Historical Resource Research Report August 7, 2018

Historical Resource Research Report

August 7, 2018 Updated September 14, 2018

Updated October 17, 2018 Updated December 7, 2018

4194 Randolph Street San Diego, Ca 92103

Prepared by:

Jennifer Ayala, RA, LEED AP Principal Architect

Submitted to:

The City of San Diego Historical Resources Board

1222 First Avenue Fifth Floor San Diego, California 92101

Prepared for: Mr. and Mrs. Mark and Loren Selman

4194 Randolph Street San Diego, CA 92103

427 C Street, Suite 212

San Diego, CA 92101 Tel. (619) 985-9280

PLANNING & RESEARCHNEXUS

Page 1 of 134 *Resource Name or #: 4194 Randolph Street P1. Other Identifier: n/a

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

*P2. Location: � Not for Publication X Unrestricted *a. County San Diego and (P2c, P2e, and P2b or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad La Jolla Date 2015 T ; R ; � of � of Sec ; B.M.

c. Address: 4194 Randolph Street City: San Diego Zip: 92103 d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources) Zone , mE/ mN

e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, decimal degrees, etc., as appropriate) APN 443-472-10-00 Lot 1, Block 4, Florence heights Addition, map 634

*P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The 4194 Randolph Street is composed of a one-story, asymmetrical, rectangular-shaped, Spanish Eclectic style single-family residence, and an associated one-story garage. According to the San Diego Assessor Building Record, both buildings were built in 1925. The home consists of approximately 1,419 total square feet, while the garage consists of approximately 396 total square feet. The residence features two bedrooms, two bathrooms, a dining room, living room, kitchen, and front and rear patios. The home is wood framed with a concrete stem-wall foundation, and a raised wood joist floor structural system. It has a painted exterior stucco finish and a combination of hipped and gabled tile roofs, with shallow eaves as well as flat roof with parapets. The garage is also wood framed, stucco finished with a flat roof on a concrete slab on grade foundation. (See Continuation Sheet for additional information and discussion.) *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP2 *P4. Resources Present: X Building � Structure � Object � Site � District � Element of District � Other (Isolates, etc.)

P5b. Description of Photo: (view, date, accession #) Front (east) March 2016 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Source: X Historic � Prehistoric � Both *P7. Owner and Address: Mark Selman and Loren Selman, Trustees of the Selman Revocable Living Trust dated October 8, 1999 4184 Randolph Street, San Diego, CA 92103 *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Jennifer Ayala, RA LEED AP | Nexus Planning & Research *P9. Date Recorded: August 7, 2018 *P10.Survey Type: (Describe) Intensive *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") *Attachments: �NONE � Location Map X

Continuation Sheet X Building, Structure, and

Object Record �Archaeological Record �District Record �Linear Feature Record �Milling Station Record �Rock Art Record

�Artifact Record �Photograph Record X

Other (List): Attachments A-F

P5a. Photograph

*Resource Name or # 4194 Randolph Street *NRHP Status Code 6Z Page 2 of 134

DPR 523A (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: B2. Common Name: B3. Original Use: Residential/Single-Family B4. Present Use: Residential/Single-Family *B5. Architectural Style: Spanish Eclectic *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) According to County of San Diego Assessor Building Record the Building was constructed in 1925. Alterations were made, some with permit records in 1976, 2008, and 2014, including replacement of all original windows and garage doors. See continuation sheets for full description.

*B7. Moved? X No �Yes �Unknown Date: Original Location: Yes *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Edward Depew b. Builder: Ideal Building Company *B10. Significance: None Area: Mission Hills Period of Significance n/a Property Type Residential Applicable Criteria:

None (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.)

The 4194 Randolph Street property was assessed under The Historical Resources Guidelines of the City of San Diego’s Land Development Manual’s Criteria for its potential historical significance. The subject property is not significant with respect to any form of historical development and does not qualify under HRB Criterion A (Community Development). The property is not identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history and does not qualify under HRB Criterion B (Events/Person). The property is a basic example of the Spanish Eclectic Style and does not have any unusual features or elements that would raise it to a level of significance to qualify for local historical designation, therefore it does not qualify under HRB Criterion C (Architecture). The property’s builder is the Ideal Building Company and the property’s architect was Edward Depew, a San Diego Master Architect, however the property does not qualify under HRB Criterion D (Notable Work of a Master) because in no way does the property display any measure of the “skillful” expertise for which Depew is regarded and recognized as a master architect. Moreover, the residence does not display any “notable” features of design/construction which would warrant a determination of significance. Lastly, the property is not listed in, or deemed eligible for listing in the National or California Registers and is not located within an existing historic district so it cannot qualify under HRB Criterion E (National or California Register Eligible) or HRB Criterion F (Historic District). (See Continuation Sheets for full analysis for each of the Criteria.) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) None *B12. References: Published authorities on Vernacular Architecture; City Building Records; County Assessor’s records; City Water and Sewer Records; San Diego City Directories; the Union Tribune archives, and others, see continuation sheets. B13. Remarks: Sketch Not-to-Scale, nearest cross streets are: West Arbor Drive and West Montecito Way *B14. Evaluator: Nexus Planning & Research: J Ayala, RA,LEED AP *Date of Evaluation: August, 2018

North

age of *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) *Recorded

by: *Date � Continuation � Update

DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)

State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# ________________________________ DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # ___________________________________

Trinomial ________________________________ CONTINUATION SHEET

Property Name: 4194 Randolph Street Page 3 of 134

3

P.11 REPORT CITATION

1981

In 1981, the University of San Diego, partially funded by the California State Office of Historic Preservation,

prepared a survey that included the subject property. Referenced as “Cultural Resource Survey of Presidio

Hills, Mission Hills and Banker’s Hill Areas of san Diego, California” (1981). This survey recognized a pattern

of indiscriminate demolition of existing buildings in these neighborhoods and recommended the following:

“We recommend via this survey that the San Diego Historical Sites Boards take some sort of action to discontinue the actions of indiscriminate construction especially along the walls of the beautiful canyons which is gradually but surely encroaching on the residential areas and causing the loss of significant structures. This is especially true in the Maple Canyon Area.”1

The community was surveyed and buildings that were already on the national register as well as buildings

with the potential to have national register status were indicated, mapped, and DPR forms were created.

The subject building was not included in this survey. Only one building on Randolph Street was included,

4145 Randolph Street.

2

Therefore no DPR form for the subject property was prepared.

2001-2007

In 2001-2002, The City of San Diego commissioned the Uptown Historical Context and Oral History Report and

a reconnaissance level survey entitled the Uptown Historic Reconnaissance Survey (“2007 Draft Uptown

Survey”). The 2007 Draft Uptown Survey identified individual resources and eligible historic districts for the

entire Uptown Community Planning Area. The survey work completed during this time was completed by

examining parcels from the public right-of-way. It is described as being “substantially more detailed than a reconnaissance-level survey”, but did not provide the documentation or analysis required for an intensive-

level survey. The goal was to identify potential individually significant historic resources as well as potential contributing resources to potential historic districts.

The 2007 Draft Uptown Survey surveyed the area surrounding 4194 Randolph Street property and identified

it as a potential historic district, North Florence Heights. At that time it noted that the Building was unaltered

and gave it a status code of 5D3, “a resource that appears to be a contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation”. It did not identify it as a resource that

appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation.

Regardless, this survey was “discarded in its entirety”

3

due to issues with elements of the survey and

therefore none of its findings were adopted. A DPR form from this survey for 4194 Randolph Street could not

be located.

1

Cultural Resource Survey of Presidio Hills, Mission Hills and Banker’s Hill Areas of san Diego, California, page 2

2

Cultural Resource Survey of Presidio Hills, Mission Hills and Banker’s Hill Areas of san Diego, California, page 6

3

Uptown Community Plan Area Historic Resources Survey Report, page



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




4

2016

The subject property was again evaluated during preparation of the 2016 Uptown Community Plan Update.

The update includes the Final Historic Context Statement Area Historic Resources Survey (“2016 Final

Survey”). This survey built upon the 2007 Draft Uptown Survey for individual property information and

analysis. The adopted survey focused on all buildings constructed before 1961, visible from the street. The

survey’s purpose was to identify potentially significant resources within the community plan area and

evaluated all properties using the City of San Diego’s local designation criteria.

4

• The new Uptown Community Plan was approved and adopted by the San Diego City Council in

November 2016.

• The subject property is not included within Appendix C

5

of the 2016 Final Survey, Potential Individual Resources.

• The subject property is within a potential historic district, North Florence Heights, Appendix D

6

of the

2016 Final Survey, however, approval of a North Florence Heights Historic District was not granted by

the City of San Diego during the Uptown Community Plan update in 2016, and there is no pending

date for its designation.

• The subject property is included in Appendix G

7

, a Database of Surveyed Resources (all properties

constructed after 1961 within the community plan area). See Attachment A.7.

• The Database describes the subject property with the following information:

o Description (Spanish),

o Condition (unaltered), and

o Status code (5D3 - “Appears to be a contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation through survey elevation.”)

o The survey did not identify the Building as potentially eligible for individual designation as a

historic resource.

o See Attachment A.7.

• Per the adopted Uptown Community Plan, all parcels within the Uptown Community Planning area

were surveyed. All properties constructed prior to 1961 were to be included in a database available

to the public and property records would be updated to include the 2007 Draft Survey information.

For parcels without a record, one would be created and uploaded to the City’s internet based

California Historic Resources Inventory Database (CHRID). A search of CHRID found no Building

Record for 4194 Randolph Street.

In conclusion, the consensus of the previous surveys of the subject property are that it does not merit local

historical designation as an individual resource but would be a contributor should a historic district be

adopted for the area immediately surrounding it. All 2016 Community Plan Update survey documents are

included within Attachment A.7.

4

Uptown Community Plan Area, Historic Resources Survey Report, pages 7

5

Uptown Community Plan Area, Historic Resources Survey Report, page C-44

6

Uptown Community Plan Area, Historic Resources Survey Report, page D-103 – D-108

7

Uptown Community Plan Area, Historic Resources Survey Report, page G-311



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




5

P3.A Building Description

4194 Randolph Street (“Building”) and associated garage (“Garage”) are located on a flat corner lot, fronting

on the west side of Randolph Street in the Mission Hills community directly across from The Francis Parker

School and adjacent to other single-family homes. The Building is sited on a standard City of San Diego

single-family residential lot measuring 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep for a total of 5,000 square-feet. The

Building is located towards the southeast area of the parcel, and the garage is located in the northwest

corner of the site with access to and from Arbor Drive.

The Building has three elevations – east (front), north (side), and west (rear) that are clearly visible to the

public right-of-way. A solid stucco low wall along Arbor Drive, borders the side yard along the sidewalk. The

low wall allows a clear view of the side and rear house elevations, garage and rear yard from Arbor Drive.

The front entry is accessed directly from Randolph Street via a concrete walk, and concrete steps up to a

recessed covered concrete patio. The parcel is minimally landscaped with one mature tree, turf, and

hardscape in the front and side yards, and pavers and drought tolerant plants in the rear yard.

The Building is of the Spanish Eclectic style of vernacular architecture, common architecture found in the

Mission Hills neighborhood of San Diego. The majority of the Building’s character defining Spanish Eclectic

features are present on the Randolph Street elevation. Overall it has minimal adornment and is finished

entirely with a heavy stucco texture. The roof is a combination of cross-gabled and flat roofs (the roofs of the

west half of the house and the entire detached garage are flat with parapets). The front half of the Building

has two front gabled forms fronting onto Randolph Street. The smaller front gable hips into a gable roof

running north/south that hips into the larger gable roof. The gable portions of the roof are covered with

regularly laid, straight-barrel mission tile. Windows are fibrex-clad wood casement windows

8

(vertical and

horizontal). The Building has a solid-wood-plank front door set within an arched doorway with low-relief

plaster quoining.

East Elevation

The East (front) elevation is asymmetrical with two front-gabled projections framing a recessed entry porch.

The recessed entry has a cross gable tile roof above it. The south gable projection is taller and wider than the

north gable end with a centered focal window (a three-part grouped window with a central square fixed

picture window flanked by narrow casement windows) and a circular roof vent at the gable peak. There are

three tile accents above the focal window. The shorter and narrower gable end has one two-part casement

window and a tile vent in the gable peak. The recessed porch has a three-part casement window facing the

street. The front entry door faces north, at the north face of the larger gable projection.

North Elevation

The North (side) elevation provides a clear view of both the Building and front of the garage. The Building’s

north elevation is divided into three separate planes. The east quarter of the elevation has a gable edge

hipping into central front gabled face fronting onto Arbor Drive, creating a cross-gabled roof form. The long

edge of the gable eave, also the north face of the smaller East elevation projection, is shallow with a two-part

8

Original windows were a combination of casement and double hung wood framed windows. (See Attachment E: Criterion C -

Window and Doors History.)



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




6

casement window. The Arbor Drive front gable end has one picture window centered under the peak of the

gable with a multi-tile roof eave vent. The western half of the elevation is a rectangular form with a parapet

roof and one horizontal casement window and two tile pipe roof vents.

West Elevation

The West (rear) side of the Building has access to bedrooms and backyard. This elevation is also rectangular

with a roof parapet condition. There are a mix of window sizes and compositions: one two-part casement

window, two horizontal casement windows, and one sliding glass door set. There exist three-pairs of tile pipe

roof vents and sconces also on this elevation.

South Elevation

The South (side) elevation of the Building is along a four-foot side yard. It is also generally rectangular with a

parapet roof condition. There are three casement windows and a Chimney that tapers from the ground up to

a small black metal spark arrestor. The east end of the elevation, towards the front of the Building, completes

the front of the Building’s large front gable with its long eave edge flanking the chimney.

Garage

The Garage is a one-story, rectangular, 396 square-foot building with a flat roof and parapets. It has a

symmetrical front (north) elevation with a single, two-car wide, non-original roll-up metal garage door. The

Garage is finished entirely in stucco, similar in texture and finish to the Building. The Garage has a door and

window on the east elevation and a window on the south elevation.

Spanish Eclectic Architectural Style

The Spanish Eclectic style uses design elements borrowed from a varied history of Spanish architecture,

including Moorish, Byzantine, Gothic, and Renaissance styles and combines them in a range of uses. Prior to

1920, Spanish influenced buildings were designed in a Mission style, reflecting California’s heritage from its

Colonial settlement period. However, after 1920, the major influence came from the 1915 Panama-California

Exposition in San Diego. According to McAlester and McAlester, “The exposition was designed by Bertram

Grosvenor Goodhue, who had previously authored a detailed study of Spanish Colonial architecture.

Goodhue wanted to go beyond the then prevalent Mission interpretations and emphasize the richness of

Spanish precedents found throughout Latin America. Inspired by the wide publicity given the exposition,

other fashionable architects soon began to look directly to Spain for source material. There they found a still

longer and richer sequence of architectural traditions which became melded into a style that they continued

to call the Spanish Colonial Revival. Because of its broad roots, we prefer the more inclusive Spanish

Eclectic.”

9

The typical features of Spanish Eclectic design include a low-pitched roof with little or no eave overhang, a

red tile roof, arches above central doors and windows, stucco exteriors, and an asymmetrical facade.

Buildings can be one or two stories with side-gabled, cross-gabled, hipped or flat roofs. Building shapes

range from rectangular to “L”-shaped; many times wings of differing heights are added to change the

9 McAlester and McAlester, A Field Guide to American Houses, p. 418.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




7

footprint and height of the structure. Doors are an important feature and are often heavy, carved,

impressive wooden doors dominating the main facade. Sometimes heavy wood panels alternating with glass

panes are also used in the simpler style structures. Many times arches or spiral columns, pilasters or other

decorative elements are used on the main entrance area. Different size and shaped windows are used on the

facades of the structure, but many times a large picture window serves as a focal point on the main facade.

Doors leading to exterior gardens, patios, and balconies are usually paired and glazed with multiple panes of

rectangular glass. Decorative window grilles and balustrades of wood or iron, balconies, fountains, walled

gardens, towers, tile terraces and wrought iron accent elements are also used as part of the design

vocabulary.

Per A Field Guide to American Houses and The City of Santa Barbara’s Lower Riviera Special Design District Design Guidelines: Spanish Eclectic Style architecture includes the following character defining features:

Spanish Eclectic style design characteristics Characteristic Evaluation in Buildings

1. Walled entry courtyard 1. Not Present. 2. Multi-level roofs 2. Not Present.

3. Eaves with little or no overhang 3. Present.

4. Shed roof over entry 4. Not Present.

5. Straight barrel mission tile, regularly laid 5. Present.

6. Stucco finish 6. Present.

7. Elaborate chimney top with tile detail 7. Not Present.

8. One large focal window 8. Present.

10

9. Casement windows 9. Present.

11

10. Dramatically carved wood doors 10. Not Present.

11. Board and batten doors 11. Not Present.

12. Balcony with wood or iron railing 12. Not Present.

13. Exterior stairs 13. Not Present.

14. Small arcaded wing walls 14. Not Present.

15. Trebeated posts and beam covered entry and rear loggia 15. Not Present.

16. Decorative iron sconce at front door 16. Not Present.

17. Stucco and tiled vents 17. Present.

18. Iron Window grills 18. Not Present.

19. Stained glass 19. Not Present.

20. Arcaded walkway to rear 20. Not Present.

21. Decorative tile or fountains 21. Not Present.

22. Detached subordinate garages, matching in style 22. Present.

Overall the Building possesses several, general character defining features common to the Spanish Eclectic

style to be classified as an example of this style. However, as noted above, the Building lacks a majority of

important, Spanish eclectic character defining features to be considered a representative example. These

10

Large focal window style characteristic is present today, however this window is a replacement of the original focal window.

See section B6.1 for a detailed description of the Building’s alterations.

11

Currently all windows are casement, however all original casement windows were replaced with new. See section B6.1 for a

detailed description of the Building’s alterations.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




8

include a walled entry courtyard; multi-leveled roofs; shed roof over entry; elaborate chimney top with tile

detail; dramatically carved wood doors; balcony with wood or iron railing; exterior stairs; small arcaded wing

walls; trebeated posts and beam covered entry and rear loggia; decorative iron sconce at front door; iron

window grills; stained glass; arcaded walkway to rear; and decorative tile or fountains. In addition, the

Building’s design ignores its corner lot, incorporating only minor character defining features along most of

the side street elevation. In fact, the side street elevation is treated similar to Buildings that have another

building along this elevation.

B.6 Construction History

Construction

1925 The Building is referenced by the County of San Diego per Assessor’s Parcel Number 443-472-

10-00, Lot 1 in Block 4 of North Florence Heights Addition, in the City of San Diego, County of

San Diego, State of California, according to the Map Thereof No. 634, filed in the Office of the

County Recorder of San Diego County, June 9, 1890. The Assessor’s Building Record dates the

Project’s construction from 1925, and describes it as a single-family house, measuring 1,419

square feet with detached 396 square foot garage. There is no record of a building permit for

the 1925 construction in the Building Record. See Attachment A.1.

Notice of Completion

1925 A Notice of Completion was located by California Lot Book. It states that C. D. Weiss entered

into a contract with the Ideal Building Company to erect a “Stucco Residence and Garage” and

that construction was completed on December 31, 1925. See Attachment A.2.

Water and Sewer

1925 A water record found on file with the City of San Diego Water and Sewer Department dates initial

water service as October 31, 1925. See Attachment A.3.

1925 A sewer record found on file with the City of San Diego Water and Sewer Department dates initial

sewer service as November 2, 1925. See Attachment A.3.

Building Permits:

Year Type Scope of Work

1925 Building Permit Notice in the Evening Tribune “C. D. Weiss. 2952 Fourth. Per

same, stucco cottage and garage, 4194 Randolph; $7500.

1925 Plumbing Notice Notice in the Evening Tribune “C. D. Weiss. Per same, 4194

Randolph (7).

1958 Electrical Permit Outlets and lamp holders

1963 Plumbing Permit Water

1966 Electrical Permit New Service

1976 Permit No. ? Electrical Permit to remodel the Building and add a second bath.

1976 Permit No. L00724 Plumbing and Gas Permit to remodel the Building and add a

second bath.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




9

1976 Permit No. L00784 Building Permit to remodel the Building and add a second bath.

1982 Permit No. ? Gas

2002 Plan File A-100868-02 Unclear if work completed

2003 E502153-03 Electrical permit for increased service

2008 Permit No. 542682 Building Permit for “Remodel existing toilet and add toilet and walk-in-closet within the existing bedroom”.12 Final inspection and

approval was made on April 20, 2009.

See Attachment A.4 for copies of all permits, permit drawings, and inspection record.

Other alterations with approximate dates:

c.2008 There are differing opinions regarding window alterations on the west façade. Per

HRB Staff, west façade windows and a door were changed without a permit

because they are not described in the 2008 permit drawings.

13

c.2011 Garage doors replaced.

2014 Two doors and fourteen windows were modified/ replaced with fibrex-clad wood

windows. Two windows were removed and not replaced (small closet window on

north elevation of house and a window on the east elevation of the garage). Door

opening dimensions were unchanged. Twelve window opening dimensions were

changed which constitutes modifications that require a building permit. (Including

two window changes at garage.) Additionally, three decorative tiles were added

above the primary elevation focal window. See Attachment E.3, pages 115-119, for

a door and window schedule keyed to a site plan describing each door and

window’s condition before and after 2014 modifications.

Site Plan with Building Footprint

Copies of current aerial photographs, showing the Building, its immediate surroundings, and areas of

additions and new construction is included as Attachment A.5.

Lot Block Book Page

The San Diego County Assessor Lot Block Book Page shows the first year with assessed improvements as

being 1926. See Attachment A.6.

Previous Survey Forms

No previous survey form for the Building was located. See Attachment A.7.

12

Based upon the following evidence: statement by pervious homeowner, 2008 Permit Inspection Record and Google Street

photographs from August 2007 and February of 2009, the professional opinion of this HRRR’s preparer is that the west

elevation’s 2008 window and door changes were lawfully permitted per Permit No. 542682 through a construction change that

did not require an amendment to the permit. See Attachment E.3, page 118 for copy of correspondence from owner verifying

that window and door replacements were completed by same contractor prior to seeking Final Inspection on April 20, 2009.

13

Sic.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




10

Chain of Title

The date of construction of the Building is 1925; property owners are listed below for those years from when

the Building was constructed through 2001.

Year(s) Owner

1923 – 1955 Charles D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss

1955 – 1976 Ethel S. Weiss

1976 - 1991 William L. Holliday and Eileen F. Holliday

1991 – 2001 Eileen F. Holliday

Copy of Chain of Tile prepared by California Lot Book is included in Attachment B.1.

San Diego City Directory – through 1984

Year(s) Years in Residence Occupant, Owner, and Occupation

1923 – 1955 Charles D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss Red Cross

1955 – 1976 Ethel S. Weiss No profession found

1976 – 2001 William L. Holliday and Eileen F. Holliday No profession found

Ownership after 2001 is not summarized here but can be reviewed in its entirety in Attachment B.2.

Deed from Date of Construction

Copy of deed to C. D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss is included in Attachment B.3.

Newspaper Research

The San Diego Union / San Diego Union Tribune published articles listing either the Building’s address or one

of its occupants. Copies of this research are included in Attachments E.2.

Owner #1 – C. D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss (1925 -

Two articles mention Mr. C. D. Weiss and his association with the Red Cross. No additional information was

located in regards to his life.

Maps

Copies of the 800 scale Engineering and the USGS Maps are included in Attachment C.1 and C.2. The original

Subdivision Map is included in Attachments C.3.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

The Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from 1921 shows the parcel as vacant. The next available map is 1950, and

the Building with its current configuration is present. Additional years available include 1956, 1957, 1958,

1959, 1960, 1963, 1965, 1967, 1969, and 1970. Copies of the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps are included in

Attachment C4.

Historical Photos

One photograph was located in the San Diego History Center’s archives dated “1920’s”. It shows an aerial

view of the parcel prior to the Building’s construction. A copy of this photograph is included as Attachment

D1.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




11

Google and owner photographs from 2007 through 2015 show the Building before and after the 2008

remodel and additional window changes in 2014. These are included in Attachment D1.

Current Photographs

Current photographs are included in Attachment D2.

B.6.1 Alterations

The following alterations, by elevation, have been made to the Building. All alterations are from 2014 unless

otherwise specified:

East Elevation

• Focal window replaced;

• Addition of new gate at side yard in 2008;

• Addition of stucco wing wall at side yard in 2008;

• Dining room window replaced;

• Breakfast nook window replaced, window opening width same, and sill raised up;

• Tiles added to wall over; and

• Patch and repair of stucco at window replacements.

North Elevation

• Breakfast nook window replaced, window opening width same, and sill raised up;

• Kitchen window replaced;

• Window removed from closet;

• Bedroom window replaced, and opening was modified; and


West Elevation

• Bedroom window replaced, window opening width same, and sill raised up;

• Bathroom #1 window removed in 2008

14

and replaced in 2014;

• Bathroom #2 window replaced, 2008

15

and 2014;

• Bedroom window replaced with doors in 2008

16

;

• 2008

17

doors replaced in 2014; and


14





that window and door replacements were completed by same contractor prior to seeking Final Inspection on April 20, 2009.

15

Sic.

16

Sic.

17

Sic.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




12

South Elevation

• Bedroom window replaced, window opening width same, and sill raised up;

• (2) Living room windows replaced, window opening width same, and sill raised up; and


Garage

• Two wood lift-up garage doors replaced with single metal roll up garage door, before 2014;

• (1) south facing window replaced, window opening width same;

• (1) east facing window removed;

• 1 door replaced, same opening and size; and


The 2008/2009 Remodel was permitted and included plans that are provided in Attachment A.4 and notated

in Attachment E.3. Ms. Stacey Kartchner, the homeowner responsible for the construction, verified via a

phone conversation on September 4, 2018 that the window changes were a construction change during

construction. Per Ms. Kartchner, she instructed the contractor to make the changes per city building codes

and any required permit processes. She verified that the window changes were made before “Final

Inspection” on April 20, 2009. Google Street view photographs from August 2007 show the west elevation

before the windows were replaced. Google Street photographs from February of 2009 show the new

windows installed. It is the opinion of HRB Staff that the windows were not permitted due to the fact that

they are not described in the scope of work, however the sequence of permits, inspections, and Google

Street photographs as well as the previous owner’s statement provide significant evidence to the contrary. It

is the opinion of this HRRR’s preparer that the west elevation’s windows were significantly changed through

an approved City of San Diego permit process prior to a second replacement in 2014. Ms. Kartchner

confirmed these facts in an email dated September 7, 2018. A copy of this correspondence is included in

Attachment E.3, page 118.

The 2014 window replacements constitute a significant modification from the Building’s original number,

material, type, and operation of windows. Some windows included a change in opening dimension too. All

three window groups were modified along the east/primary elevation, however only the 2-part window had

a change in opening size. The original arched focal window and recessed porch window openings retain their

original window opening dimensions and groupings. Remaining door and window modifications are

described above are graphically explained through notated plans, door and window schedule and pictures in

Attachment E.3.

B.10 Significance

Historic Context Statement: History of Mission Hills Development

The neighborhood of Mission Hills is located within the Uptown Community Planning Area of San Diego, the

oldest and most urbanized area of the City outside of the historic downtown (excluding prehistoric Native

American presence and the neighborhood of Old Town). The Uptown Community is confined to the mesa

top north of downtown and the neighborhood of Mission Hills is located in the farthest northwest area of the

community.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




13

The Uptown Community’s development began with speculation by investors motivated by Alonzo Horton’s

purchase and development success of downtown San Diego. Subdivision and construction occurred through

five distinct time periods and historical contexts: The Railroad Boom and Early Residential Development:

1885-1909; The Panama-California Exposition and Streetcar Suburbs: 1909-1929; Great Depression and

World War II: 1929-1948; Postwar Development, Suburbanization, the Automobile & Modernism: 1948-

1970; and Neighborhood Revitalization and the LGBTQ Community: 1970-Present.

The first wave of development in Uptown, 1885-1909, began closest to downtown and progressively moved

northwards but did not quite reach the neighborhood of Mission Hills. The majority of Mission Hills’

development takes place during the historic context theme of “The Panama-California Exposition and

Streetcar Suburbs: 1909-1929”. Development interest in this time period was boosted by the announcement

of the 1915 Panama-California Exposition (“1915 Exposition”) which spurred a doubling of San Diego’s

population. During this time development was pushed to the farthest reaches of the mesa top made possible

by the expansion of transit lines. By 1925 the San Diego Electric Railway had a rail line that extended through

to the farthest reaches of the Uptown Community, including Mission Hills. The rail line extended along the

neighborhood’s development spine, Fort Stockton Street, ending at Arista Street. While Craftsman style

remained popular, residential design in Mission Hills was heavily influenced by the 1915 Exposition’s Spanish

Colonial Revival architecture leading to the popularity of Spanish Eclectic and Mission Revival styles. By the

1930’s most of Mission Hills was completely developed.

The neighborhood of Mission Hills covers a significant portion of the northwestern area of the Uptown

Community planning area. And within that boundary, it has a variety of micro-planning areas. One of the

first micro-planning areas of Mission Hills to develop, an area referred to as North Florence Heights is

comprised of 96 properties and dates back to 1903 when the San Diegan horticulturist, Kate Sessions

purchased tracts of this subdivision. She originally used the land to grow plants and trees, establishing a

nursery at the intersection of West Lewis and Stephens Streets. She later convinced John Spreckels to extend

the San Diego Electric Railway streetcar into the community, enabling its residential development. Kate

Sessions influenced the overall character of the neighborhood through the planting of street trees, Queen

Palms, pink concrete sidewalks, and turf parkways.

Historic Context According to the Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, the significance of a historic property can be judged and explained only when it is evaluated in its historic context. Historic contexts are those patterns or trends in history by which a specific occurrence, property or site is understood and its meaning (and ultimately its significance) within history is made clear. In order to decide whether a property is significant within its historic context, the following things must be determined. 18

1. Identify the themes, geographical limits and chronological period that the property represents:

18

Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, page 2



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




14

The subject Property was constructed as a modest single-family residence in 1925 in the residential

neighborhood of Mission Hills in the City of San Diego, California.

2. Determine how the theme of the context is significant in the history of the local area:

The subject property was developed as part of the overall residential development of Mission Hills

throughout the early-twentieth century incorporating one of a variety of traditional vernacular architectural

design styles. This theme is significant as it represents the majority of the development in Mission Hills.

3. Determine what the property type is and whether it is important in illustrating the historic context:

The property type is a single-family residential home designed in a Spanish Eclectic design style. The Building

illustrates its historic context as one of many, single family residences built in the Mission Hills neighborhood.

4. Determine how the property represents the context through HRB Criteria:

The property does not represent the context through the HRB Criteria. The Property does not exemplify or

reflect special elements of any aspect of the City’s, community’s or neighborhood’s development under

Criterion A: Community Development. “Special elements” under that criteria are “resources that are distinct

among others of their kind or that surpass the usual in significance.” The subject property meets neither of

those tests. The subject property is not significant under Criterion B: Person or Event as no persons or events

of importance were connected to the subject property. The single-family residence does not embody the

characteristics of a style, type, period or method of an architectural style at a level necessary for significance

under Criterion C: Architecture. There is a possibility that the Building was designed by master architect

Edward Depew while he was working at the Ideal Building company, however the residence is not

representative of the notable work of Edward Depew as a master architect and does not meet the criteria for

significance under Criterion D. And neither Criteria E or F apply to the subject property. Consequently, the

property does not represent its historic context under any of the established criteria of the San Diego Historic

Resources Board Designation Criteria.

5. Determine what physical features the property must possess for it to reflect the significance of the historic context:

The theme of the historic context is custom designed single-family residential design and construction during

the early development of Mission Hills in the early-twentieth century. In order to reflect the significance of

the historic context, the Property would need to be a superior example of an architect-designed custom

single-family home by a master architect in good condition without alterations or with alterations that meet

the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Or the subject property could qualify as a custom-designed single-

family home designed in the Spanish Eclectic Style with distinctive characteristics that make it a valuable

example of the style. Neither of these situations is present in the subject property.

Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




15

According to the City of San Diego Land Development Manual, Historical Resources Guidelines, Appendix E,

Part 2, any improvement, building, structure, sign, interior element and fixture, site, place, district, area or

object may be designated as a historic resource by the City of San Diego Historical Resources Board if it meets

one or more of the following criteria.

Criterion A: Community Development: If it exemplifies or reflects special elements of a City’s, a community’s or a neighborhood’s historical, archaeological, cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, landscaping or architectural development. Special elements of development refer to a resource that is distinct among others of its kind or that surpass the usual in significance. 19

Pursuant to these Guidelines, “special elements of development refer to a resource that is distinct among others of its kind or that surpass the usual in significance.”

No historical evidence was identified regarding the Building to suggest that it exemplifies or reflects a special

or unique aspect of the City's general historical, archaeological, cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic,

engineering, landscaping or architectural development; or that it exemplifies or reflects a unique aspect of

the City's history. The Building is a standard example of the residential development that took place in

Mission Hills during the 1920’s. The building is not distinct among others of its kind and does not surpass the

usual Spanish Eclectic styled residences in the community. Therefore, it does not merit designation under Criterion A.

Criterion B: Persons or Events: Is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history. 20

In order for a property to qualify for designation under Criterion B for identification with a person significant

in local, state or national history, the person must have made demonstrable achievements and contributions

to the history of San Diego, the state or the nation. No such person has been identified with this property. In

order for a property to qualify for designation under Criterion B for identification with an event significant in

local, state or national history, the event must be significant in the history of San Diego, the state or the

nation. No such event has been identified with this property. Therefore, it does not merit designation under Criterion B.

Criterion C: Architecture: 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. 21 “Style” means the composition, massing, scale, materials and details exhibit the essential physical features of a recognized architectural style. 22

19

Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, page 7.

20


21


22




DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




16

The Building was assessed Criterion C as defined in The Historical Resources Guidelines of the City of San Diego’s Land Development Manual for its potential significance as a building which embodies the distinctive

characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous

materials or craftsmanship. The Building is an example (with basic characteristics) of the Spanish Eclectic style

and does not have any unusual features or elements that would raise it to a level of significance to qualify for

historical designation.

There are differing opinions regarding window alterations on the west façade. Windows along this

facade were replaced twice. The first replacement occurred in 2008/2009 and a second replacement

occurred in 2014. Per HRB Staff, the 2008/09 replacement was made without a permit because the

window and door changes were not described in the 2008 permit drawings.

23

Therefore Criterion C

analysis must be completed under the assumption that it has all original windows intact. The Building

exhibits the most common Spanish Eclectic vernacular architectural features found across examples of

this style, including stucco finish, red tile roof with short eaves, focal window and casement windows.

However, these features are merely limited basic elements of the Spanish Eclectic style. The scale and

presentation of these features can be found on many other homes that were built around the same

time across the Uptown and Mid City communities. In addition, the Building’s design and features

ignores its corner lot location, utilizing a common Spanish Eclectic composition that can be found on

interior lot parcels.

It is the professional opinion of this HRRR’s preparer that Criterion C analysis should include the City of San

Diego permitted window changes that were made in 2008/2009 along the west elevation. These changes

further eliminate the subject property’s eligibility for historic designation.

In addition, the City’s 2006 Report, which surveyed all properties built before 1961 did not identify it as a

resource that appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation and

the property is not listed in the final Uptown Community Plan’s list of potential individually significant historic

resources. Integrity of Architectural Style

1. “Type of construction” means the form and materials clearly demonstrate, through the presence of

essential physical features, a specific purpose and/or function.24

The subject property is a single-family residence of standard residential components. It does not constitute a

“type of construction” as that term is understood for the application of Criterion C since the vast majority of

single family residences possess these features.

23





that window and door replacements were completed by same contractor prior to seeking Final Inspection on April 20, 2009..

24




DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




17

2. “Method of Construction” means it is a rare or an important example of building practices, construction innovations, or technical advances during a specific time in history. 25

The subject property is of standard residential construction and materials. It does not present a rare or

important example of building practices, construction innovations or technical advances during the 1920’s or

single-family construction or design.

3. “Period of construction” means the age and physical features reflect the era when the specific recognized architectural style, building type, or method of construction became popular. 26

The original design of the Building reflects the standard housing design concepts popularized throughout the

City of San Diego during the 1920’s.

4. “Craftsmanship” means the resource exemplifies high craftsmanship and design with handcrafted, unique and rare elements and may or may not be catalogued as belonging to a specific architectural style. . . The resource’s design elements and/or features, or association with an individual’s design approach or philosophy is unique in nature and does not reflect a specific design or style, but is a reflection of a very personal and/or creative effort. 27

The subject property is of standard construction and exhibits no elements of handcrafted, unique or rare

elements in any of the design, finishes, or elements that compose the buildings’ design or construction.

5. “Indigenous Materials” means the resource is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials

and may include the interior. The resource’s design elements and/or features, including design context and period of design, or association with an individual’s design approach is reflective of indigenous design through the use of local indigenous materials and available craftsmanship. 28

The subject building contains no materials related to indigenous construction. In addition, no traditional

indigenous methods of construction were used in the design or building of the single-family residences.

In conclusion, the Building is a basic example of the Spanish Eclectic style but lacks a number of the

characteristics of the style, type, period, or method of construction and does not display any elements of

architectural design that would raise it to a level of significance to qualify for individual historical designation.

For example, the Building lacks a majority of important, Spanish eclectic character defining features to be

considered a representative example. Nor is it a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or

craftsmanship. These facts preclude the Building from being unique, notable, or unusual example of the

Spanish Eclectic style of architecture. Therefore, the Building does not meet the criteria for significance under Criterion C: Architecture as a good example of Spanish Eclectic Style.

25


26


27


28




DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




18

Criterion D: Master Builder: Is representative of the able work of a master builder, designer, architect, engineer, landscape architect, interior designer, artist, or craftsman. 29

Per the Notice of Completion, the Building’s builder is the Ideal Building Company. The Ideal Building

Company is not a Master Builder within the City of San Diego; therefore, the Building does not merit

designation as representative of a master builder. However, Master Architect Edward H. Depew while under

the employ of the Ideal Building Company, designed the Building shortly after joining the builder’s employ in

1925. The evidence linking the Building’s design to Mr. Depew is in the form of several advertisements that

ran in the Union Tribune; the earliest of which was in 1927, two years after the Notice of Completion’s date

of construction in 1925.

Edward Harold Depew was born on April 11, 1897. It is uncertain whether he was born in Oregon, Arizona,

Kansas, or Texas. He came to San Diego with his wife, Dorothy, 1921. Upon his arrival in San Diego, he

became active in the building trade. From 1925-1927, he served as an architect for the Ideal Building

Company. By 1928, he operated his own design-build firm. From the late 1920s-1940s, Depew designed and

built structures throughout San Diego. His drawings occasionally appeared in the San Diego Union

newspaper's Sunday Development Section. In addition to his architectural vocation, Mr. Depew also

developed apartment buildings and business complexes. Though he was capable of working in a variety of

eclectic styles, popular over this period, it appears that Depew was most adept in designing in the Spanish

Eclectic style (identified as the “Southern California” style).

In the later 1940s, Depew gave up the contracting business and opened Depew Marine Center, which sold

and repaired boats. This business is said to be the first major yacht and marine sales center in San Diego.

Outside of his professional career, Depew was a charter member of the Point Loma Community Church. He

was also a Mason and was instrumental in the acquisition of land for the Scottish Rite Temple in Mission

Valley. Depew was also a member of the San Diego Yacht Club. He passed away in 1990.

In July 2005, the City of San Diego afforded “Master” architect status upon Edward Depew by virtue of the

designation of the “Edna Shapley/Edward Depew House,” located at 4252 Arista Street (HRB Site #721; Built

in 1931). At the time he was established as a master architect, an inspection of Depew’s overall body of work

concluded that Depew’s greatness as an architect was based upon the finding that, “[h]is designs speak to his

ability as a designer; it can be seen that Depew skillfully employed not only the Spanish Eclectic style, but

other eclectic styles popular in the 1920s and 30s, including Colonial Revival, French Eclectic, French Country

Revival and Monterrey Revival.” He masterfully employed the "Southern California" style to create well

designed and aesthetically pleasing homes throughout Point Loma, Coronado, Mission Hills, and other San

Diego neighborhoods. Homes “skillfully” designed by Depew in the Spanish Eclectic style, embody a wide

range of Spanish-inspired elements, details, and craftsmanship, including those located at 3222 Curtis Street

(1928); 3212 Browning Street (1931); 2674 Rosecrans Street (1933); and 2555 Willow Street (1937). Other

designated resources which were designed by Depew include the “David A. and Emma Loebenstein House,”

located at 1087 Myrtle Way (HRB Site #714; Built in 1926); and the “Depew Building Company/Edward

Depew Spec House #1 (HRB Site #1237; Built in 1939). Other “notable” examples of Depew’s work include

the “Dr. Harry and Beryl Faulkner House,” located at 3003 Kingsley Street (HRB Site #651; Built in 1939); the

29




DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




19

Eugene N. Adrian Residence, Chula Vista (Built in 1928); and the Alcazar Apartments (17

th

& E Streets, Built in

1929).

The 4194 Randolph Street residence was designed by Edward Depew while he was employed by the Ideal

Building Company in 1925. In later years, a sketch of the building was featured in several editions of the San Diego Union (Development Section). However, inspection of other sketch homes which appear in the San Diego Union that were also designed by Depew and built by the Ideal Building Company (i.e. January 17, 1926

and May 23, 1926) display almost identical floor plans; window placements; focal windows; front porches;

and gabled, shed, and flat roof forms. Based upon an examination of Depew’s work during the mid-1920s, it

is clear that he generally produced easily replicable, uniform housing models which were efficient for the

Ideal Building Company to develop and construct. Very little creative thought, detailed craftsmanship, or an

emphasis on high design standards were employed with respect to these small-scale Spanish Revival

(Southern California) homes. In no way does the 4194 Randolph Street residence display any measure of the

“skillful” expertise for which Depew is regarded and recognized as a master architect. Moreover, the

residence does not display any “notable” features of design/construction which would warrant a

determination of significance. As a result, the residence is not representative of the notable work of Edward

Depew as a master architect and does not meet the criteria for significance under Criterion D.

Criterion E: National Register Is listed or has been determined eligible by the National Park Service for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or is listed or has been determined eligible by the State Historical Preservation Office for listing on the State Register of Historical Resources; or �

The Building is not listed on either the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of

Historical Resources, and it has not been determined to be eligible for listing on either register by the

National Park Service or the State Historic Preservation Office. The property does not qualify under HRB Criterion E (National or California Register Eligible).

Criterion F: Historic District Is a finite group of resources related to one another in a clearly distinguishable way or is a geographically definable area or neighborhood containing improvements which have a special character, historical interest or aesthetic value or which represent one or more architectural periods or styles in the history and development of the City.

The Building is not located within an existing historic district. Therefore, it does not qualify under HRB Criterion F Historic District.

Significance Conclusion: City of San Diego Historical Designation Criteria

The single-family residence located at 4194 Randolph Street is not eligible for the San Diego Historical Resources Register under any of the established criteria.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




20

Integrity

In addition to determining the significance of a property under local, state and federal criteria, it is necessary

to assess whether the property has integrity. Integrity is the ability of a property to convey and maintain its

significance. A property must not only be shown to be significant under the established criteria, it must also

have integrity. In order to retain historic integrity, a property must possess several, and usually most, of the

seven key aspects of integrity, which are location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and

association.

Application of the City’s Guidelines for finding Integrity: According to the City’s Guidelines for the application of the Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, there are two important principles for understanding Integrity:

1. Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical integrity clearly indicated by the retention of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance.

2. Integrity relates to the presence or absence of historic materials and character defining

features. Historical resources eligible for designation by the HRB must meet one or more of the designation criteria and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. 30

Application of the seven aspects of integrity:

1. Location: Location is the place where a resource was constructed or where an event occurred. The subject building remains in its original location. Therefore, the building has retained its Location

integrity.

2. Design: Design results from intentional decisions made during the conception and planning of a resource. Design includes form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.

Per HRB Staff’s position on the west façade’s windows, the Building’s form, plan, space, structure and style

have not changed. Therefore the resource retains its aspect of Design integrity.

However, per the opinion of this HRRR’s preparer, the aspect of integrity is not retained because the west

elevation’s 2008/2009 window replacements removed original architectural forms (removal of one window,

change of a second window to a door, and conversion of a third window to glass block). Therefore, the

Building, according to this HRRR’s preparer has not retained its Design integrity.

30

Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, pages 3-4.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




21

3. Setting: Setting applies to the physical environment, the character of a resource’s location, and a resource’s relationship to the surrounding area.

The Building is located in a low-density, single-family residential neighborhood that was developed with

architectural styles specifically associated with its period of significance. This particular section of the

Building’s street has seen little change since development of the subdivision. Therefore, the integrity of

Setting remains.

4. Materials: Materials comprise the physical elements combined or deposited in a particular

manner or configuration to form a property. The Building did not use any unusual materials in its construction. The materials used are identified as typical

examples of wood construction from the 1900’s through today. Therefore the integrity of Materials is no

longer present.

5. Workmanship: Workmanship consists of the physical evidence of the crafts employed by a particular culture, people, or artisan, which includes traditional, vernacular and high styles.

Per HRB Staff’s position on the west façade’s windows, the Building’s Workmanship has not changed.

Therefore the resource retains its aspect of Workmanship integrity.

However, per the opinion of this HRRR’s preparer, this aspect of integrity is not retained because the west

elevation’s 2008/2009 window replacements removed original Workmanship (removal of one window,

change of a second window to a door, and conversion of a third window to glass block). Therefore, the

Building, according to this HRRR’s preparer has not retained its Workmanship integrity.

6. Feeling: Feeling relies on present physical features to a property to convey and evoke an

aesthetic or historic sense of past time and place. The Building retains its scale and style of architecture as originally designed and therefore retains its Feeling aspect of integrity.

7. Association: Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a

historic property.

The Building’s builder, The Ideal Building Company is not a designated Master Builder in the City of San Diego.

But the property does have a direct link to a master architect, Edward H. Depew, therefore, the Building’s

Association aspect of integrity is possible. However, per the Criteria D discussion, this building in no way

displays any measure of the “skillful” expertise for which Depew is regarded and recognized as a master

architect. Moreover, the residence does not display any “notable” features of design/construction which

would warrant a determination of significance. As a result, the residence is not representative of the notable

work of Edward Depew as a master architect and therefore does not retain is integrity of Association.



DPR 523L (Rev. 1/1995)(Word 9/2013)




22

Conclusion:

Of the seven aspects of integrity, and per HRB Staff’s position, the Building retains the following five aspects

of integrity: Location, Design, Workmanship, Setting, and Feeling aspects of Integrity.

Per the opinion of this HRRR’s preparer, the Building retains the following three aspects of integrity:

Location, Setting, and Feeling. B.12 References

1. California Lot Book, Inc., Chain of Title for 4194 Randolph Street, San Diego, March 2016.

2. California Room, San Diego public Library.

3. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, California Historic Resources Inventory Survey Workbook, Third Revision, August 1986.

4. November, 2015.�McAlester, Virginia Savage, A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised): The Definitive

Guide to Identifying and Understanding America's Domestic Architecture, New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

5. San Diego County Assessors’ Office, Residential Building Record. APN 443-472-10-00.

6. City of San Diego, California Historical Resources Inventory Database, Web. 15 July 2016 and 7 May 2018.

7. Lower Riviera Special Design District Design Guidelines, Community Development Department Planning

Division, City of Santa Barbara Adopted 19 December 2006.

8. City of San Diego, Guidelines for the Application of Historical Resources Board Designation Criteria, Land

Development Manual, Historical Resources Guidelines, Appendix E, Part 2, Adopted August 27, 2009.

9. City of San Diego, Historical Resources Board, Historical Resource Research Report Guidelines and Requirements, Land Development Manual, Historical Resources Guidelines, Appendix E, Part 1.1,

Updated February 9, 2009.

10. City of San Diego, Land Development Code, Historical Resources Guidelines, Adopted September 28,

1999, Amended June 6, 2000 & April30, 2001.

11. City of San Diego, Sewer and Water Connection Records.�

12. San Diego Historical Center Research and Photographic Archives.

13. City of San Diego, Uptown Community Plan 2016

14. City of San Diego City Directories, 1913-1980

15. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps.�

16. San Diego Union Tribune newspaper Archives

17. Archacos, 2772 Evergreen Street, San Diego, CA. 92106, June 25, 2001.

18. Hager B., Sandel S., Seyfert V.,4250 Sierra Vista Street, San Diego, CA 92103, December 1, 2006.

19. May, Vonn Marie, 3305 Voltaire Street, San Diego, CA 92106, May 2016.

20. Montes, B., David A. & Emma Loebenstein House, 1087 Myrtle Way, San Diego, CA 92103, August 2004.

21. Montes, B., Ena M. Shapley/Edward H. Depew House, San Diego, CA 92103, August 2004.

22. University of San Diego, Cultural Resource Survey of Presidio Hills, Mission Hills and Banker’s Hill Areas of

san Diego, California, 1981

23. City of San Diego, IS Architecture, Walter Enterprises; Uptown Historic Context and Oral History Report,

2003

State of California C Natural Resources Agency Primary#DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEETProperty Name: ___4194 Randolph Street ________________________________________________________________Page of 134

Attachment A

Building Development Information

A.1 San Diego County Assessor’s Building Record

A.2 Notice of Completion

A.3 Water/Sewer Connection Records

A.4 Building Construction Permits

A.5 Site Plan with Foot print Showing Additions

A.6 County Lot and Block Book Page

A.7 Previous Survey Forms


Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial


A.2 Notice of Completion – July 5, 1925 (Recorded December 31, 1925), between C. D. Weiss and Ideal Building Company


Trinomial


A.3 Water Connection Records – Water Service Application: October 28, 1925


Trinomial


A.3 Water Connection Records – Water Service Application: October 28, 1925


Trinomial


A.3 Water Connection Records – Water Assignment Order: September 25, 1964


Trinomial


A.3 Water Connection Records – Water Assignment Order: September 25, 1964


Trinomial


A.3 Sewer Connection Records – Sewer Connection Order: November 2, 1925


Trinomial


A.3 Sewer Connection Records – Sewer Connection Order: November 2, 1925


Trinomial


A.4 Building Permits

Evening Tribune, published as EVENING TRIBUNE (San Diego, California) • 7-15-25 • Page 25

Evening Tribune, published as EVENING TRIBUNE (San Diego, California) • 5-8-25 • Page 26


Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial


A.4 Building Permits – 1997 Permit Drawings: Second Floor Plan


Trinomial


A.4 Building Permits: 2008 Bath Remodel


Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial


x

A.4 Building Permits – Construction Inspection Record for 3/28/08 Permit - Bath/Closet in Existing Space

State of California C Natural Resources Agency Primary#

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

Trinomial

CONTINUATION SHEETProperty Name: ___4194 Randolph Street ________________________________________________________________

Page of 134

A.4 Building Permits – Construction Inspection Record for 3/28/08 Permit - Final Inspection April 20, 2009


Trinomial




Trinomial


A.5 Site Plan with Foot print (No Additions to Show)

Garage House


Trinomial


A.6 County Lot and Block Book - The San Diego County Assessor Lot Block Book Page shows the first year with assessed improvements as being 1926


Trinomial


A.7 – 2016 Final Historic Context Statement Area Historic Resources SurveyPrevious Survey Forms could not be located within the City’s California Historic Resources Inventory Database (CHRID). The subject property is described in the database within Appendix G, see below.


Trinomial


A.7 Proposed Historical District’s Boundary, Context Statement and Period of Significance

Potential North Florence Heights historic district, was NOT approved during 2016 Uptown Community Plan update


Trinomial



Potential North Florence Heights historic district, NOT approved or anticipated at this time.


Trinomial






Trinomial


Page of 134

E.6 Criterion F – Proposed Historical District’s Boundary, Context Statement and Period of Significance


4194 RandolphStreet


Trinomial


A.7 – Subject Property given status code of “5D3”, as potential contributor to a potential historic district.


Trinomial


Attachment BOwnership and Occupant Information

B.1 Chain of Title

B.2 Directory Listing of Occupants

B.3 Deed from Date of Construction


Trinomial


B.1 Chain of Title – page 1 of 4


Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial


B.2 Directory Listing of Occupants

Year(s) Occupant Owner at Time of Residency Owner /Occupant Occupation

1925 - 1955 Charles D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss

Charles D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss

Salvage Manager for Red Cross

1955 - 1976 Ethel S. Weiss Ethel S. Weiss No profession found1976 - 1991 William L. Holliday and

Eileen F. HollidayWilliam L. Holliday and Eileen F. Holliday

No profession found

1991 - 1999 William L. Holliday and Eileen F. Holliday

William L. Holliday and Eileen F. Holliday , Co-Trustees or their Successors in Trust, under the Holliday Family Trust Dated June 12, 1991

No profession found

1999 - 2001 Eileen F. Holliday Eileen F. Holliday, Trustee of the Holliday Family Trust dated June 12, 1991

No profession found


Trinomial


B.3 Deed from - for purchase of parcel from Alice Lee to Charles D. Weiss and Ethel S. Weiss


Trinomial


Attachment CMaps

C.1 City of San Diego 800 Scale Engineering Map

C.2 USGS Map (Current)

C.3 Original Subdivision map

C.4 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps


Trinomial


C.1 City of San Diego 800 Scale Engineering Map

4194 Randolph Street


Trinomial


C.2 USGS Map (Current) 4194 Randolph Street


Trinomial


C.3 Original Subdivision Map



Trinomial


Page of 134

C.4 Sanborn Maps - 1921



Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134




Trinomial


Page of 134

Attachment DPhotographs

D.1 Historical Photographs

D. Current Photographs, 2017


Trinomial


Photograph # 5370-B “Mission Hills Aerial": 1920s

D.1 Historical Photographs, Courtesy of the San Diego History CenterImage dated by San Diego History Center: 1920s

4194 Randolph Street, last house to be built on block of 10 parcels



Trinomial


Page of 134

D.1 Historical Photographs, Courtesy of the San Diego History Center

Image dated by San Diego History Center: 1920s

Photograph # 5370-B “Mission Hills Aerial": 1920s

4194 Randolph Street, last house

to be built on block of 10 lots


Trinomial



Google Maps

Image capture: Aug 2007 © 2016 Google

Street View - Aug 2007

San Diego, California

Currently shown: Aug 2007

W Arbor Dr

W Arbor Dr - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7537359,-117.1772506,3a,...

1 of 1 4/29/16, 10:34 AM

Photograph #1: 2007 North and West elevations, Arbor Drive side yard prior to 2008 remodel, Note west elevation window configuration. Three windows were replaced in 2008 along this elevation.

Photograph #2: 2007 North elevation, Arbor Drive side yard prior to 2008 remodel, close up with three windows visible.



Trinomial


Page of 134


Photograph #3a: February 2009 West elevation, Arbor Drive side yard after 2008 remodel, Note west

elevation window configuration. Original pair of wood garage doors are present in 2009.

Photograph #3b: February 2009 West elevation close up showing: 1) removal of one window, 2)

installation of glass-block in a second window and 3) replacement of a third with French doors


Trinomial



Google Maps

Image capture: Apr 2011 © 2016 Google

Street View - Apr 2011


Currently shown: Apr 2011

W Arbor Dr

W Arbor Dr - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7537359,-117.177239,3a,7...

1 of 1 4/27/16, 1:11 PM

Google Maps

Image capture: Apr 2011 © 2016 Google

Street View - Apr 2011


Currently shown: Apr 2011

W Arbor Dr

W Arbor Dr - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7537359,-117.177239,3a,3...

1 of 1 4/27/16, 1:52 PM

Photograph #4a: 2011 West elevation, Arbor Drive side yard after 2008 remodel, Note west elevation window configuration. Original pair of wood garage doors are present in 2009.

Photograph #4b: 2011 West elevation close up showing: 1) removal of one window, 2) installation of glass-block in a second window and 3) replacement of a third with French doors


Trinomial



Google Maps

Image capture: Mar 2014 © 2016 Google

Street View - Mar 2014


Currently shown: Mar 2014

W Arbor Dr

W Arbor Dr - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7537366,-117.1771486,3a,...

1 of 1 4/27/16, 1:10 PM

Google Maps

Image capture: Mar 2014 © 2016 Google

Street View - Mar 2014


Currently shown: Mar 2014

Randolph St

Randolph St - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@32.7534994,-117.1768643,3a,...

1 of 1 4/27/16, 1:16 PM

Photograph #5: 2014 North elevation, Arbor Street side yard with garage door has been replaced.

Photograph #6: 2014 East elevation along Randolph Street



Trinomial


Page of 134


Photograph # 7: 2015 West (rear) Elevation

Photograph #8: 2015 East (front) Elevation, original sidewalk and path with steps to house


Trinomial



Photograph #9: 2015 West elevation, removal of master bedroom window and 2008 window

Photograph #10: 2015 West elevation, removal of glassblock from 2008 remodel


Trinomial



Photograph #11: 2015 West elevation, wood rot and termite infestation

Photograph #12: 2015 West elevation, wood rot and termite infestation


Trinomial



Photograph #13: 2015 West elevation, removal of 2008 installed French doors

Photograph #14: 2015 typical condition of all windows and doors removed and replaced



Trinomial


Page of 134

D.2 Current Photographs

Photograph #15: East elevation, street front along Randolph Street

Photograph #16: East Elevation, Living room window


Trinomial



Photograph #17: East elevation, living room and covered entry porch

Photograph #18: East elevation, covered entry porch and dining room window


Trinomial



Photograph #19: Front door with raised plaster quoining


Trinomial



Photograph #20: East elevation, kitchen window


Trinomial



Photograph #21: North Elevation, Arbor Drive

Photograph #22: North elevation, master bedroom window


Trinomial



Photograph #23: North elevation, kitchen window


Trinomial



Photograph #24: North elevation, kitchen window


Trinomial



Photograph #25: North elevation, water heater cover


Trinomial



Photograph #26: North elevation, stucco patch from previous window


Trinomial



Photograph #27: North elevation, metal garage door

Photograph #28: East elevation, garage


Trinomial



Photograph #29: South elevation, garage

Photograph #30: West elevation



Trinomial


Page of 134


Photograph #31: West elevation, master bedroom window


Trinomial



Photograph #32: West elevation, master bath window


Trinomial



Photograph #33: West elevation, bathroom window


Trinomial



Photograph #34: West elevation, French doors


Trinomial



Photograph #35: South elevation side yard, from west


Trinomial



Photograph #36: South elevation, second bedroom window

Photograph #37: South elevation


Trinomial



Photograph #38: South elevation, living room window


Trinomial





Trinomial



Photograph #40: South elevation, side yard



Trinomial


Attachment E

Supplemental Documentation

E.1 Criterion A – N/A

E.2 Criterion B – Owners and Occupants Research

E.3 Criterion C – Building History Analysis

E.4 Criterion D – Builder/Architect Research

E.5 Criterion E – N/A

E.6 Criterion F – N/A



Trinomial


Page of 134

E.2 Union Tribune Research on Owners, Occupants and Building address

San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 12-22-1918 • Page 16

San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 06-21-1918 • Page 4



Trinomial


Page of 134

q

r

E.3 Criterion C – Window and Door Replacement History

t

Door and Window Legend

Original Window or Door

2008 Alteration per City of

San Diego permit

Undated (c2011) Garage

door modification

2014 Window replacements

2014 Window modification

in opening dimensions

x

x

x

x

For doors and windows, see

E3.b

Attachment E.3A – Site Plan with Door Window Changes at Garage

N

s

x


Trinomial




Original Window or Door

2008 Alteration per City of San Diego permit

Undated (2009-2011) Garage door modification

2014 Window replacements, no change in opening

dimensions

2014 Window modification in opening dimensions

N

x

x

x

a

x

p

o

b

c

d

e

k j

n

m

i

h

g

f

l

Attachment E.3B –Existing Plan with Door Window Changes at House

x


Trinomial


E.3 Criterion C – Window and Door Schedule - History

Notes:Casement = CSMTDouble-hung = DHFibrex-Clad Wood = FCW

Attachment E.3C –Door and Window Schedule

Win

dow

/do

or

Orig

inal

co

nditi

on

Curre

nt

cond

ition

Open

ing C

hang

ed si

ze

2008

per

per

mit

2011

2014

Mat

eria

l

Type

Lite

patte

rn

Oper

atio

n

Mat

eria

l

Type

Lite

patte

rn

Oper

atio

n

a Wood Door N/A N/A No change N N N N

b Wood 3-part Group 1x4 CSM

T FCW 3-part Group 1x1 CSMT Y N N Y

c Wood 2-part Group 1x4 CSM


d Wood 2-part Group 1x4 CSM


e Wood Sash 1x2 DH FCW Single 1x1 CSMT N N N Y

f Wood Door 1x5 N/A FCW Door 1x1 N/A N N N Y

g Wood Fixed 1x1 N/A Removed Y N N Y

h Wood 2-part Group

2x3 over 1

DH FCW Single 1x1 Awng Y N N Y

i Wood 2-part Group

2x3 over 1

DH FCW 2-part Group 1x1 CSMT Y N N Y

j Wood 2-part* Group

2x3 over 1

DH FCW Single 1x1 Awng Y Y N Y

k Wood Glass Block* N/A Fixed FCW Single 1x1 Awng Y Y N Y

l Wood Pair Doors*

5x2 each

Slider FCW Pair

Doors1x1 ea N/A N Y N Y



Trinomial


Page of 134

E.3 Criterion C – Window and Door Schedule - History

Notes:Casement = CSMTDouble-hung = DHFibrex-Clad Wood = FCW

Attachment E.3C –Door and Window Schedule

Win

dow

/do

or

Orig

inal

co

nditi

on

Curre

nt

cond

ition

Open

ing C

hang

ed si

ze

2008

per

per

mit

2011

2014

Mat

eria

l

Type

Lite

pa

tter

n

Ope

ratio

n

Mat

eria

l

Type

Lite

pa

tter

n

Ope

ratio

n

m Wood Single 1x1 Awn FCW Single 1x1 Awng Y N N Y

n Wood2-part Group

2x3 over 1

DH FCW2-part Group

1x1 CSMT Y N N Y

o Wood2-part Group

1x4CSMT

FCW2-part Group

1x1 CSMT Y N N Y

p Wood3-part Group

1x4/ Fixed / 1x4

CSMT

FCW3-part Group

1x1

CSMT/Fixd/ CSMT

N N N Y

q WoodGarage Door

N/A

CSMT/Fixd/ CSMT

Metal Single N/ARoll up

N N Y N

r Wood Sash1x1 over 1x1

DH Removed Y N N Y

s Wood Door N/A N/A No Change N N N N

T Wood Sash1x1 over 1x1

DH FCW Sash 1x1 DH N N N Y


Trinomial




2008 Alteration per City of San Diego permitx

kj

l

N

Window modifications along this elevation were completed per the permit process with field approval. See E.3E, email from 2008 homeowner confirming this fact. Field inspectors have discretion as to when a field change requires a plan change.

Attachment E.3D –2008 Floor Plan with Door Window Changes at House



Trinomial


Email from Stacey Kartchner, verifying that window and door changes were made to 4194 Randolph Street during the 2008 permit process. Ms. Kartchner owned the home from 2003 – 2014.

E.3E Criterion C – Window and Door Replacement Verification from 2008 homeowner, Stacey Kartchner


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Architect: July 14, 2005 HRB Staff Report, recognition of Edward H. Depew as Master Architect


Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial




Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Architect: Edward H. Depew Master Builder


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Architect: Edward H. Depew Obituary


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Builder/Architect: Edward Depew, architect biography

San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 4.22.1925• Page 22


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Builder/Architect: Ideal Building Company, possible association with Edward Depew, architect

Advertisement for Ideal Building CompanySan Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 5.23.1926• Page 17

Notes:• Not subject property.• Depew, not credited but timing suggests

he was architect.• House plan is interchangeable with other

plans on offer by ideal Building Company and designed by Depew.


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Builder/Architect: Ideal Building Company, association with Edward Depew, architect

Advertisement for Ideal Building CompanySan Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 6.20.1926• Page 17

Advertisement for Ideal Building CompanySan Diego Union, published as Evening Tribune (San Diego, California) • 10.6.1926• Page 10

Notes: Model is 4194 Randolph Street and Depew credited

Notes:• Depew, not credited• Model is 4194 Randolph Street• House plan is interchangeable with other

plans on offer by ideal Building Company and designed by Depew.


Trinomial


E.4 Criterion D – Builder/Architect: Edward Depew, architect

Advertisement for E. H. Depew & Co.San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 1.15.1928• Page 55Notes: Not subject property

Advertisement for E. H. Depew & Co.Union (San Diego, California) • 3.14.1928• Page 21Notes: Not subject property,


Trinomial



Advertisement for E. H. Depew & Co.Evening Tribune, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 4.18.1928• Page 55Notes: Not subject property, custom home by Depew

Advertisement for E. H. Depew & Co.San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 5.20.1928• Page 55Notes: Not subject property, custom home by Depew


Trinomial



San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 12.15.1929• Page 55


Trinomial



San Diego Union, published as The San Diego Union (San Diego, California) • 1.13.1930• Page 12Notes: Not subject property, house plan is interchangeable and not custom

Documents

Historical Resource Research Report August 7, 2018