not identify a significant historical event that occurred at the property. Therefore, 5810 Amaya Drive is not eligible under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1.
Criterion B/2: [Properties] that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
The property has been owned by various entities from 1970 to the present day, including PRC Development Corporation (1970) and Vista Amaya Apartments (1975--2007). Research did not identify any names associated with these entities, or