SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Found City Photos (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   noirish Los Angeles (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=170279)

HossC Mar 7, 2018 8:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 8110278)

This 1929 Hill Publishing Co map doesn't show Harratt Street (it's between Sunset Boulevard and Cynthia Street), but it does show Clark Street going down to Santa Monica Boulevard.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...rattClark1.jpg
www.historicmapworks.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Pal (Post 8111314)

Thanks, HossC! That means at some point the section of Clark Street from Santa Monica Blvd. (where your red arrow is) to Sunset Blvd. was renamed San Vicente. (San Vicente below Santa Monica Blvd. isn't there yet, but is probably that unnamed street below the vacant white space where "El Tovar" connects to it.)

Also noticed:

--Either it's mis-spelled on the map or Larabee St. was later changed to Larrabee Street.

--La Cienega doesn't appear to go straight up to Sunset Blvd. yet.

--Am I correct that I'm seeing the east/west street that intersects with Sunset Blvd. near the top of the map is labeled as HOLLOW WY? Now known as Holloway?

Here's how the roads looked in the 1943 Renie Pocket Atlas. Note that the two maps overlap between Waring and Willoughby, but they're labeled differently, so I couldn't easily merge them.

The spellings that Martin Pal pointed out (Hollow Way and Larabee) have been corrected/changed. San Vicente appears to make it as far as Santa Monica Boulevard, but it's still Clark Street above.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...2.jpg~original
www.historicmapworks.com/www.historicmapworks.com

Bristolian Mar 7, 2018 9:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 8110701)

I should also add: There were Nisei social clubs that pre-dated WWII.

HERE'S AN EXAMPLE
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/8...923/rMpHcz.jpg
PRE.ORG

The Tartanettes, one of many Japanese-American social clubs, at a beach outing in the late 1930s.


Credit: Courtesy of the Nishi Family



__

FWIW, I believe this photo was taken in Manhattan Beach, south of the pier. The pier buildings, which would be a giveaway, are unfortunately mostly hidden behind the lady standing in the middle but the look of the beach and what can be seen of the pier appear right to me. Between 1928 and 1941 the Manhattan Beach Pier had a wooden extension beyond the roundhouse building.

Here is a 1930s photo taken from the opposite direction.

https://i.imgur.com/bgZJcfe.jpg?1
http://manhattanbeachhistorical.org/

The small building on the extension looks similar from either direction.

ethereal_reality Mar 7, 2018 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Charles (Post 8110778)
One minor correction, though - I am Scott Charles, not ScottyB.

:duh

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottCharles (Post 8110778)
I'm almost sure that my mom is the second-from-the-right in that photo.

I thought that girl was your mom too.

The pic is fuzzy but her charm shows through none-the less.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...922/Ro3u9w.jpg
DETAIL




There is an earlier post on the 'Forsyth Memorial School for Girls' HERE. It later became the Evergreen Hostel.

I'll post this here for people who don't bother with links.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/blYEOE.png
gsv

It looks like it's brimming with ghosts.

You can also read about the old school/hostel HERE.

__

Martin Pal Mar 7, 2018 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 8111423)
Here's how the roads looked in the 1943 Renie Pocket Atlas.

The spellings that Martin Pal pointed out (Hollow Way and Larabee) have been corrected/changed. San Vicente appears to make it as far as Santa Monica Boulevard, but it's still Clark Street above.
___________________________________________________________________

Thanks, HossC, San Vicente is such a wide street that it's interesting to me it was still Clark Street North of Santa Monica as late as 1943. I also see Harratt has arrived on the map by then. (And Phyllis...I know someone who lives on that street.) Oh, Harratt must've arrived by 1932, that was the date on the original "corner of Harratt & Clark St." photo that E_R posted.

ethereal_reality Mar 7, 2018 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Pal

Harratt must've arrived by 1932, that was the date on the original "corner of Harratt & Clark St." photo that E_R posted.

As a reminder for casual viewers / This one.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/IVQOQ0.jpg
EBAY

"Cor. Harratt and Clark St West Hollywood, Aug 20, 1932."





HERE'S A CLOSER LOOK.
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...923/uqHRbN.jpg

On the back, it also said "Century Cactus in Parsonage lot." So what parsonage (CHURCH] do you think they're talking about? :shrug:



__

ethereal_reality Mar 8, 2018 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by odinthor (Post 8111088)
e_r, I think I found it (the specific location of the oak tree in Bouquet Canyon!)

https://s26.postimg.org/h0keaqvq1/Oak.jpg
LA Times via ProQuest via CSULB Library

Oh my gosh odinthor, it's like a Treasure Hunt! I love this.

APRIL 1935
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...924/K8uFKy.jpg
DETAIL

I would be soooooo lost.







The elusive mega-oak is also mentioned in this booklet.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/3...923/DRJwYk.jpg
books.google




but Google only lets me see is this. :( (below)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...923/6ODMy6.jpg
books.google

Page 115 especially sounds interesting. :previous:

(is there any way to get around these page limitations?) Work your magic odinthor :)

_

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyingwedge (Post 8111361)
You are quite welcome!

I just had a hunch that the Clifton House, the church, and the building in between didn't last until WWII.

Speaking of the Clifton House on the SW corner of Broadway and Temple, it can be seen on the right side of this
c. 1892-3 photo of the LA County Court House, which shows Temple on the right and New High St. on the left:
Islandora/UCLA

Here is a closer look at the Clifton House, on the right:

http://s1165.photobucket.com/user/Go...qdmhs.jpg.html

Remarkable. And I've actually seen the Clifton House before in my photos of the old Court House... I just never knew it was called the Clifton House. Some of you folks seem to have a photographic memory of every old building in LA!

HossC Mar 8, 2018 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Pal (Post 8111611)

Thanks, HossC, San Vicente is such a wide street that it's interesting to me it was still Clark Street North of Santa Monica as late as 1943.

San Vicente still wasn't a wide street in 1947. In fact, it doesn't even appear to go straight across Beverly Boulevard.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...7.jpg~original
mil.library.ucsb.edu
Flight ID: C-11351, Frame: 9-8, Date: May 2, 1947

Looking at Historic Aerials, the current wide "S" curve of San Vicente between Melrose and Beverly only got built between 1964 and 1972. Here's roughly the same area today.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...8.jpg~original
Google Maps

odinthor Mar 8, 2018 1:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 8111713)
Oh my gosh odinthor, it's like a Treasure Hunt! I love this so much.

APRIL 1935
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...924/K8uFKy.jpg
DETAIL

I would be soooooo lost.







The elusive mega-oak is also mentioned in this booklet.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/3...923/DRJwYk.jpg
books.google




but Google only lets me see is this. :( (below)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...923/6ODMy6.jpg
books.google

Page 115 especially sounds interesting. :previous:

(is there any way to get around these page limitations?) Work your magic odinthor :)

_

It's looking as if Google's black magic is frustrating my incantations, bah!

But . . . a slight recalibration of my wand brings us this . . . bad news . . .

https://s26.postimg.org/u3tszeapl/OakBurn1.jpg
Google Book Search

From

https://s26.postimg.org/kja6cjg8p/OakBurn2.jpg

So, e_r, darn it [kicks at dirt in frustration], I guess you can put your compass into the drawer again, and we can throw our hiking boots back into the closet . . .

:(

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 1:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bristolian (Post 8111461)
FWIW, I believe this photo was taken in Manhattan Beach, south of the pier. The pier buildings, which would be a giveaway, are unfortunately mostly hidden behind the lady standing in the middle but the look of the beach and what can be seen of the pier appear right to me. Between 1928 and 1941 the Manhattan Beach Pier had a wooden extension beyond the roundhouse building.

Here is a 1930s photo taken from the opposite direction.

https://i.imgur.com/bgZJcfe.jpg?1
http://manhattanbeachhistorical.org/

The small building on the extension looks similar from either direction.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/8...923/rMpHcz.jpgPRE.ORG

Interesting, Bristolian!

Wikipedia says that at the time of the photograph above, there were only two beaches in LA county open to black people: Bruce's Beach, and the Ink Well in Santa Monica.

But the girls can't be at Bruce's Beach, nor at the Ink Well, as both of these were north of the Manhattan Beach Pier.

So what does this mean? Are the Japanese ladies above defiantly sunbathing on a whites-only beach? Or did the segregation laws only block black people from the beach, but not Asians?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 8111607)
I thought that girl was your mom too.

The pic is fuzzy but her charm shows through none-the less.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/6...922/Ro3u9w.jpg
DETAIL

Did you happen to see this earlier post on the Forsyth Memorial School for Girls? It later became the Evergreen Hostel.

IT'S STILL STANDING

Looks like it's brimming with ghosts.

You can read more about the old school/hostel HERE

Thanks, ER! - and yes, yours is the post about Evergreen that I was remembering. I guess I missed it in the three pages of forum search results I got for "Evergreen". :duh

Beaudry Mar 8, 2018 2:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyingwedge (Post 8111361)
You are quite welcome!

I just had a hunch that the Clifton House, the church, and the building in between didn't last until WWII.

Speaking of the Clifton House on the SW corner of Broadway and Temple, it can be seen on the right side of this
c. 1892-3 photo of the LA County Court House, which shows Temple on the right and New High St. on the left:



Here is a closer look at the Clifton House, on the right:

http://i1165.photobucket.com/albums/...s.jpg~original

Oh yeah, the Clifton House! I have a special fondness for it because it's a Robert Brown Young. She often shows up in images of the Court House shot from the east. Or during something like this:

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4793/...4a5a955e_o.png

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4798/...6d825cf7_b.jpgusc

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4781/...8627fbb0_b.jpgusc

Clifton House was torn down in 1923 and its replacement, the Broadway-Temple Building, was built in 1926 and designed by none other than those titans of LA architecture Walker & Eisen. It lasts til 1957 when it is torn down for the Neutra & Alexander Hall of Records.

Here's a shot of the Bway-Temple building ca. 1948—seems that 229, the address of the News Service, is between the cocktails and bail bonds; thus 229 is the entrance and the Service takes up some part if not most of the upstairs..

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4798/...9131d2d1_o.png

Calstatelib

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 3:45 AM

Amazing photos, Beaudry! :awesome:

I tried to visit the Calstatelib link you posted below, but the site would not accept my Los Angeles library card.

It seems that you require a California State library card to gain access, and such a card is not available to the general public, only to state employees - is that correct?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaudry (Post 8111870)
Here's a shot of the Bway-Temple building ca. 1948—seems that 229, the address of the News Service, is between the cocktails and bail bonds; thus 229 is the entrance and the Service takes up some part if not most of the upstairs..

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4798/...9131d2d1_o.png

Calstatelib


ethereal_reality Mar 8, 2018 3:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Charles
Or did the segregation laws only block black people from the beach?

I thought they were primarily intended for African-Americans.

But I don't believe the ordinances were actual laws. (more like locally enforced 'rules' :shrug: maybe)

There's an excellent indepth post on Bruce's Beach and The Inkwell by tovangar2 HERE

"State and local laws, from 1896 through the 20s ensured equal access for all at the beaches, but that was far from what was happening."
FROM T2 POST 32412






In a nutshell:

“The Inkwell” (Santa Monica, CA) refers to a 200-foot stretch of beach where black patrons were allowed in the 1920s,
one of the only beaches of the kind in the county. It was born out of a tragic event* in Topanga Canyon and became very popular among
the black community. Nick Gabaldon, who is reportedly the first Black American surfer, also frequented the beach.
Gabaldon unfortunately died in a surfing accident at 24 years old. from BGLH

NICK GABALDON
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1...922/OdZ1xW.jpg
surfline

:previous: Who's the lucky girl? ;)

*So what was the tragic event in Topanga Canyon?


______________________________________________________




Bruce’s Beach (Manhattan Beach, CA), another LA-area beach, was established by Willa and Charles Bruce,
who recognized the issue of segregation in the surrounding area and the lack of beach property available to black locals.
However, racial tensions caused for the eventual demise of the resort. The beach was renamed in 2007
to pay homage to its origins and the progress that the initiative brought to the area. from BGLH


Willa Bruce at Bruce's Beach.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/923/wU8mX6.jpg
DAILY BREEZE




_

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 5:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 8112001)
I thought (the segregation laws) were primarily intended for African-Americans.

But I don't believe the ordinances were actual laws. (more like locally enforced 'rules' :shrug: maybe)

Despite there being a "1927 court case about public beach segregation in Manhattan Beach (that) required civil rights laws to be upheld", it appears that black people were made to feel unwelcome at public beaches, with occasional cases of violence.

African American historian Alison Rose Jefferson states the following:

"More or less, people could go wherever they wanted at the public beach areas. There were places that might not serve them, but they could walk along the beach."

So perhaps the above applied to the Japanese Girls Clubs - you could go to whatever beach you wanted to, but you had no guarantee against being harassed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ethereal_reality (Post 8112001)
*So what was the tragic event in Topanga Canyon? I thought they were talking about Gabaldon's surfing accident, but that didnt happen until 1951.

Here you go, ER, I've come across this story multiple times in the last few days:

Quote:

The impetus for Inkwell came when a young black chauffeur named Arthur Valentine and his family and friends brazenly settled on a section of the "whites only" beach for Santa Monica's Memorial Day festivities in 1920. Three police officers ordered them to leave.

When the group refused, one officer picked up and "tossed aside a small black child who got in their way," Douglas Flamming wrote in "Bound for Freedom: Black Los Angeles in Jim Crow America," a book published in 2005. The police beat Valentine and then shot him, Flamming wrote.

When Valentine filed a complaint, the authorities charged him with assault with a deadly weapon. If he had had a weapon, historical records do not indicate what it was.

The Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission had the power to investigate Valentine's complaint but refused because of the charges against him. He turned to Los Angeles Dist. Atty. Thomas Lee Woolwine, who was highly respected for his unbiased treatment of minorities. Woolwine filed felony assault charges against the officers.

Over the next three years, Flamming wrote, Valentine was assaulted by the police periodically. Woolwine was heckled by the Ku Klux Klan. Finally, the charges against the officers were dismissed for lack of evidence. The charges against Valentine were dropped too.

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jul/03/local/me-then3
While the above article, for some reason, fails to mention Topanga Canyon specifically, all other reports of the incident do mention Topanga Canyon:

Quote:

Arthur Valentine, a black chauffeur, and his family and friends went to a whites-only area of Topanga Canyon and were forced off of the premises by the police, according to historian Alison Rose Jefferson. Police beat and shot him, but when he filed a complaint, authorities charged him with assault of a deadly weapon.

http://laist.com/2013/11/20/photos_v...to.php#photo-1
Quote:

In the early 1920s, Jefferson said, two off-duty sheriff's deputies assaulted a black man, Arthur Valentine, while he celebrated Memorial Day with his family in the Topanga area. The deputies accused Valentine of trespassing on private property. After a big court case, a jury acquitted the deputies.

https://www.scpr.org/news/2008/08/28...son-african-a/
Notice that the above accounts vary in their details - for example, the first one says that the law officers were "three police officers", while the third one says they were "two off-duty sheriff's deputies".

The above-mentioned historian, Alison Rose Jefferson, says that much of the information floating around about Inkwell is inaccurate. If you wish to read an article that she has edited for accuracy, please read this one: http://laist.com/2013/11/20/photos_v...to.php#photo-1

Beaudry Mar 8, 2018 5:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Charles (Post 8111991)
Amazing photos, Beaudry! :awesome:

I tried to visit the Calstatelib link you posted below, but the site would not accept my Los Angeles library card.

It seems that you require a California State library card to gain access, and such a card is not available to the general public, only to state employees - is that correct?

No, I guess it just takes certain steps...I'm certainly no State employee!

Let's see...go here http://www.library.ca.gov/ and up top it'll say "collections" which takes you here http://www.library.ca.gov/collections/ and from there choose "online collections" http://www.library.ca.gov/collection...e-collections/ and from there click "picture catalog" which takes you here http://catalog.library.ca.gov/F/JD6T...s_handle=GUEST and THEN!!! where it says "type word or phrase," there you go. Go nuts! If you're after downtown pix, you'd do well to add "Hylen" or "Reagh" to the search field as they shot a lot down there.

Here's something noirishers should know if they don't already—Cal State Library recently reupped their images with the ability to download as a large tiff. Totally changes the game. For example, I'd always known this image by Hylen to look like this

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4790/...ed807f16_o.png

but now you can blow these up to have detail like

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4779/...a0f203df_o.png

I know, incredible, right?

ScottyB Mar 8, 2018 6:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaudry (Post 8112122)
No, I guess it just takes certain steps...I'm certainly no State employee!

Let's see...go here http://www.library.ca.gov/ and up top it'll say "collections" which takes you here http://www.library.ca.gov/collections/ and from there choose "online collections" http://www.library.ca.gov/collection...e-collections/ and from there click "picture catalog" which takes you here http://catalog.library.ca.gov/F/JD6T...s_handle=GUEST and THEN!!! where it says "type word or phrase," there you go. Go nuts! If you're after downtown pix, you'd do well to add "Hylen" or "Reagh" to the search field as they shot a lot down there.

Here's something noirishers should know if they don't already—Cal State Library recently reupped their images with the ability to download as a large tiff. Totally changes the game. For example, I'd always known this image by Hylen to look like this

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4790/...ed807f16_o.png

but now you can blow these up to have detail like

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4779/...a0f203df_o.png

I know, incredible, right?

Thanks Beaudry, I have been quite frustrated by the small file sizes at CSL ....time for a visit!

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 7:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beaudry (Post 8112122)
No, I guess it just takes certain steps...I'm certainly no State employee!

Let's see...go here http://www.library.ca.gov/ and up top it'll say "collections" which takes you here http://www.library.ca.gov/collections/ and from there choose "online collections" http://www.library.ca.gov/collection...e-collections/ and from there click "picture catalog" which takes you here http://catalog.library.ca.gov/F/JD6T...s_handle=GUEST and THEN!!! where it says "type word or phrase," there you go. Go nuts! If you're after downtown pix, you'd do well to add "Hylen" or "Reagh" to the search field as they shot a lot down there.

Many thanks, Beaudry, I truly appreciate it! Thanks also to Flyingwedge, who sent me similar instructions via private message.

I know you cropped the photo you posted to highlight the building where the City News Service was, but the entire photo is even more impressive - just look at the steps of the courthouse building in the foreground!

https://i.imgur.com/RlCaHb4.jpg
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/F/R4SM...004&format=999

At Flyingwedge's suggested, I searched by entering the terms "broadway" and "temple", and the following photo showed up...

What a great picture! Not only can you see the City News Service building, but you can also see (the remains of) Court Flight at the bottom left of the photo!

https://i.imgur.com/Drjslno.jpg
http://catalog.library.ca.gov/F/R4SM...002&format=999

Scott Charles Mar 8, 2018 9:11 AM

Map of downtown LA's hills?
 
(Disclaimer for any lost soul who might stumble across this post: NONE of the "maps" in this post are real or accurate, they are quick, mock-up images I made for illustration purposes ONLY!)

Hey, folks!

I was wondering if anyone here possesses a map - or aerial photo - that shows the location and boundaries of the now-gone hills in downtown, LA?

Something that looks similar to this, maybe?

https://i.imgur.com/AZrqn0m.jpgGoogle Maps

Or perhaps something that looks like this:

https://i.imgur.com/ufxxYGZ.jpgNASA.gov

Certainly, some of the old hills are more easy to understand, but with say, Normal Hill - all I know is that the Public Library stands on what used to be Normal Hill. But I have no idea whether Normal Hill covered one square block or six square blocks! And as to Poundcake Hill, I'm pretty much completely lost!

I did do a Google search, but pretty much came up with squat. Even this article -The Lost Hills of Downtown Los Angeles - only gives very vague descriptions.

Does anyone have an image - either map or photograph - that shows the boundaries of these respective hills?

:help:

oldstuff Mar 8, 2018 3:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HossC (Post 8110106)
I downloaded a couple of aerials from UCSB, but I couldn't tell if the dark, circular object was a tree or a building. Then I checked Historic Aerials, and the tree showed up much clearer. I'd say it looks best in the 1964 image (below). The 1972 and 1980 images appear to show the tree getting smaller, and I think it's gone by 1994.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...tonBayFig1.jpg
Historic Aerials

If the Moreton Bay Fig was still standing, it would be about here.

http://i809.photobucket.com/albums/z...tonBayFig2.jpg
GSV

The "cousins" of the Moreton Bay Fig do remain around the edges of the gas station. They are probably Ficus Benjamina. All the Ficus trees here were originally imported. Don't forget the giant example in Santa Barbara ( I know it's not LA, but....)

odinthor Mar 8, 2018 4:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Charles (Post 8112198)
(Disclaimer for any lost soul who might stumble across this post: NONE of the "maps" in this post are real or accurate, they are quick, mock-up images I made for illustration purposes ONLY!)

Hey, folks!

I was wondering if anyone here possesses a map - or aerial photo - that shows the location and boundaries of the now-gone hills in downtown, LA?

Something that looks similar to this, maybe?

https://i.imgur.com/AZrqn0m.jpgGoogle Maps

Or perhaps something that looks like this:

https://i.imgur.com/ufxxYGZ.jpgNASA.gov

Certainly, some of the old hills are more easy to understand, but with say, Normal Hill - all I know is that the Public Library stands on what used to be Normal Hill. But I have no idea whether Normal Hill covered one square block or six square blocks! And as to Poundcake Hill, I'm pretty much completely lost!

I did do a Google search, but pretty much came up with squat. Even this article -The Lost Hills of Downtown Los Angeles - only gives very vague descriptions.

Does anyone have an image - either map or photograph - that shows the boundaries of these respective hills?

:help:

Well, gulp, not me; but I just wanted to pass along that, in contemplating Bunker Hill in the abstract, the name belies its origin: It seems to be the case that what we call Bunker Hill isn't actually named for a particular hill, but rather for a real estate project which was called the Bunker Hill Development because . . . the deal securing water service to the planned area was signed on Bunker Hill Day (June 17). The following doesn't mention the name, but talks about the deal: "In the year 1872 improvements were commenced in the hills [note the plural] West of Los Angeles city. These hills, although offering delightful sites for residences, from lack of water and difficulty of access, had not shared in the prosperity of the city, but had remained comparatively valueless and neglected. To the energy and perseverance, more especially of two men, Mr. P. Beaudry and Mr. J.W. Potts, is due the change that had taken place. Mr. Potts has, since 1872, expended in grading, principally upon the lines of Temple and Second streets, upwards of $30,000. Mr. Beaudry has in like manner expended upwards of $50,000. The work with which Mr. Beaudry’s name has been more especially linked is the furnishing of an abundant supply of water to these hill lands. Mr. Beaudry has had excavated a large basin amid the springs lying along upper Alameda street, from which, with a sixty horse power engine running a Hooker pump of the capacity of 40,000 gallons per hour, water is forced to an elevation of 240 feet, where it is received by two reservoirs with a storage capacity of 3,500,000 gallons, and thence distributed through eleven miles of iron pipes over the tops of the highest hills. These works have cost $95,000” (from what is usually known as the Centennial History, more properly An Historical Sketch of Los Angeles County, California, Los Angeles, California: Louis Lewin & Co., 1876, p. 128).

At one time I put some effort into trying to find any indication that the name "Bunker Hill" for the area preceded the development, without success. I indeed once found a map which was older than the development, and which displayed the name Bunker Hill where one would expect it . . . but then realized that that name had been written in on the map at some unknown time after the map had been created, so was inconclusive as evidence. My hasty check of the Los Angeles Times just now showed no mention of Bunker Hill at all until 1882 (the Times started publication in 1881); and, checking the early usages that year of the term, they are all specifically referring to the street Bunker Hill Avenue, not to the general area. And so, here is the challenge to all Los Angeles historians: What is the date of the first usage of the term "Bunker Hill" for the area we now know by that name?

_______

Edit add: Here are the two earliest references I can find in the L.A. Times to Bunker Hill as an area rather than as a specific street; and if the Holtons lived on Bunker Hill Avenue, then the first, earlier, item should be excluded:

https://s26.postimg.org/qy0xk9vq1/Bu_Hi.jpg
L.A. Times via ProQuest via CSULB Library.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.