Cultural Resource Management Report Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House

Transcription

1 Cultural Resource Management Report Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Including a Phase II Evaluation, Alternatives Analysis Outline, and Mitigation Plan Outline Prepared by: Hatheway & Associates Post Office Box 3246 Crestline, California and The Keith Companies 2955 Red Hill Avenue Costa Mesa, California Principal Investigator, History and Architecture: Roger Hatheway Hatheway & Associates Research Associate: Lora Hatheway Hatheway & Associates Project Manager and Archaeologist: Gavin Archer The Keith Companies Report Submitted January 6, 2003

2

3 A Cultural Resources Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House i Table of Contents 1. Abstract...1 Introduction...1 Purpose and Scope of Work...1 Limitations and Exceptions to the Report...2 Proposed Project Description and Location...2 Historical Resources and Environmental Setting...3 Methodology...4 Architectural Description: The Valencia Orange Growers Association Packing House Property and Associated Features...4 Summary Statement: Existing Conditions IVG Packing House and Building Complex...5 Historical Research...5 Historical Summary Statement: Determination of Significance for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House...6 Discussion of Alternatives...9 Analysis of Alternatives Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts Mitigation Measures Level Of Significance after Mitigation Impacts Overview Mitigation Measures for the Alternatives Environmentally Superior Alternative Introduction Purpose and Scope of Work Summary of CEQA Evaluation Limitations and Exceptions to the Report Project Location and Description Historical Resources and Environmental Setting Historic Preservation Law, Policies, and Mechanisms CEQA Regulatory Requirements Archaeology: Criteria for Evaluation California Register: Criteria for Listing Special (Criteria) Considerations - California Register Methodology Introduction Field Investigations Research Summary Statement - Methodology Architectural Description: The Irvine Valencia Orange Growers Association Packing House Property and Associated Features Historic Description (Appraisal Report) of IVG Buildings and Facilities In Previous Architectural Descriptions... 34

4 ii A Cultural Resource Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Architectural Description: Existing Conditions...39 Summary Statement - Conclusions: Alterations to IVG Building Complex Historical Background: The Orange Industry and Fruit Packing...43 Sunkist Growers and the Orange Packing Industry in California...43 A Basic Introduction to Growing, Harvesting, and Packing Citrus Background History: The California Cooperative/Association - An International and National Perspective...50 Summary Statement: A Background History of the California Cooperative - An International and National Perspective Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges, and The Irvine Ranch (a Select Reading List)...55 This Was Mission Country Orange County California: The Reflections in Orange of Merle & Mabel Ramsey by Warren F. Morgan...55 Orange County: A Centennial Celebration ( ) by Doris Walker...57 The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Editor Thomas Talbert...62 Orange County by Steve Emmons...65 The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland Orange County: The Case of the Disappearing Orange (A Select Reading List)...72 Orange County through Four Centuries by Leo J. Friis...72 The New California: Facing the 21 st Century by Dan Walters...73 A Farewell to the Orange Groves by Marv Wolf, New West Magazine...74 Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County? The Southern California Citrus Industry in Transition by Edward J. Bachus, Southern California Quarterly Orange County: An Alternate View of the Orange...78 A Century of Citrus by Jim Sleeper, The Santa Ana Register The Packing House and the Rules of the Cooperative/Association...82 Summary Statement: Packinghouses: Vital to the Industry The Packing House as an Operational Entity...85 Summary Statement: The Packing House as an Historic and Operational Entity The Packing House as a Social and Business Entity: An Academic View...90 The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt by Louis Reccow Laboring in the Packing House: Another Academic View...94 Labor and Community; Mexican Citrus Worker Villages in a Southern California County, by Gilbert G. Gonzalez Historical Background: The Railroad and the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House...99 Santa Fe s Venta Spur by Steve Donalson, Pacific Rail News...99 Summary Statement: Santa Fe s Venta Spur Organization and Business Structure: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Original 1926 Articles of Incorporation of Irvine Valencia Growers Original By-Laws of Irvine Valencia Growers

5 A Cultural Resources Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House iii Meeting Minutes of the Board of Directors and/or Stockholders Construction of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Initial/Preliminary Planning for Construction of a Packing House The Frances Citrus Association Connection Plans Rushed to Build Packing House Acquisition of Land from The Irvine Company Agreement between IVG and the Santa Fe Railroad First Addition to the Packing House Insurance Bond for Addition # Notice of Completion for Addition # Second Addition to the Packing House Notice of Completion for Addition # Summary Statement: Planning, Initial Construction and Early Additions to IVG Packing House Daily Operation of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Job Profiles Summary Statement: Job Descriptions: Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Trademarks of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Linen Satin Tweed Velvet Madras Irvale Serge An Interesting Historical Sidelight Summary Statement: Trademarks of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A Contemporary (Historic) View of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Citrus Packing Industry Creates Fame for County by Pat Coe, The Santa Ana Register Summary Statement: A Contemporary (Historic) View of IVG Biographical Review: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House G. P. Ferrel R. Ferrel William Bradford Hellis The Irvine Company and/or James Irvine George Jeffrey Mary Jeffrey Robert Jeffrey Los Alisos Company A. J. McFadden Ralph J. Mitchell Willis G. Mitchell Owen A. Murray Bennie Osterman J. H. Pankey C. E. Smith

6 iv A Cultural Resource Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House George H. Veeh Herbert Walker Walter West John L. Wheeler Summary Statement: A Biographical Review of IVG Historical Summary Statement: Determination of Significance for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 152 State: California Register Items (1-4) Summary: California Register Summary: Potential as District Contributor Discussion of Alternatives Defining the Alternatives for Analysis Analysis of Alternatives Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts CEQA Guidelines Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties Thresholds for Cumulative Impacts Approach to Evaluating Impacts to Historic Districts Summary Statement: District Impacts Mitigation Measures Introduction HABS Outline Format Documentation Level of Significance after Mitigation Impacts Overview Growth Inducing Impacts Cumulative Impacts Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Significant Irreversible Environmental Change Mitigation Measures for the Alternatives Environmentally Superior Alternative Bibliography Books and Reports City Directories Libraries Maps/Drawings Newspapers Periodicals Technical Bulletins And Reports Respondents Minutes of the Board of Directors Meetings Minutes of Stockholders Meetings Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws Real Estate Options

7 A Cultural Resources Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House v Correspondence/Miscellaneous Documents Appraisal Reports Valuable Trade-Mark Records Employee Job Descriptions

8 vi A Cultural Resource Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Appendices Appendix A - Figures...A-1 Figure 1 - Vicinity Map... A-2 Figure 2 - Location Map. Tustin 7.5 minute quadrangle map showing Kathryn Station and IVG packing house general site plan (photorevised 1981)... A-3 Figure 3 - Historic 1945 Santa Ana topography map showing Kathryn and Frances packing houses/sidings (railroad alignment highlighted). 15 minute quad.... A-4 Figure 4 - Original (1929) IVG site/building plan.... A-5 Figure 5 - Contemporary aerial.... A-6 Figure 6 - Site plan (existing) IVG packing house. 30th Street Architects.... A-7 Figure 7 - Section/upper floor packing house. 30th Street Architects.... A-8 Figure 8 - Lower floor IVG packing house.... A-9 Figure 9 - Pre cooler section/floor plan. 30th Street Architects.... A-10 Figure Insurance appraisal map. Site plan and building location/use.... A-11 Appendix B - Photographs...B-1 Photograph 1 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking westerly along Jeffrey. View azimuth 210 degrees... B-2 Photograph 2 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking easterly along Jeffrey. View azimuth 45 degrees.... B-3 Photograph 3 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking northerly. View azimuth 310 degrees... B-4 Photograph 4 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view packing house east elevation. View azimuth 170 degrees... B-5 Photograph 5 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view packing house / pre cooler east elevation. View azimuth 270 degrees... B-6 Photograph 6 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Entry elevation (north) packing house. View azimuth 160 degrees... B-7 Photograph 7 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall packing house / sheds along Jeffrey. View azimuth 80 degrees.... B-8 Photograph 8 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Packing house skylight detail.... B-9 Photograph 9 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Packing house loading platform shed. View azimuth 140 degrees...b-10 Photograph 10 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: basement access ramp north elevation....b-11 Photograph 11 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: basement access ramp south elevation...b-12 Photograph 12 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Interior packing house main floor looking southerly...b-13 Photograph 13 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Interior packing house basement...b-14 Photograph 14 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: connection between packing house and pre cooler...b-15 Photograph 15 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall pre cooler south and west elevations. View azimuth 340 degrees....b-16 Photograph 16 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. South elevation refrigeration and equipment. View azimuth 270 degrees...b-17 Photograph 17 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Easterly elevation pre cooler. View azimuth 295 degrees...b-18

9 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House vii Photograph 18 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: pre cooler art deco influence. View azimuth 225 degrees....b-19 Photograph 19 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Office building (13248). View azimuth 105 degrees....b-20 Photograph 20 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view metal sheds. View azimuth 140 degrees....b-21 Photograph 21 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Construction detail metal shed....b-22 Photograph 22 - New (non-historic) fruit packing building. View azimuth 155 degrees...b-23 Photograph 23 - Gargiulo packing building (13252 Jeffrey). View azimuth 90 degrees....b-24 Photograph 24 - Irvine Farm Management (13256 Jeffrey). View azimuth 240 degrees...b-25 Photograph 25 - Irvine Packing & Cooling (13250 Jeffrey). View azimuth 240 degrees....b-26 Photograph 26 - Home of entry sign for building complex businesses...b-27 Photograph 27 - Gas pumps. View azimuth 345 degrees...b-28 Photograph 28 - IVG office / mobile offices. View azimuth 165 degrees...b-29 Photograph 29 - Entry sign along Jeffrey: Irvine Packing & Cooling....B-30 Appendix C - Amended DPR 523 Form... C-1 Appendix D - Qualifications...D-1

10 viii A Cultural Resource Management Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House

11 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 1 1. Abstract Introduction This report represents an in-depth historical research effort providing a sufficient level of detail to evaluate the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House within a fully developed historical context. The level of information gathered allows for the placement of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, as required by CEQA, into the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The historical context and cultural resource evaluation portions of this report are complete and fully compliant with CEQA. For planning purposes, impacts, alternatives, and mitigation options are overviewed and discussed. These portions of the report, while based on substantive information, are intended as outlines only. Impacts, alternatives, and mitigation options should be further and more specifically analyzed and developed. Purpose and Scope of Work During the period extending from June 10, 2002 to June 30, 2002 the following report entitled, A Cultural Resource Management Report for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, was prepared by Hatheway & Associates under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for the Keith Companies Inc., Costa Mesa, California. This report was prepared to determine the historical and architectural significance of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and known or potential cultural resources associated with it. This report is classed as a Phase II evaluation in full compliance with CEQA Guidelines. In addition, Discussion of Alternatives, Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Impacts Overview outlines are provided for planning purposes only. In addition, this report has been prepared in accordance with the conditions, conclusions, and recommendations as contained in the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by The Keith Companies, Inc. The preparation of this report was designed to maximize the level of information gathered. Principals, specialists, and/or professionals were utilized throughout. Roger G. Hatheway served as the Principal Investigator, and was assisted by a qualified research associate. Mr. Hatheway has 26 years of qualifying experience as a Cultural Resource Management (CRM) specialist, having actively worked in the field of historic preservation for the entire period of time extending from 1976 to the present. Hatheway & Associates has prepared studies, extending nationwide, for a wide variety of federal, state, county, city and private clients.

12 2 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Limitations and Exceptions to the Report All conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based solely on studies as conducted within the defined and agreed upon scope of services. All opinions expressed are based on experience with similar studies, and on information gathered as part of the specific proposed investigation. The opinions contained in this report are based on visual observations made at the project site, on data gathered as part of the proposed historical and archival research process, and on information provided, in part, to Hatheway & Associates. If additional information is made available, and/or physical conditions change at the project site, Hatheway & Associates reserves the right to modify any and all opinions expressed. Any use of information contained in this report, or reliance on the conclusions and recommendations of this report for purposes other than those as stated in the proposal/scope of services, shall be the sole responsibility and liability of the party undertaking such use. Hatheway & Associates makes no warranty as to the accuracy of information provided by others as contained and/or quoted in this report, nor are there any other warranties or guarantees, either intended or implied, apart from the fact that the document has been prepared in accordance with accepted standards, practices, and guidelines similar to other Cultural Resource Management (CRM) specialists. Finally, none of the work conducted or any of the opinions expressed as part of the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall be regarded as or constitute a legal or binding opinion of any nature whatsoever. Specifically, the ultimate decision as to the significance of properties in the State of California rests with the Office of Historic Preservation and/or the California State Historic Resources Commission. Proposed Project Description and Location The packing house complex is located on the east side of Jeffrey Road between Trabuco Road and Irvine Boulevard (13000 block of Jeffrey Road) in unincorporated Orange County, California (see Appendix A, Figures 1-5). It lies in Planning Area 9 and the planned Jeffrey Open Space Spine (JOSS). The JOSS is a planned passive recreation and open space corridor running along the east side of Jeffrey Road between the Santa Ana (Interstate 5) Freeway and the open space area north of Portola Parkway. The spine will be 325 feet wide and total 117 acres. The land is currently under County of Orange jurisdiction and zoned for agricultural use. Rezoning of the JOSS for recreation-open space use and of the surrounding Northern Sphere for commercial and residential use is in progress. The City of Irvine plans to annex the Northern Sphere, including the JOSS land. The spine will have a park-like look, with trails meandering down the eastern side of Jeffrey Road. Parking will be available near the packing house site and toward the northern end of the spine. Design alternatives for the packing house include rehabilitation and conversion to mixed recreationcommercial use or demolition.

13 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 3 Historical Resources and Environmental Setting This report has been prepared in general accordance with CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, archaeological and historical resources are protected on private land by the California Environmental Quality Act (statute as amended January 1, 2001 Legislation: Guidelines as amended February 1, 2001). Appendix G Part (j) of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that a project will normally have a significant impact on the environment if it disrupts or adversely affects a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic or social group. Appendix K of the CEQA Guidelines further specifies that CEQA applies to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, and that public agencies should seek to avoid damaging effects on archaeological resources whenever feasible. If avoidance is not feasible, then Appendix K provides guidance on mitigating significant impacts. Note: Archaeological resources are not a part of the present report. These are addressed in the previously mention Keith Companies 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California. As required by CEQA Guidelines, portions of the present report analyze the potential historic resource impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental Setting discussion provides background information on: 1. Historic preservation law, preservation policies, and preservation mechanisms at the state level. 2. The potential historic nature/significance of existing structures on the project site. The Thresholds for Determining Significance discussion explains the nature of an historic resource impact, as defined by CEQA. The Project Impacts discussion addresses three main questions: (1) does the project area contain a significant historic resource; (2) will the project result in a significant impact to historic resources; and (3) will the project result in a significant impact to any historic district? The Mitigation section explains what is required to mitigate an historic resource impact and identifies any feasible mitigation measures for project impacts. Finally, the Level of Significance portion of this section identifies whether there are any historic resource impacts of the proposed project that cannot be mitigated.

14 4 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Methodology Field Investigations Various field studies were conducted beginning on June 10, All building features within and/or in the immediate vicinity of the project area were photographed, and field notes were taken for use in the preparation of written architectural descriptions. Additional photographs of the interior of the Packing House were taken on June 11, Research Meetings were also held June 10, 2002 with Irvine Valencia Growers office staff and Keith Companies staff regarding the acquisition of all previous reports/surveys regarding the property, and the acquisition of important historical records and access to archives pertaining to the historical growth and development of the property. The Special Collections at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) were consulted over a period of two days. At UCI, numerous references were collected regarding the orange industry in Orange County. Architectural Description: The Valencia Orange Growers Association Packing House Property and Associated Features The IVG facility has been described several times prior to preparation of the present report. Most notably, it was described: 1. in a 1976 Insurance Appraisal report as prepared by General Appraisers, 2. in a Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, as prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, 3. and in an August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared by The Keith Companies, Inc. Each of the above noted descriptions has been reviewed, and significant elements incorporated into the Architectural Description: Existing Conditions section of this report.

15 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 5 Summary Statement: Existing Conditions IVG Packing House and Building Complex Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Specifically, a comparison of historic maps to existing conditions reveals that numerous changes have taken place since construction of the facility beginning in The complex was completed in In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1928/1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised. The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building additions, are historic. Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance. Historical Research This report represents a massive research effort. This level of research was undertaken in recognition of the fact (results of field survey) that the ultimate determination of significance would likely be made as based upon historical information and not on architectural merits. Sections of this report containing historical material pertaining directly to the history, construction, and operation of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and Building Complex and/or the significance of various aspects of the orange industry in Orange County are:?? Historical Background: The Orange Industry and Fruit Packing?? Sunkist Growers and the Orange Packing Industry in California?? A Basic Introduction to Growing, Harvesting, and Packing Citrus?? Background History: The California Cooperative/Association -- An International and National Perspective?? Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges, and The Irvine Ranch (A Select Reading List)?? Orange County: The Case of the Disappearing Orange (A Select Reading List)?? Orange County: An Alternate View of the Orange?? The Packing House and the Rules of the Cooperative/Association?? The Packing House as an Operational Entity?? The Packing House as a Social and Business Entity: An Academic View?? Laboring In The Packing House: Another Academic View?? Historical Background: The Railroad and The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Organization and Business Structure: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Construction of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House

16 6 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Daily Operation of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Trademarks of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? A Contemporary (Historic) View of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Biographical Review: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Historical Summary Statement: Determination of Significance for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Note: The following conclusions are made based upon a field survey, and an in-depth archival research program in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. State: California Register Items (1-4) 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to this item. Numerous significant events are discussed in detail in sections of this report entitled:?? Background History: The California Cooperative/Association - An International and National Perspective;?? Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges,?? The Irvine Ranch (A Select Reading List); and?? Orange County: The Case of the Disappearing Orange (A Select Reading List) The most significant events that the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and Building Complex is associated with and/or that have made a significant contribution to the broad patters of California local history are: 1. The development of the California citrus industry and the California Cooperative. 2. The development of the Valencia orange industry in Orange County. Note here that the Valencia was identified at the official tree of Orange County in The development of The Irvine Ranch and/or The Irvine Company, and as a representative example of how the pervasive influence of the company was expressed in a version of the California Cooperative. 4. The association of the IVG Packing House with the Citrus Strikes of , and the significance of this event in the labor history of Orange County.

17 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 7 5. The association of the IVG Packing House with the decline of the orange industry in Orange County, and as a symbol of time and time past. 6. As an example of a packing house as a social, cultural, and business entity in California. These events are of true and undoubted significance. Additional events might also be considered (the role of the railroad, etc.), but the identified events (relevant to the broad patterns of California history) are sufficient to warrant a positive determination of significance in relation to this item. 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Despite the fact that the biographical research effort was limited to some degree by the sheer number of individuals associated with the IVG Packing House, it is unlikely that additional biographical information would identify any individual of overwhelming local significance or importance in relation to the IVG Packing House. Very simply, every individual researched, and for whom some information has been found, has some local significance. However, it must be understood that these individuals were a part of an Association and that no single individual researched had a singular influence on the establishment, construction, growth, and/or development of either IVG as a business or the IVG Packing House. Specifically, their individual home might be of significance (if it remains standing today), but the IVG Packing House cannot be regarded as significant in association with any one individual. This would include James Irvine himself. His signature is on the Land Conveyance document giving title of Irvine Company lands to IVG, but if every property having Irvine s signature on a document related to it were made significant, then half of Orange County would be potentially significant. No significant individual may, therefore, be said to be associated with the IVG Packing House. Rather, the IVG Packing House is here regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (see Item #1). 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Alterations to the historic IVG Packing House Building Complex include the following: Addition to Main Building/Packing House 2. Circa 1937 Pre Cooler Addition and 1969 Pre Cooler Addition Refrigeration and Equipment Storage Building 4. Demolition of Original Office Building (In Front of Main Building) 5. Shed Additions (Eventual Demolition of Several) 6. Garage and Storage Building Addition (Eventual Demolition of Same)

18 8 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 7. Boiler House Construction 8. Demolition of Several Equipment/Yard Features (Pump House, Etc.) 9. Construction of Present Irvine Packing & Cooling Building 10. Construction of Additional Fruit Packing Buildings 11. Construction of Irvine Farm Management Buildings 12. Numerous Small Additions (Platforms/Sheds/Docks) In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised. The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building additions, are historic. Regardless, the primary significance of the packing house is not related to architecture. Rather, the IVG Packing House is best regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (see Item #1). Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance. 4. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. This Item is primarily related to archaeological concerns. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #4 at the present time. No previously identified archaeological resources are known to be associated with the project area, and no resources were identified during the survey conducted as part of the present study. Summary: California Register The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #1. Summary: Potential as District Contributor This building does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing as a contributing feature to any type of architectural and /or historic district in accordance with California Register guidelines.

19 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 9 Discussion of Alternatives Note: This section is an outline only. Alternatives and mitigation options should be analyzed and discussed more fully and specifically. Defining the Alternatives for Analysis According to Section of the CEQA Guidelines: An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. Alternatives and Their Relationship To Project Impacts The alternatives included in the document are designed to address impacts according to CEQA Guidelines Section (b)(1): Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project s impact on historical resources shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant. Alternatives that are designed to comply in part or in full with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards would avoid or substantially lessen historic resource impacts. A brief background on the Secretary of the Interior s Standards is provided below. Secretary of the Interior s Standards The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties) provide four treatment approaches for dealing with historic structures:

20 10 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 1. Preservation This is defined as the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property: - Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. - Exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment. - The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation project. 2. Restoration This is defined as the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 3. Reconstruction The act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, features, and detailing of a surviving or non-surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. 4. Rehabilitation The act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features that convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. The two alternatives included in this document that address potential historic resource impacts are examples of restoration, reconstruction, and rehabilitation treatments. Relocation of the building is not presented as an alternative. The State Historic Resource Commission discourages removal from historical location (see Chapter 5). The resource s significance is largely association with events, not architectural. Even if a new location were compatible with the building s original character and use, relocation would not substantially lessen project impacts. Analysis of Alternatives Alternative #1 - No Project/No Change Note: The following alternative analysis applies to the No Project/No Change Alternative as well as the Preservation and Restoration of Existing Building Alternative.

21 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 11?? Historic Resources This alternative would result in no impacts to historic resources.?? Feasibility This alternative presents feasibility constraints with regards to the long-term operation of the facility.?? Project Objectives This alternative would not achieve the City s objective of providing additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project. Alternative #2 - Preservation, Restoration and Adaptive Reuse of Packing House Building Complex This alternative would result in beneficial impacts to historic resources, through the preservation and restoration of the IVG Packing House.?? Feasibility A number of feasibility constraints are associated with this alternative. Specifically, the restoration and preservation of the IVG Packing House building would be a time consuming and expensive proposition. Meeting current building codes and reversing the numerous alterations to the building units are also a consideration. The Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse, Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, estimated a cost of approximately $14M to $16M for preservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse.?? Project Objectives The cost of preservation and restoration would reduce the City s ability to provide additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project as planned. Alternative #3 - Preservation of Original Old Packing House Building Only?? Historic Resources This alternative would have a minimal impact on historic resources as it would first involve the demolition of a portion of the building complex (Pre Cooler, Refrigeration Building, and metal sheds) prior to reconstruction and preservation of the Old Main Building. The main building is, in fact, the original packing house, and the preservation and restoration of this building unit would result overall in beneficial impacts to historic resources.

22 12 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Feasibility A number of feasibility constraints are associated with this alternative. Specifically, the restoration and preservation of the IVG Packing House main building would be a time consuming and expensive proposition. Meeting current building codes, and reversing the numerous alterations to the building units are also a consideration. The Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse, Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, estimated a cost of approximately $14M to $16M for preservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse.?? Project Objectives The cost of preservation and restoration would reduce the applicant s ability to provide additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project as planned. Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts CEQA Guidelines According to CEQA Guidelines: A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. Substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired. The significance of an historical resource is materially impaired according to CEQA Guidelines (4)(b)(2) when a project: (A) (B) (C) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historic resource that convey its historic significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to (k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historic resources survey meeting the requirements of (g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historic significance and that justify its eligibility

23 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 13 for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA. Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties According to CEQA Guidelines: Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior s Standard for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource. Thresholds for Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact occurs when a proposed project, in combination with other past, current and probably future projects will have an impact on the environment. ***** As noted previously, this Thresholds for Determining Significance discussion explains the nature of an historic resource impact, as defined by CEQA. Specifically, 1. Does the project area contain a significant historic resource? The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House has been identified as a potentially significant historic resource in relation to California Register of Historic Places guidelines (Criterion 1). 2. Will the project result in a significant impact to historic, architectural, and/or archaeological resources? The proposed project will result in a significant impact to a potentially significant historic resource (The IVG Packing House) in relation to Threshold (A). 3. Will the project result in a significant impact to any historic district? Neither CEQA nor OHP provides guidance on specific thresholds of significance to use when evaluating potential impacts to historic districts verses impacts to individual buildings determined to be historical resources. In addition, neither CEQA nor the OHP provides specific guidance on how much material alteration can occur to a district, before it loses its historical significance.

24 14 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House National Register Bulletin 15 does provide some general guidelines for determining whether a district retains its integrity. According to the Bulletin: For a district to retain integrity as a whole, the majority of the components that make up the district s historic character must possess integrity even if they are individually undistinguished. In addition, the relationship among the district s components must be substantially unchanged since the period of significance. When evaluating the impact of intrusions upon the district s integrity, take into consideration the relative number, size, scale, design, and location of the components that do not contribute to the significance. A district is not eligible if it contains so many alterations or new intrusions that it no longer conveys the sense of a historic environment. No district has been identified in association with the IVG packing house. Summary Statement: District Impacts The project will not have a significant impact on any future proposed architectural or historical district. Mitigation Measures CEQA Guidelines provide the following guidance in determining whether impacts to an historic resource have been fully mitigated: (1) Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction or the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitation, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project s impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant. Alternatives that provide varying degrees of mitigation pursuant to (1) above are presented in the Discussion of Alternatives section of this report. (2) In some circumstances, documentation of an historic resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur.

25 Phase II Cultural Resources Management Report The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 15 Architecture The following mitigation measure, pursuant to (b) of the CEQA Guidelines, will reduce but not eliminate significant project impacts: A HABS outline format narrative description of the property, contemporary and historic photographs, and other relevant documentation shall be prepared by a historic consultant approved by the City. The report shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Director of Irvine, and an approved original deposited in the City of Irvine Public Library (or other suitable repository) prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the subject property. Level Of Significance after Mitigation The proposed mitigation measures will reduce, but not eliminate: Significant impacts to potential historic/architectural resources on the project site (Threshold A) resulting from their demolition. Project impacts to historical resources will remain significant after mitigation. Impacts Overview Growth Inducing Impacts The proposed project is growth inducing as it would foster population growth. Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact occurs when a proposed project, in combination with past, present and probable future developments, produces an impact which is considerable. No significant cumulative impacts on cultural resources are anticipated with regards to the proposed project (Please refer to the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by the Keith Companies Inc). The proposed project is, at the present time, the only major project that could adversely affect the potential historical significance of the IVG Packing House and building complex. The buildings are not associated with any proposed or potential architectural district. No other projects that would

26 16 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House affect this potential are currently proposed. There are, therefore, no cumulative historic resource impacts. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts The proposed project would result in the following unavoidable adverse impacts: The proposed project would result in significant unmitigated impacts to a potential historic resource as a result of the demolition of that resource. The project as proposed will result in significant unmitigated historic resource impacts to architectural resources (The IVG Packing House Building Complex) on the site. Significant Irreversible Environmental Change The proposed project would result in the irreversible loss of a potential historic resource. This would be an irreversible effect of the proposed project. Mitigation Measures for the Alternatives The following mitigation measure would apply to all but the No Project/No Change alternative, in order to ensure that development is consistent with any alternative approved by the City of Irvine. Documentation: Prior to any demolition or significant modification of buildings on the project site, a HABS outline format narrative description of the property, contemporary and historic photographs, and other relevant documentation shall be prepared by a historic consultant approved by the City of Irvine. The report shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Director of the City of Irvine and an approved original deposited in the City of Irvine Public Library (or other suitable repository) prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the project. Environmentally Superior Alternative All of the alternatives are environmentally superior to the proposed project that would result in the demolition of the IVG Packing House.

27 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Introduction Purpose and Scope of Work During the period from June 10, 2002 to June 30, 2002 the following report entitled, A Cultural Resource Management Report for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, was prepared by Hatheway & Associates under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for The Keith Companies Inc., Costa Mesa, California. This report was prepared to determine the historical and/or architectural significance of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and/or any known or potential cultural resources associated with it. This report is classed as a Phase II evaluation. The proposed scope-of-services, as appearing in the contract between Hatheway & Associates and The Keith Companies reads, in part: GENERAL INTRODUCTION Specifically, a Determination of Eligibility (DOE) statement shall be made for building components located on the subject property, and additional conclusions shall be made regarding a mitigation plan outline (if necessary) in accordance with appropriate state and local guidelines. The study shall be divided into two basic components: a field study and an historical research effort. The preparation of the report shall be a fully coordinated, step-by-step effort, designed to maximize the level of information gathered. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS Architectural The property shall be systematically surveyed. Photographs of all major structural features will be taken, as well as descriptive field notes regarding condition, style, method of construction, and integrity. Archival Research The archival portion of the research process shall consist of the consultation of a number of sources and repositories of information. Archival research may be completed at a wide variety of locations including libraries, museum archives and collections, and newspapers. This shall include review of previous area and site-specific cultural resource studies, and the consultation of significant books, periodicals, and reports of area-wide interest.

28 18 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House REPORT PREPARATION All information gathered as part of the field and archival investigations shall be incorporated into the final decision-making process regarding the cultural significance of the subject property in accordance with state and local guidelines. Please Refer To Attachment 1 For A Brief Description Of Appropriate Guidelines. The Determination of Eligibility Report shall include: 1. A methodology section 2. A field survey 3. Historical background 4. Previous research summary 5. Summary of findings 6. Conclusions and recommendations 7. Bibliography MITIGATION PLAN [OUTLINE] A mitigation plan outline shall be prepared for the property if any features are determined to be potentially eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places. The Mitigation Plan shall include (See also Gavin Archer Outline as FAXED to Hatheway & Associates): 1. A discussion of alternatives. 2. A discussion of the feasibility of alternatives. 3. A recommended mitigation plan which might include: a archival photography; b. HABS style/format research and report production; c. grading monitoring; d. moving of buildings In addition, this report has been prepared in accordance with the conditions, conclusions, and recommendations as contained in the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by The Keith Companies, Inc. The Keith Companies report notes: MANAGEMENT SUMMARY In March of 2001, The Keith Companies, Inc. (TKCI) of Costa Mesa, California was retained by the Irvine Community Development Company (ICDC), Irvine, California to conduct a Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory on a 1,226 acre parcel of land. The property is identified in the City of Irvine s General Plan as Planning Area 9 (PA 9). PA 9 is proposed for development and there is a potential that cultural resources could be impacted during construction. Phase I inventories are accomplished to identify historic or

29 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 19 prehistoric cultural resources that may exist on properties slated for development. Any cultural resources discovered must be evaluated for significance and eligibility pursuant to Section of the CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines). The locational relationship of historic or archaeological resources on the property to planned development is critical for evaluating any adverse effects development may have on the resource. Once the effect is understood, measures can be recommended and implemented to mitigate the effects. Effects may be mitigated through avoidance and preservation, simple recordation and grading monitoring, or by a scientifically designed data recovery program. Monitoring of cultural resources during construction is always mandatory regardless of the outcome of evaluative testing to ensure any previously unrecorded resources are managed properly. Investigations were undertaken to determine if a culture resources survey had ever been conducted and if cultural resources were recorded for the property. The results of that inquiry would indicate whether a new investigation of the property was required. A search of the records on file at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), Institute of Archaeology, California State University, Fullerton, California indicated that portions of the property had been formally surveyed during prior investigations and no historic or prehistoric sites were identified by those investigations in the surveyed areas. However, a review of the Santa Ana quadrangle indicated numerous structures existed on the property at that time but these too had not been indicated in prior reports. Overall, the results of the archival review indicated that a new inventory of the entire property was warranted to identify any cultural resources not previously reported on the property. TKCI accomplished a new inventory of the property in March of 2001 to locate cultural resources. The inventory consisted of a twofold approach: an assessment of the state of standing or fallen historic structures that might merit recordation with the SCCIC, and a systematic examination of the ground for evidence of historic or prehistoric cultural deposits. An old packinghouse was observed in operation on the property and TKCI conducted an onsite inspection of the facility and a literature review to determine its history. The packing house was recorded as an historical structure and listed with the SCCIC. No other historic structures were noted during this part of the investigation. Upon examination of the entire property, TKCI concluded that extensive commercial agricultural activities, consisting of various buildings, structures, roads, and crop rows, almost completely obscure the ground surface. These obstacles effectively hinder an adequate visual assessment of the ground on the property at this time. On the whole, there are only several small areas where the ground surface can be examined and most of those areas consist of disturbed soils, frequently containing road gravels or other imported materials, which prevent an objective assessment of the area. In sum, TKCI Cultural Resources division accomplished an adequate level of above ground investigation for standing or fallen historic structures and prehistoric deposits for this report. The following tasks were recommended by TKCI Cultural Resources division and were adopted in the Northern Sphere General Plan Amendment (see Draft EIR for the Northern Sphere Area):

30 20 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House * A monitor agreement must be in place for all grading activities on PA 9 to inspect active cuts for cultural resources. The focus of this task is to watch for unknown historic or prehistoric deposits or artifacts. Additionally, several areas on the property appear to have had historic structures erected in them in past years. Although evidence of any remains from these structures has yet been identified there is a potential for buried historical remains in the vicinity of these known locations. The monitor should be vigilant for the presence of any material remains from these sites. Newly discovered sites would require evaluative study. During any such evaluation work in proximity to the find must be halted or diverted while evaluative studies are accomplished. In the event an evaluation determines a newly found resource eligible under Section of the Guidelines work in proximity to the find must continue to be halted or diverted until a plan has been devised to mitigate the effects development will have on the resource. * Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a Phase II evaluation of the packing house must be accomplished to determine the sites eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources pursuant to Section of the Guidelines (2001 Keith Co.: i-iii). Specifically, this report, A Cultural Resource Management Report for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, has been prepared in accordance with the recommendations contained in the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by The Keith Companies Inc. The current report was prepared at the request of The Keith Companies. This report is compatible with recent guidelines relating to archaeological and historical resources according to CEQA (1970, as amended). The preparation of this report was designed to maximize the level of information gathered. Principals, specialists, and/or professionals were utilized throughout (see Appendix D). Roger G. Hatheway served as the Principal Investigator and was assisted by a qualified research associate. Mr. Hatheway has 26 years of qualifying experience as a Cultural Resource Management (CRM) specialist, having actively worked in the field of historic preservation for the entire period of time extending from 1976 to the present. Hatheway & Associates has prepared studies, extending nationwide, for a wide variety of federal, state, county, city, and private clients. Summary of CEQA Evaluation As required by CEQA, this document describes the environmental setting, identifies potential environment impacts, and develops mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the proposed project. Analysis of each impact issue area includes the following components:

31 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Historical Resources/Environmental Setting: This is discussed in detail in the sections entitled Guidelines for Assessment, Background History, and Evaluation of Historical, Architectural and Archaeological Resources. The environmental issues discussed in this document include:?? Historical and Architectural Resources Note: Prehistoric/Native American archaeological concerns are not a part of the present project. 2. Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts: Here defined as the amount or type of impact that constitutes a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment. Some thresholds are quantitative (e.g., change in historical resources), while others are intended to help the reader understand why the document has concluded that a particular impact is considered significant or not significant. The report makes the following determinations:?? Determining Significance Of Potential Impacts 1. Does the project area contain a significant historic resource? 2. Will the project result in a significant impact to historic, architectural, and/or archaeological resources? 3. Will the project result in a significant impact to any historic district??? Recommendations for Future Ongoing CEQA Compliance Based upon the final determination of impacts, suggested recommendations for future CEQA compliance are made for: 1. History and Architecture Limitations and Exceptions to the Report All conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based solely on studies as conducted within the defined and agreed upon scope-of-services. All opinions expressed are based on experience with similar studies, and on information gathered as part of the specific proposed investigation. The opinions contained in this report are based on visual observations made at the project site, on data gathered as part of the proposed historical and archival research process, and on information provided, in part, to Hatheway & Associates. If additional information is made available, and/or physical conditions change at the project site, Hatheway & Associates reserves the right to modify

32 22 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House any and all opinions expressed. Any use of information contained in this report, or reliance on the conclusions and recommendations of this report for purposes other than those as stated in the proposal/scope-of-services, shall be the sole responsibility and liability of the party undertaking such use. Hatheway & Associates makes no warranty as to the accuracy of information provided by others as contained and/or quoted in this report, nor are there any other warranties or guarantees, either intended or implied, apart from the fact that the document has been prepared in accordance with accepted standards, practices, and guidelines similar to other Cultural Resource Management (CRM) specialists. Finally, none of the work conducted or any of the opinions expressed as part of the conclusions and recommendations of this report shall be regarded as or constitute a legal or binding opinion of any nature whatsoever. Specifically, the ultimate decision as to the significance of properties in the State of California rests with the Office of Historic Preservation and/or the California State Historic Resources Commission.

33 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Project Location and Description The packing house complex is located on the east side of Jeffrey Road between Trabuco Road and Irvine Boulevard (13000 block of Jeffrey Road) in unincorporated Orange County, California (see Appendix A, Figures 1-5). It lies in Planning Area 9 and the planned Jeffrey Open Space Spine (JOSS). The JOSS is a planned passive recreation and open space corridor running along the east side of Jeffrey Road between the Santa Ana (Interstate 5) Freeway and the open space area north of Portola Parkway. The spine will be 325 feet wide and total 117 acres. The land is currently under County of Orange jurisdiction and zoned for agricultural use. Rezoning of the JOSS for recreation-open space use and of the surrounding Northern Sphere for commercial and residential use is in progress. The City of Irvine plans to annex the Northern Sphere, including the JOSS land. The spine will have a park-like look, with trails meandering down the eastern side of Jeffrey Road. Parking will be available near the packing house site and toward the northern end of the spine. Design alternatives for the packing house include rehabilitation and conversion to mixed recreationcommercial use or demolition.

34 24 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 4. Historical Resources and Environmental Setting As required by CEQA Guidelines, portions of this document analyze the potential historic resource impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental Setting discussion provides background information on: 1. Historic preservation law, preservation policies, and preservation mechanisms at the state level. 2. The potential historic nature/significance of existing structures on the project site. The Thresholds for Determining Significance discussion explains the nature of an historic resource impact, as defined by CEQA. The Project Impacts discussion addresses three main questions: (1) does the project area contain a significant historic resource; (2) will the project result in a significant impact to historic resources; and (3) will the project result in a significant impact to any historic district? The Mitigation section explains what is required to mitigate an historic resource impact and identifies any feasible mitigation measures for project impacts. Finally, the Level of Significance portion of this section identifies whether there are any historic resource impacts of the proposed project that cannot be mitigated.

35 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Historic Preservation Law, Policies, and Mechanisms CEQA Regulatory Requirements Note: Prehistoric/Native American archaeological concerns and issues are not a part of the present project. Prehistoric and historical resources are protected on private land by the California Environmental Quality Act (statute as amended January 1, 2001 Legislation: Guidelines as amended February 1, 2001). Appendix G part (j) of the CEQA Guidelines specifies that a project will normally have a significant impact on the environment if it disrupts or adversely affects a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community, or ethnic or social group. Appendix K of the CEQA Guidelines further specifies that CEQA applies to historic and prehistoric archaeological resources, and that public agencies should seek to avoid damaging effects on archaeological resources whenever feasible. If avoidance is not feasible, then Appendix K provides guidance on mitigating significant impacts. Archaeology: Criteria for Evaluation In accordance with the criteria for site significance outlined in CEQA Appendix K, a site is significant if it meets any of the following criteria. A. Is associated with an event or person of: 1. Recognized significance in California or American history; 2. Recognized scientific importance in prehistory; B. Can provide information that is both of demonstrable public interest and useful in addressing reasonable archaeological research questions; C. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; D. Is at least 100 years old and possesses stratigraphic integrity; or E. Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can only be answered with archaeological methods.

36 26 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House California Register: Criteria for Listing The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is a state version of the National Register of Historic Places program. The California Register of Historical Resources program was enacted in 1992, and became official January 1, Potential historic resources are evaluated for inclusion in the California Register using the same four criteria as the National Register (though the California Register criteria are numbered (1-4) rather than lettered (A-D). An historical resource must be significant at the local, state or national level under one or more of the following four criteria: 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; 4. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. All resources nominated for listing must have integrity, which is the authenticity of a historical resource s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource s period of significance. Resources, therefore, must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. It must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria under which a resource is proposed for nomination. Special (Criteria) Considerations - California Register?? Moved buildings, structures or objects. The State Historical Resources Commission (SHRC) encourages the retention of historical resources on-site and discourages the non-historic grouping of historic buildings into parks or districts. However, it is recognized that moving an historic building, structure, or object is sometimes necessary to prevent its destruction. Therefore, a moved building, structure, or object that is otherwise eligible may be listed in the California Register if it was moved to prevent its demolition at its former location and if the new location is compatible with the original character and use of the historical resource. An historical resource should retain its historic features and compatibility in orientation, setting, and general environment.

37 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Methodology Introduction The preparation of this report was part of a fully coordinated, step-by-step effort designed to maximize the level of information gathered. Principals, specialists, and/or professionals were utilized throughout. Roger G. Hatheway served as the principal investigator, and was assisted by a qualified research associate. Field Investigations Various field studies were conducted beginning on June 10, All building features within and/or in the immediate vicinity of the project area were photographed, and field notes were taken for use in the preparation of written architectural descriptions. Additional photographs of the interior of the packing house were taken on June 11, Research Meetings were also held June 10, 2002 with Irvine Valencia Growers office staff and The Keith Companies staff regarding the acquisition of all previous reports/surveys regarding the property, and the acquisition of important historical records and access to archives pertaining to historical growth and development of the property. The Special Collections at the University of California, Irvine, were consulted over a period of two days. At UCI, numerous references were collected regarding the orange industry in Orange County. Summary Statement - Methodology This report represents an in-depth historical research effort providing a sufficient level of detail to evaluate the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House within a fully developed historical context. Previously confusing and/or unclear historical dates and associations, including the dates of construction of buildings, have been clearly established. Finally, the level of information gathered allows for the placement of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, as required by CEQA, into the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.

38 28 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 7. Architectural Description: The Irvine Valencia Orange Growers Association Packing House Property and Associated Features The Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) facility has been described several times prior to preparation of the present report. Most notably, it was described: 1.) in a 1976 Insurance Appraisal report as prepared by General Appraisers, 2.) in a Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, as prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. and dated September 6, 2001, and 3.) in an August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared by The Keith Companies, Inc. Each of the above noted descriptions has been reviewed, and significant elements incorporated into the Architectural Description: Existing Conditions section of this report. Historic Description (Appraisal Report) of IVG Buildings and Facilities In 1976 Note: The following information is contained in an historic June 11, 1976 appraisal report entitled Appraisal Report: Construction and Equipment, Irvine Valencia Growers, East Irvine, California, as prepared by the General Appraisal Company for IVG. This is a massive document consisting of 380+ pages of detailed information describing the construction of all building features and a listing of each and every piece of equipment contained in every building. This information has been incorporated into the Existing Architectural Description portion of this report (see below), including the historic identification and use of various extant building features. Please note that the dates of construction referred to erroneously in several instances in the appraisal report have been corrected as a result of research conducted during preparation of the present A Cultural Resource Management Report for The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House. OFFICE BUILDING #1?? Construction A 15 4 x 56, 12 x 50, 12 8 x 12 8, 19 2 x 27 4 and 12 x 13 4 single story concrete block and wood frame structure with 5 6 x 27 4, 6 x 41, 6 x 12 and 4 x 12 8 covered canopy.?? Erected 1969.?? Gross Floor Area: Building 2,301 Sq. Ft. Covered Canopy 519 Sq. Ft.

39 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 29?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing?? Exterior Walls Reinforced concrete block, split face 1 side, painted concrete filled, and Plaster two sides, 2x4 studs, 16 center to center, 4x4 posts, 48 center to center, painted.?? Floor Reinforced concrete?? Roof Built-up composition roofing PACKING HOUSE BUILDING #2?? Construction A 133 x 212 basement and one-story concrete and wood and steel frame structure x 65 concrete ramp. 24 x 53 6 concrete ramp. 7 4 x 19 entrance platform x 16 concrete and concrete block platform. 5 to 20 x 19 6 to 24 6 concrete platform. 22 x 110 canopy.?? Erected ?? Gross Floor Area: Basement 29,022 Sq. Ft. First Floor 28,196 Sq. Ft. Ramps 2,769 Sq. Ft. Platforms 614 Sq. Ft. Canopy 2,420 Sq. Ft. Total 63,021 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing and concrete pier footing?? Exterior Walls Reinforced concrete, and concrete wall beam?? Floors Reinforced concrete?? First Floor Reinforced concrete above ground. Maple flooring on 1x6 diagonal sheathing on 3x14 joists, 16 center to center, painted.?? Roof Built-up composition roofing on sheathing, painted PRECOOLER BUILDING #3?? Construction A 64 x 110 and 13 x 39 6 part basement and two story concrete and wood frame structure.?? Erected ?? Gross Floor Area:

40 30 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Basement 7,268 Sq. Ft. First Floor 7,553 Sq. Ft. Second Floor 7,040 Sq. Ft. Total 21,861 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing, and reinforced concrete pier footing.?? Exterior Walls Reinforced concrete?? Floors Reinforced concrete?? First Floor D&M flooring on 2 x6 sheathing on 3 x16 joists, 16 center to center painted.?? Second Floor D&M flooring on 2 x6 sheathing on 3 x16 joists, 16 center to center painted.?? Roof Built-up composition roofing PRECOOLER BUILDING #4?? Construction A 41 9 x 77 6 and 13 4 x 35 4 AND 11 6 x 12 8 single story and mezzanine concrete block and wood frame structure, with 17 6 x 88 6, 11 x 41 9, 11 6 x 22, 5 x 27 2, 5 2 x 27 2 to 32 and 22 to 29 4 x 6 10 concrete and concrete block dock.?? Erected 1969?? Gross Floor Area: First Floor 3,707 Sq. Ft. Mezzanine 145 Sq. Ft. Dock 2,565 Sq. Ft. Total 6,417 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing, Reinforced concrete pier, and Reinforced concrete pier footing.?? Walls Reinforced concrete block wall.?? Floors First Floor Reinforced concrete.?? Mezzanine ¾ plywood on 2 x10 joists, 16 center to center painted plaster soffit?? Roof Built-up composition roofing REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT & STORAGE BLDG. #5?? Construction

41 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 31 A 30 8 x 101 and 40 4 x 64 x 15 9 to 18 9 high, single story concrete and wood and steel frame structure.?? Erected 1939?? Gross Floor Area 5,678 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing, reinforced concrete pier, and concrete pier footing?? Walls Concrete with 4 cork insulation?? Floor D&M flooring on 2x12 plank on 4 cork on 4 concrete.?? Roof Tar and gravel roofing on 4 cork on 2 x6 T&G sheathing, painted GARAGE BUILDING #6?? Construction A 16 3 x 18 2 x 8 to 11 6 high single story wood frame structure.?? Erected ?? Gross Floor Area 295 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations 6 x 12 Concrete Wall Footing.?? Walls Drop siding one side, 2 x4 studs, 24 center to center painted?? Floor Concrete?? Roof Roll roofing on 1 x4 sheathing on 2x4 rafters, 24 center to center on wood framing GARAGE AND STORAGE BUILDING #7?? Construction A 43 x 144 single story concrete and wood frame structure.?? Erected 1944?? Gross Floor Area 6,192 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Reinforced concrete wall footing?? Walls Reinforced concrete, and corrugated galvanized iron siding?? Floor Reinforced concrete floor STORAGE BUILDING #8?? Construction A 32 x 80 x 12 high to eaves, open front galvanized iron wood frame single story structure.?? Erected 1938

42 32 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Gross Floor Area 2,560 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Concrete wall footing, and concrete pier footing?? Walls Corrugated galvanized iron?? Floor Earth?? Roof Corrugated galvanized iron roofing STORAGE BUILDING #9?? Construction A 32 x 80 x 12 to eaves, open front galvanized iron single story structure.?? Erected 1938.?? Gross Floor Area 2,560 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Concrete wall footing, and deep concrete pier footing?? Walls High average corrugated galvanized iron?? Roof Corrugated galvanized iron roofing BOILER HOUSE #10?? Construction A 16 x 31 x 10 6 high (average) metal clad steel frame single story structure.?? Erected 1959?? Gross Floor Area 496 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Concrete wall footing?? Floor Reinforced concrete floor?? Walls Corrugated galvanized iron siding?? Roof Corrugated galvanized iron roofing GAS HOUSE BUILDING #11?? Construction A 10 x 16 2 x 7 high, galvanized iron clad wood frame structure.?? Erected 1937.?? Gross Floor Area 160 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Concrete wall footing

43 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 33?? Walls?? Floor?? Roof Corrugated galvanized iron siding Concrete Corrugated galvanized iron roofing WATER PUMP HOUSE BUILDING #12?? Construction A 9 x 24 x 7 high single story galvanized iron clad wood frame structure.?? Erected 1927?? Gross Floor Area 216 Sq. Ft.?? Foundations Concrete wall footing?? Floor Concrete?? Walls Corrugated galvanized iron siding?? Roof [This information was not provided in the appraisal report.] YARD?? Underground Water and Drain Pipe?? Paving?? Fire Protection EQUIPMENT?? Underground Storage Tank?? Underground Tank?? Water Tank?? Piping?? Metal Picking Bins Summary Statement 1976 Appraisal Report Clearly, the IVG building complex has been altered during the period of time extending from 1976 to the present. Most notably, all of the original building equipment has been removed, and several sheds/garages have been moved and/or demolished.

44 34 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Previous Architectural Descriptions The IVG Packing House has been previously described in some detail twice before. No attempt has been made here to correct and/or edit either of the two previous descriptions. They are, however, largely accurate from a descriptive standpoint, and provide excellent background information regarding both the Packing House and Historic Building Complex. Please note that the dates of construction referred to erroneously in several instances in each previous architectural description have been corrected as a result of research conducted during preparation of the present A Cultural Resource Management Report for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House. Previous Architectural Description #1: Feasibility Study Note: The following description is taken from the excellent report entitled Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, as prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, Introduction The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and Pre-Cooler buildings are located within an existing packing and shipping compound on Jeffery Road, approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the Interstate 5 Freeway. There are currently over a dozen structures on the site, but these two buildings, constructed in 1926, were the original structures at the site. Throughout this report, graphics are found on the pages following the text they support. The area surrounding the structures is transitioning to new uses and the packing and shipping uses will be abandoned at the site. The two buildings represent the origins of the packing and shipping of agricultural products and therefore are considered contributors to the history of the area. The City of Irvine has commissioned this study to evaluate the feasibility of implementing an adaptive reuse plan for the two structures. Because of the historical nature of the buildings, this report assumes that the adaptive reuse would meet recognized historical standards for rehabilitation. Existing Conditions Site: The two buildings are set approximately 115 feet from Jeffery Road, and are surrounded by relatively flat parking, loading and storage areas comprised primarily of AC paving, with some concrete aprons. The site has a number of service power poles, fire hydrants and other utility elements. There is a separate driveway for a road leading under the Packing House which serves the lower level for loading/unloading. The property to the north of the buildings will be used for a community pedestrian/bicycle pathway. It is assumed for this study that all buildings except for the Packing House and Pre- Cooler building will be removed, and the areas to the west, south and east of the building will be used for parking and possibly for other outdoor activities, such as exhibits, seating, etc.

45 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 35 Architectural - Packing House: The Packing House has two floors, each approximately 28,000 sq. ft., with the lower floor being partially subterranean. The exterior walls are constructed of board formed concrete and are assumed to be reinforced with steel. The walls appear to be in good condition, with no significant cracking or water infiltration apparent. There is minor spalling at some vertical concrete surfaces surrounding the service driveway, perhaps caused by damage from collisions with vehicles. The walls have been painted, over the years, and generally the paint is in medium to poor condition. The exterior walls are penetrated by a myriad of windows, person-doors, and service doors, constructed of wood and steel. There are windows to the lower floor at both the north and south sides. A new canopy is located at the north side of the building which likely would be removed. A tin structure is attached to the south side of the building, at the west side, which would also likely be removed. The interior perimeter walls are painted board formed concrete. The first floor has restrooms and a lunchroom at the northwest corner. The rooms are constructed of stud walls with wood finish at the packinghouse side and a plaster finish at the interior of the rooms. The restrooms do not meet ADA standards. Two large storage areas at the south end of the packing house are partitioned by a concrete wall with some hollow clay tile infill. Steel columns are spaced at wide intervals at the upper level, and appear to be continuous through to the lower level into foundation. The ceiling/roof structure is primarily a steel truss system with vertical clerestories of a sawtooth design that allows north light into the working area. The ceiling is painted, exposed wood rafters with perpendicular wood planking. There is a firesprinkler system exposed at the ceiling. The roofing is mineral cap, and appears to be years old. The vertical clerestories are steel frame and single glazed. The upper level floor is plywood sheathing with a good portion covered in steel sheets. The lower level has a concrete service drive at the southern part of the building, which is approximately 4-5 feet lower than the finished floor, to allow for ease of loading and unloading. Just north of this drive, the column system is of concrete, while the majority of the remaining 11 x 6 column grid is composed of 12x12 wooden columns. The ceiling of the lower level is of painted exposed floor joists and diagonal floor sheathing. The floor is concrete. The building does not meet the requirements of ADA for access, restrooms, handrails, stairs, and floor level changes. Structural Packing House: The Packing House has concrete exterior wall, a concrete floor at the lower floor, a wood framed upper floor, and a steel truss with wood framed roof. The column system includes concrete, steel and wooden elements. Generally, the concrete walls appear to be in good condition, with only minor spalling occurring where water had infiltrated at one location. The floor/ceiling assembly between floors has a few conditions where floor joists have failed, but generally the system is in good condition.

46 36 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The roof system at the upper level shows little sign of deflection, and generally appears to be in good condition with no visible signs of distress. The Structural Engineers report is presented in the Appendix. Mechanical - Packing House: The Packing House has no HVAC system at either floor, for it is an open air working area. Cross ventilation is accomplished by operable clerestory windows, doors, and windows. Plumbing - Packing House: The Packing House only has minimal restrooms at the upper level, which would not meet current codes for conservation or ADA requirements. The sewer lines are suspended under the upper floor, and are visible from the ceiling of the lower floor. They show signs of leaking. Electrical - Packing House: The Packing House has multiple services entering the buildings, as well as systems that are apparently disconnected. The current active service appears to be a 600A/277/480 volt, single phase, which passes through a transformer to provide 120/240 volts, also believed to be single phase. The lighting system is open lamp strip fixtures, which are currently not allowed to be produced or used. There is no sign of illuminated exit signs or egress lighting. There is minimal power being dispersed by drop cords and a few wall outlets. The exterior has utilitarian flood lighting. The Mechanical, Plumbing and Electrical Engineer s report is presented in the Appendix. Architectural - Pre Cooler: The Pre Cooler building has a three level center portion with single story wings at the east and west, for a total of approximately 31,000 sq. ft. The exterior walls of the three story portion and the wing to the east are constructed of board formed concrete and are assumed to be reinforced with steel. The walls of the western single story portion is concrete block. The walls generally appear to be in good condition, with no significant cracking or water infiltration apparent, except for the furthermost western wall which has considerable spalling. The walls have been painted over the years, and generally the paint is in medium to poor condition. The exterior walls of the three story portion are solid, with no windows and only three doors. The wing to the east has steel windows and doors, and the western wing has doors only. There is large loading dock at the southern end of the building which has a metal canopy. All portions of the building have a flat roof, which was not inspected. There was no sign of current roof leakage at the roof from the interior. The interior of the east and west wings have no significant interior walls. The interior of the three level space has wood frame devising walls, which are covered with a cork insulation. The three level space has wood framed floors. The floor at the east and west wings and the lowest level of the center portion is concrete. There is no visible firesprinkler system.

47 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 37 The structure does not meet the requirements of ADA for access, restrooms, handrails, stairs, and floor level changes. Structural - Pre Cooler: The Pre Cooler has concrete exterior walls on the majority of the building, and a concrete block wall addition at the west side. The floors and roof system are wood framed. The eastern single story portion has a steel girder system at the roof, with wood rafters and sheathing. Although not visible, it is likely that the three story roof has a similar construction. The concrete walls generally appear to be in good condition, except for at the eastern exterior wall, which has spalling as described above. Mechanical - Pre Cooler: The Pre Cooler has no HVAC system. The building is equipped with shafts and equipment for cooling of the cold rooms. Plumbing - Pre Cooler: The Pre Cooler has no restrooms, and the only plumbing visible was drains for condensation. Electrical - Pre Cooler: The Pre Cooler has an electrical service and the panel appears to be original. The lighting system throughout is incandescent lamps in keyless sockets, which does not meet current code. The exterior has utilitarian flood lighting. The Mechanical, Plumbing and Electrical Engineer s report is presented in the Appendix (Thirtieth Street Architects 2001: 1-5). Previous Architectural Description #2: Phase I Inventory Note: The following description is taken from the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by The Keith Companies Inc. Please note that the dates of construction referred to have been corrected as a result of research conducted during preparation of the present A Cultural Resource Management Report for The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House. Site Visit and Inspection A site visit was arranged with Mr. Dominic Etcheberria, General Manager for the Irvine Valencia Growers for the morning of April 4, Mr. Etcheberria kindly conducted the walk around, providing detailed information about the facility. The packing house is currently leased to Weyerhaeuser Box Company. Plastic strawberry containers are manufactured onsite.

48 38 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Exterior According to Mr. Etcheberria (personal communication 2001), the packing house was built in The building is roughly rectangular in shape and is oriented Northwest/Southeast, with the front of the structure facing northwest towards Jeffrey Road. It was constructed of poured concrete and currently has a composition tile roof. The packing building has a saw-toothed roof, which contains the glass and steel skylighting. The roof of the cooling rooms appears to be flat, but it was not directly observed. The structure is in good condition and appears to be maintained very well. The packinghouse complex consists of two main elements; the main packing plant, closest to Jeffrey Road and the refrigeration/cooling room, behind the packinghouse. The cooling facility consists of five rooms of varying size. Although the structures do not share a common wall (separated by an open walkway), they share a common foundation also manufactured of poured concrete. Additions were made to the cooling plant in the mid 1980s. The exterior of the buildings exhibits a pilastered facade on all four sides of the two structures. Some of the detailing is obscured by more recent awnings; especially on the east side of the building. A series of six wooden chutes of unknown use protrude from the west side of the packing plant. They are not in current use. An additional chute of different design also extends from the west elevation. There is evidence of other chutes on the west wall that were removed. The packing plant structure is three levels in height including a full basement. Driveway access to the basement floor permitted trucks to unload their oranges within the building. The oranges were then transported by conveyor belts to the ground floor where they were sorted and packed. Sliding wooden doors on the east side of the structure gave access to railroad cars where the fruit crates were loaded directly from the packing room. The upper floor, consisting of a wood frame penthouse, may have served as an office facility. It was assessed from the outside only, and appears to extend over a small portion of the packinghouse structure. Interior The packing house is divided into four rooms: the main packing plant which encompasses at least ninety-five percent of the floor space, a small room, now used for a kitchen, and two bathrooms. The three smaller rooms are located at the north end of the building immediately right of the front door when entering. The original tongue and gro[o]ve hardwood floor, installed over twelve inch wide pine board subflooring, remains in good condition. It is covered by plywood sheets as reinforcement for the forklifts that are used for moving pallets of cardboard boxes inside the main structure. Interior lighting was originally provided by the skylights in the roof. Florescent tube lighting was installed at a later date to supplement the natural light. The structure is strengthened by steel support beams, while the main floor is supported by steel reinforced concrete pillars in the basement. All major interior construction appears to date to the original construction period. Functioning sliding wooden doors are still attached at the entrance and exit to the basement unloading docks and on the main floor of the building. Auxiliary Structures Five corrugated metal sheds stand west of the main packing plant. They appear to be contemporary in age to the poured concrete structures and may have served as auxiliary

49 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 39 maintenance sheds. Multiple structures are shown on the 1942 USGS 15 quad map. The sheds are currently in use and are in good condition. A railroad spur once lay along the eastern side of the packinghouse. Box cars were loaded directly from the packing plant through doors on the east side. The railroad line no longer exists. It was a spur line that terminated at the packinghouse and was called Kathryn by the AT&SF railroad. The spur extended northwest to the next stop at Frances, before looping south to connect with the main line. The spur line did not extend beyond the Kathryn stop (2001 The Keith Companies, Inc.: 23-24). Architectural Description: Existing Conditions The following descriptions are purposely concise. They are written in a manner that avoids duplication of any previous description.?? Irvine Valencia Growers Facility?? Site (Photographs 1,2,3) The overall site/built environment is comprised of both the historic packing house and a number of newer fruit packing and farm management buildings. The larger site is bounded on the east by a strawberry field, on the north by Jeffrey Road, on the west by the Irvine Packing & Cooling complex and the Irvine Farm Management complex, and on the south by the Gargulio fruit packing facility. The overall impression is one of an agricultural/industrial building complex. Interestingly, despite the fact that the majority of buildings comprising the overall site/building complex are of recent construction and are not significant architecturally, the agricultural/industrial design theme is philosophically the same as that of the original 1928/1929 building complex. The historic building complex is comprised of the Main Building: the Old Packing House, a Pre Cooler Building with Additions, a Refrigeration Building, Metal Sheds, and an Office.?? Historic Building Complex?? Main Building: Old Packing House (Photographs 4-14) The main building is designed in an Industrial/Utilitarian architectural style. It is constructed in a rectangular building plan, and has a main floor with basement. It has several additions. The Main Building consists of a 133 x212 basement and one-story wood and steel frame structure. The basement has a gross floor area of 29,022 sq. ft., the first floor

50 40 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House has a gross floor area of 28,196 sq. ft, ramps 2,769 sq. ft., platforms 614 sq. ft., and a canopy of 2,420 sq. ft., for a total area of 63,021 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the walls are of reinforced concrete with concrete wall beam, and the floors are of reinforced concrete (some maple flooring). The roof is built-up composition roofing. The main elevation (entry façade) fronts on Jeffrey Road. It is of a simple, utilitarian design, and is dominated by what have previously been described as sawtooth skylights. While interesting, these skylights are not an unusual architectural feature for an industrial building of this age. Specifically, many industrial buildings constructed before the advent of air conditioning and the heavy use of artificial lighting incorporated similar skylights into their design. The purpose was to save costs on electricity for lighting, and to provide ventilation. The building has been altered by several major additions and by numerous minor modifications. This includes an addition to the westerly side of the building, the addition of two Pre Cooler and Refrigeration buildings to the south, removal of all original equipment, the removal of the original office, and the addition of various canopies and platforms.?? Pre Cooler with Additions and Refrigeration Building (Photographs 14-18) The building that is generally referred to as the Pre Cooler actually consists of three different buildings, with associated platforms. These are: the original Pre Cooler, a circa 1939 Refrigeration and Storage Building, and a 1969 Pre Cooler Addition. The original Pre Cooler building is designed in an Industrial/Utilitarian architectural style with an element (minimal) of Art Deco influence. It is constructed in a rectangular building plan and has several additions. This consists of a 64 x110 concrete building. It has a basement with a second story. The basement has a floor area of 7268 sq. ft, the first floor has an area of 7,553 sq. ft., and the second floor has an area of 7,040 sq. ft., for a total floor space of 21,861 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the exterior walls are of reinforced concrete, the first and second floors have D&M flooring, and the roof is of built-up composition roofing. The building has been altered by the addition of a Refrigeration and Equipment Storage building to the south and by the addition of a 1969 Pre Cooler Addition to the north. The building does have some minimal Art Deco design detailing, but it is relatively undistinguished architecturally. The Refrigeration and Equipment Storage building consists of an approximately 31 x101 concrete and wood and steel frame structure. It has a gross floor area of 5,678 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the walls are of concrete, and the flooring is D&M flooring on concrete. The roof is tar and gravel roofing on cork. The building is purely of an Industrial/Utilitarian design and is undistinguished architecturally.

51 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 41 The1969 Pre Cooler Addition consists of an approximately 42 x77 concrete block and wood frame structure with a mezzanine and a loading dock. The building has a gross floor area of 6,417 sq. ft. It is single story in height. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, and the walls are of reinforced concrete block. The floors are of reinforced concrete, and the roof is built-up composition roofing. The building is purely of an Industrial/Utilitarian design and is undistinguished architecturally.?? Office (Photograph 19) The office consists of a single-story concrete block (exterior walls) and wood frame (interior walls) structure. The building is designed in a simple and utilitarian manner with few distinguishing architectural features apart from a large wooden cornice that extends upwards to a flattened composition roof and roofline. It is built in an essentially rectangular building plan and has approximately 2,300 square feet of floor space. The foundation is of reinforced concrete, and the exterior walls are of reinforced concrete block. The interior walls are of wood stud and plaster construction. The floor is of reinforced concrete, and the roof is of composition roofing. The office may be considered both as an addition and an alteration to the historic IVG building complex. Constructed in 1969, it is architecturally undistinguished and, while utilitarian in nature, the building is incompatible (in terms of design) with the historic portions of the IVG Packing House, including the old main building, the pre cooler and additions, and the old metal sheds.?? Metal Sheds (Photographs 20, 21) There are three historic metal sheds (constructed between 1938 and 1944) associated with the historic IVG Packing House building complex. These generally have concrete wall footings, with corrugated metal siding and roofs. They are purely Industrial/Utilitarian in design and are undistinguished architecturally.?? Associated Fruit Packing Buildings?? Site/Buildings (Photographs 22-29) The overall site includes a number of buildings that are not historically a part of the Irvine Valencia Growers historic building complex. This includes: Irvine Farm Management Buildings Irvine Packing & Cooling Building Present-Day Irvine Valencia Growers Office Various Gargiulo Packing Buildings Several Mobile Trailer Offices These buildings are all of recent construction. They are all Industrial/Utilitarian in design, and have no architectural significance or importance.

52 42 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Summary Statement - Conclusions: Alterations to IVG Building Complex Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Specifically, a comparison of Figure 4: 1929 IVG Site/Building Plan to Figure 5: Contemporary Aerial, reveals that numerous changes have taken place since construction of the facility beginning in The complex was completed in The various alterations to the historic IVG Packing House Building Complex include the following: Addition to Main Building/Packing House 2. Circa 1937 Pre Cooler Addition and 1969 Pre Cooler Addition Refrigeration and Equipment Storage Building 4. Demolition of Original Office Building (in Front of Main Building) 5. Shed Additions (Eventual Demolition of Several) 6. Garage and Storage Building Addition (Eventual Demolition of Same) 7. Boiler House Construction 8. Demolition of Several Equipment/Yard Features (Pump House, Etc.) 9. Construction of Present Irvine Packing & Cooling Building 10. Construction of Additional Fruit Packing Buildings 11. Construction of Irvine Farm Management Buildings 12. Numerous Small Additions (Platforms/Sheds/Docks) In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1928/1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised (see also Figure 4: Historic 1929 Site/Building Plan). The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building, additions are historic. Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance.

53 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Historical Background: The Orange Industry and Fruit Packing Sunkist Growers and the Orange Packing Industry in California Note: The following section is taken from the Sunkist Internet Web Site at: Credit for the information is hereby given to Sunkist. Minor editing (including removal of photographs and the addition of explanatory headings) has taken place, without altering the content or intent of the original. The Sunkist Association is significant, as Irvine Valencia Growers was associated with Sunkist for some five decades. Founding the California Citrus Industry But the history of California citrus can be directly traced to a wandering Kentucky trapper and a middle-aged couple from Maine. The trapper, William Wolfskill, first settled in what is now Los Angeles in 1841, where he planted hundreds of orange and lemon seedlings on two acres at Central Avenue and East Fifth Street, later the site of the Southern Pacific Central Station. Wolfskill's trees, "Mediterranean Sweets" that he obtained from the San Gabriel Mission, flourished so well that he expanded his efforts to 70 acres. The resulting fruit, known as Wolfskill Oranges, became famous throughout the Southland for their wonderful sweet taste. Soon, he began shipping his oranges and lemons north to San Francisco, where the California gold rush was just getting under way. By 1875, Wolfskill had planted groves of nearly 17,000 orange trees, representing a large proportion of all the trees in the state. But his were not the only oranges gaining fame. Five years earlier, Maine residents Luther and Eliza Tibbets moved to Riverside to escape the cold Eastern winters. They wrote to the U.S. Department of Agriculture requesting information on the types of trees to plant around their new home and were rewarded when Agricultural Commissioner William Saunders sent them three "navel" orange trees from Brazil, in an attempt to see if the foreign trees would flourish in the California climate. Although one tree did not survive (reputedly due to a wandering cow), the other two thrived. Soon word spread throughout the area of the miraculous new seedless oranges being grown by the Tibbets in Riverside. Demand eventually became so great for the navel oranges, the Tibbets began selling budstock off the two trees for the unheard-of price of $5 a bud. Unwittingly, the Tibbets had created the beginnings of wholesale production of citrus fruit in the state.

54 44 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Meanwhile, Wolfskill had undertaken another bold venture as a citrus farmer. With the completion of the transcontinental railroad, he was able to load a freight car full of oranges in 1877 and send them East to St. Louis -- the first time citrus was shipped any great distance. Although it took a month for the freight car to arrive, the fruit was still in good condition, and amazed residents quickly bought out the entire shipment. With this undertaking, Wolfskill started wholesale marketing of California citrus. Between the intrepid trapper and the Eastern-bred Tibbets, the seeds of an entire industry had been successfully planted. Sunkist Growers - A Brief Background History The story of Sunkist Growers is one of agriculture's greatest success stories of the 20th century. Built by California growers facing financial ruin more than a century ago, this grower-owned organization has not only become a billion dollar industry but has created a name that is now synonymous with the word "citrus." The seeds of Sunkist Growers were first planted back in the 1840's, with the beginning of the California "Gold Rush." Many of the thousands of fortune seekers developed scurvy. As word spread that citrus fruits could prevent the disease, demand skyrocketed and soon lemons were selling for as much as $1 each. But the growth of the citrus industry got its first real start in the 1870's with the completion of the transcontinental railroad and introduction of the navel orange, which adapted well to California s mild winter climate. Meanwhile, growers were also discovering that Valencias, the "summer orange," thrived in Orange County, while high-quality lemons could be produced in the areas now known as Ventura, San Diego and Santa Barbara counties. Aided by the railroad, the citrus fruit industry created an increasingly significant economic base for California, and for years the fruit was one of the state's few export products. From 1880 to 1893, California s citrus acreage grew from 3,000 to more than 40,000 acres, and it appeared that citrus growers had uncovered a gold mine of their own. In reality, however, growers were financially hampered from the beginning by weak distribution methods. Agents were shipping fruit to markets with no knowledge of whether a demand existed or what their competitors were doing. Consequently, some markets were glutted with fruit while others received nothing. In addition, farmers were at the mercy of local buyers, who would drive the prices down, knowing that farmers would have to ship their fruit east if they could not sell it locally. By 1891, agents insisted on handling citrus on consignment, which meant that payment was made only if there was a sale. That shifted the risk from distributor to grower, who now bore full financial responsibility for the fruit. This situation led to a series of seasons known as the 'red ink' years, where growers' sales often netted less than their expenses. Facing financial ruin, growers throughout Southern California banded together to market the fruit themselves in the East.

55 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 45 Two of the most successful of these associations were the Claremont Fruit Growers Association, led by president P.J. Dreher in the upper Pomona Valley, and the Pachappa Orange Growers Association in Riverside, headed by grower T.H.B. Chamblin. On April 4, 1893, a group of about 100 prominent orange growers, including Dreher and Chamblin, met in Los Angeles to discuss Chamblin's plan to unite local associations into one general cooperative, organized by and for the growers. The plan was greeted with enthusiasm and, only a few months later, on Aug. 29, 1893, the Southern California Fruit Exchange, now known as Sunkist Growers, was born. The Exchange was set up as a federated structure and based on a system of cooperative marketing. Eight exchange districts were formed and local associations organized within each district. Each association did its own packing and established a local brand with individual or company names attached. Fruit packing was pro-rated among grower-members to give all an equal chance of delivery, and orders were pro-rated among the associations to keep the fruit moving proportionately. One of the first issues tackled by the Exchange was quality control, and both growers and their packing houses were required to meet the highest grading standards for their fruit. The Exchange was an initial success. During its first season, when it represented approximately 60 Southern California orange growers, the Exchange shipped 6 million cartons of the state's 7 million total cartons and obtained an average net price of about $1 per box -- an estimated 75 cents more than the growers would have received if they had sold it on their own. During the next few years, however, the Exchange encountered problems due in part to the conflict and confusion which resulted from each exchange making its own sales. To strengthen the sales program, the Exchange was incorporated on Oct. 3, 1895, and the new corporation was able to establish cooperative marketing of citrus fruit on a more secure basis. By 1905, citrus growers in the San Joaquin Valley area in northern California had also joined the Exchange, and on March 27, 1905, it was renamed the California Fruit Growers Exchange to reflect its broadened membership of 5,000 grower-members. At that time, the association represented 45 percent of California s citrus industry and shipped more than 14 million cartons. The next year, the Exchange branched out even further. Frustrated by their inability to obtain wood for packing crates following the devastating San Francisco earthquake in 1906, the Exchange created its own timber supply company, called the Fruit Growers Supply Company. The Supply Company also made loans to mills and when one of these loans defaulted in 1910, the company took possession of 24,000 acres of forest, as well as a logging railroad, several sawmills and a box factory. Today, Sunkist owns 360,000 acres of forests in California as a result of this venture. In 1907, the Exchange approved a major advertising campaign, the first time a perishable food product was ever advertised. The campaign, which cost $7,000, was launched in Iowa in 1908 and was so successful that orange sales actually increased by 50 percent.

56 46 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Convinced that advertising worked, the Exchange increased its ad budget to $25,000. The ad agency, Lord & Thomas, proposed using the name Sunkissed in the ads and that name was quickly shortened to "Sunkist." In April 1908, the board adopted the word Sunkist as its trademark for their highest quality oranges, and in fall 1908, six million Sunkist Orange stickers and one million Sunkist Lemon stickers were pasted on the regular labels of exchange shippers. In February 1952, the California Fruit Growers Exchange officially changed its name to Sunkist Growers, Inc., to associate the brand name with the corporate organization that had made it so famous. Summary Statement: Sunkist Growers and the Orange Packing Industry In California Several important points must be underscored with regard to the early development of the orange industry in California. Specifically, the history of orange growing in California dates back to the 1840s, but the real growth in the industry did not take place until the 1870s. Specifically, the first fruit was shipped by rail in 1877, and during the 1880s and early 1890s, the amount of citrus acreage increased from 3,000 acres to over 40,000 acres. Early marketing methods put the growers at the mercy of sales agents, and the Southern California Fruit Exchange was created in 1893 in an effort to protect the interests of the growers. The Exchange was based on a cooperative system of marketing. It sought to establish the highest of production standards for growers and packers, and to obtain the highest resulting prices from sales. In 1905, the organization was renamed the California Fruit Growers Exchange, and in 1908 the advertising agency responsible for Exchange interests convinced the board to adopt the word Sunkist as its trademark. In 1952, the name of the organization was officially changed to Sunkist Growers, Inc. The name Sunkist is, therefore, synonymous with much that defines fruit production in California. A Basic Introduction to Growing, Harvesting, and Packing Citrus Note: The following section is also taken from the Sunkist Internet Web Site at: Credit for the information is hereby given to Sunkist. Minor editing (including removal of photographs and the addition of explanatory headings) has taken place, without altering the content or intent of the original.

57 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 47 The following quoted information is not cited as nor intended to be read as an in-depth or scholarly written summary. Rather, it is intended to provide the reader of this report with highly generalized background information by which to better appreciate how the technical aspects of fruit production place the owner/grower in a highly exposed financial position by forcing the owner/grower to incur heavy, labor-intensive operating expenses in growing a product that is continually at the mercy of the elements. Naturally, citrus growers, to ensure the best possible crop, want to make sure all their trees are of the same high quality. To do this, each new tree they plant is grown, or propagated, not from a seed but by grafting or budding... In most citrus trees, the scion, or top of the tree, is a different variety from the roots or rootstock of the tree. Citrus growers plant trees whose tops will grow 'Washington' Navel oranges or 'Eureka' lemons on a rootstock that has special characteristics like disease resistance, quick to bear fruit or restricting tree size for easier harvesting. Nurserymen begin the process of propagating a new citrus tree by planting a seed for the rootstock. Most citrus have an unusual characteristic -- they can produce trees that are genetically identical to the parent through a natural process in seed development called nucellar embryony. While many rootstocks are produced by seed, because of nucellar embryony, they are all the same. After the rootstock is a year old, a single bud is taken from a branch of the desired scion variety and inserted into the bark of the young seedling. This bud grows into the top of the tree that produces the fruit. Citrus flower buds begin to form in early winter and develop through late winter and spring. Most flowers don't result in the formation of fruit because more than 99% of them usually fall off. Because the number that do become fruit depends largely on temperature and moisture, adequate water is very important during and immediately after flowering... After bloom, fruit develops from five to 18 months, depending on the variety and growing area. Unlike many other types of fruit, most citrus can be left on the tree without becoming overripe. Soil Type Citrus will grow in most soils from sandy to adobe clay, provided it drains well. Sandy soils must be watered and fertilized more frequently than soils with a higher clay content and growers can add organic matter such as manure or compost to improve water and nutrient holding abilities. Irrigating and Fertilizing Water quality is very important. Water high in salt content, common in some desert regions, can cause injury to leaves, burning leaf tips and margins. Lower levels of salts can cause the tree to grow poorly or to produce fewer or smaller fruit. Nutrients that citrus needs in relatively large amounts are nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, sulfur and calcium. In lesser amounts, citrus requires iron, magnesium, copper, zinc,

58 48 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House manganese, molybdenum, boron and chlorine. In California and Arizona soils, usually only nitrogen must be added, most often in late winter to meet the demands of spring bloom. Pruning Unlike most other fruit trees, citrus trees don't require regular pruning. Commercial growers trim tree tops to keep them smaller so they are easier, safer and less expensive to pick, and "hedge" the sides to let more sunlight into the trees to improve yields. Hand pruning opens up the trees to allow more sunlight into the center. Frost Control Protection from frost is critical. Most citrus will freeze when fruit temperature drops to F. The main methods of frost protection in California and Arizona are by wind and water. Wind machines -- large fans on poles about fifty feet above the grove -- are turned on when the temperatures near freezing. The fans mix the slightly warmer air above the grove with the colder air near the ground, which warms the air around the tree. By applying water, the heat built up in the soil during the day is lost more slowly, and air temperatures around the fruit stay warm a little longer. A few growers still use oil-burning orchard heaters, but this once common method is seldom used now because of the cost. Packing Citrus Getting fruit from the tree to the table is complicated. A citrus fruit is a living organism which must be protected from injury, decay and water loss on its journey across the country or across the ocean. Fruit are carefully picked by hand and put into bins which hold about 900 pounds. The bins are hauled by truck to a packinghouse, where the fruit is pre-graded to eliminate the obvious culls (bad fruit) and washed to clean away field dirt and dust. The fruit's natural wax, removed during the washing phase, is replaced by a food grade, non-animal source wax to restrict moisture loss and extend shelf life. The fruit is then graded, most often by electronic camera systems. After grading, the fruit is divided by size and the first grade fruit is stamped or labeled "Sunkist." An unmarked second, or choice, grade is also packed. The remaining fruit is sent to the juice plant. Most oranges and grapefruit are packed with robotic carton packing machines in 40 pound cartons. Lemons and most tangerine cartons are volume-filled with a set number of fruit. The cartons are stacked on pallets and placed in a pre-cooler before being loaded on trucks or rail cars for transportation to markets. Summary Statement: A Basic Introduction to Growing, Harvesting, and Packing Citrus In summary, the owner/grower must incur heavy labor expenses in the propagation (planting, grafting), irrigating, fertilizing, pruning, harvesting, and packing of the citrus crop. All efforts at

59 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 49 bringing in a crop are subject to the dreaded effects of the freeze, as frozen citrus is almost valueless. The growers at IVG faced many of the issues and problems noted above.

60 50 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 9. Background History: The California Cooperative/Association - An International and National Perspective The following is taken from the excellent 1998 account by Steven Stoll entitled The Fruits of Natural Advantage, a book that discusses and details the industrialization of California agriculture. One section of this treatise outlines the establishment of the California Cooperative both as an idea and as an entity. It provides excellent background information by which to better understand, evaluate, and place into proper historical perspective, the growth and development of the Irvine Valencia Growers in relation to larger international and national issues and movements. With all the fervor of rural reformers, California fruit growers united to make the American economy a safe place for specialized crops. They proceeded with the blessing of the Country-Life Movement whose motivating spirit, Theodore Roosevelt, exhorted American farmers that their future prosperity lay in forming an effective counterbalance to the power of the industrial trusts. Careful to express the proper deference for "rugged self-reliance," Roosevelt offered that the farmer "must learn to work in the heartiest cooperation with his fellows, exactly as the business man has learned to work." Others also proposed that farmers acting in combination might derive some of the advantages of big business while maintaining themselves as independent producers. Kenyon L. Butterfield,... a professor of agriculture and an advocate of progressive rural life, argued that "the farming class must produce as a unit" and encouraged the formation of a coordinated agricultural industry that would protect farmers against big business. Roosevelt and Butterfield took up the trope of cooperation. For them it described any farm-based organization that made no claims on Wall Street, railroads, urban consumers, or government. "Cooperation" sounded like good old-fashioned pulling together to help out neighbors during hard times. To others it signified a belated attempt by farmers to join industrial capitalism. Edwin G. Nourse wrote extensively on the subject of cooperatives, often asserting that they presented decentralized farmers with a scheme of organization that enabled them to participate in the economy as equals along side colossal, managerial firms. Through Nourse s lens, cooperation delivered a prosperity to farmers that populism had only promised, and it left the politics out. In this way, it seemed to represent a final coming to terms with the world as it is and the end of agriculture's prolonged adolescence. That Roosevelt, Butterfield, and Nourse mostly agreed about the apolitical ends of cooperation suggests its appeal to progressives. Though the various supporters of the Country-Life Movement never approached the subject with one mind, many recognized cooperation as a blending of rural organization with business pragmatism -- a conservative response to populism. Liberty Hyde Bailey also made comment on cooperation, but while other country-life leaders feared populist politics, Bailey feared industrial capitalism. Though certainly no populist, he seemed more comfortable with the idea of a farmer's party than he did with the idea of farmer corporations. Bailey's brand of rural romanticism brought him to recommend cooperation only as a tool to unify economy and society in a fractured countryside: "The essential thing is that country life be organized: if the organization is cooperative, the results -- at least theoretically -- should be the best; but in one place, the most needed cooperation may be social, in another

61 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 51 place educational, in another religious, in another political." The cooperative, in Bailey's corrected form, brought farmers together to make agriculture more pleasant and less tedious; it facilitated social contact and helped to spread practical knowledge; and it functioned best when it resembled the local grange. What this hesitant endorsement does not allow is for the cooperative to act as an agent for farmers in the marketplace. Such an organization might help to solve certain commercial problems, Bailey believed, but a cooperative was "properly a society, rather than a company." Any federation of farmers that produced and sold as a corporation could be considered cooperative "only in name." None of this mattered very much to orchard owners in California who combined their numbers and pooled their crops for the sole purpose of improving the outcome of sale. The form they adopted can be traced to Rochdale, England, where in 1844 a group of English textile workers went into business for themselves to secure their independence from low wages and tyrannical employers. With only slight modification, the same Rochdale Fundamentals that founded the first such association founded the marketing cooperatives that appeared in California beginning in the 1890s. First a definition. True cooperatives return all profits to members after deducting operating expenses. Cooperatives distribute earnings pro rata, or according to the amount of business each member transacts through the association, and keep nothing for themselves. Only those who produced the commodity that the cooperative is established to distribute can become members and stockholders; no one outside of the association can own its stock. All members hold the right to vote, but some cooperatives set voting power proportional to the number of acres or the amount of business that each of its members contribute, suggesting that more affluent growers would have more influence. A cooperative contracts with its members for a specified amount of fruit to be delivered to packinghouses and shipping points. The central organization then advertises, bargains for prices, searches for new outlets, arranges for sales, and remits profits. Put in other terms, a cooperative is a nonprofit collective. The marketing association serves as a commission house that takes only enough commission to maintain its services. In the words of G. Harold Powell, general manager of the California Fruit Growers' Exchange, a co-operative organization... is not a corporation in which the capital is contributed primarily in order that it may earn a profit,.. nor one in which the producer s product is handled by a corporation for the benefit of the stockholders rather than for that of the members. Typically, they owned no capital stock, issued no tradable shares, and thus never acted in the interests of anyone other than their grower-owner-members. Control vested in the membership maintained the independence of the association from shippers, canners, speculators and others with diverging interests. Fruit growers in California applied these principles to the necessities of their own time and place and founded a series of companies that the Rochdale textile workers would have barely recognized. More than any other person, G. Harold Powell defined the philosophy and the goals of cooperation in California. Born in New York, Powell graduated from Cornell University in 1895 where he studied horticulture with Liberty Hyde Bailey. A master's degree followed and then a position at the newly created Bureau of Plant Industry at the United States Department of Agriculture. Powell first became interested in the California orange industry while studying cold storage in 1904, and he made a visit to Riverside that year to advise growers on

62 52 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House refrigeration. He moved his family to Pasadena in 1911 and took over the management of the California Fruit Growers' Exchange in Powell and the orange growers gave flesh to the conception of cooperation as a collective business enterprise without (explicit) political aims. In a word, he argued that any successful federation of farmers should be business-minded and highly specialized. Powell wanted no one to confuse his industrial capitalists with the advocates of free silver and the subtreasury. He believed that cooperatives should be founded for tangible economic reasons, not out of principled outrage. "American agriculture is strewn with the wrecks of associations that were the outcome of high motives and impractical enthusiasm," thumped G. Harold Powell. And he called the Farmers' Alliance and the People's Party evolutionary dead ends in American agriculture's politically charged history. Individualist growers did not unite to beat the trusts but to join them as a means of survival in a world where only combined capital survived. Sounding like the economist Nourse, Powell insisted that "capital has been concentrated around gigantic undertakings," and individuals stood not a chance in the shadow of Leviathan enterprise. The tiller reborn would be a stockholder - producer in his own rural corporation, a new identity in changing times to bring him closer to integration into the nation's industrial sector. "In place of transacting business man to man as his father did before him," Powell wrote, the farmer "has become a more or less important part of the scheme of modern industrialism. He is no longer isolated. He is a link in the modern industrial and social chain." Powell called "common purpose' the first foundation of cooperation, by which he meant a shared experience with the many difficulties of horticulture and a shared desire for pragmatic solutions. The fruit union had been an experiment in common purpose. Its failure convinced growers that general marketing made about as much sense as general farming. No single agency could master the complexities of selling products as diverse as almonds, lemons, and plums. Rather than organize around common problems, said Powell, growers needed to organize around specific commodities. Powell asserted regional specialization as the key to successful cooperation: "It is only when they become specialists in a crop... and have to develop special facilities for the handling and distribution of the crop, that a group of farmers have a common purpose comparable to the aims of a large manufacturer." Any lasting agricultural industry "must be founded on a special industry," such as oranges, pears, or raisins. The hard-nosed demeanor of the California cooperatives prompted economist Ira B. Cross of Stanford University to point out that "even among the cooperators themselves a surprising lack of the true spirit of mutual helpfulness is evident." Cooperative enterprises in California, wrote Cross, "seem to have been organized with but one object in mind, and that is to make money for their stockholders. They are mere profit-making associations." Powell would have agreed. Suspicious of ideological fervor, he stripped the cooperative of high motives. Under his leadership and with urban, sophisticated growers as owners, a vehicle for rural uplift became a single-minded business venture. Progressive government in California quickly recognized the power of pragmatic cooperation and moved to support it. Where Powell gave the marketing association its philosophy, Harris Weinstock gave it the assistance of the state. In 1916 Weinstock became the first state market director. The appointment came from Governor Hiram Johnson, who surprised no one by naming a dry-goods merchant to pursue the state's interest in agriculture. Weinstock recognized that the benefits of cooperation had not spread far beyond oranges and raisins.

63 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 53 Through his bureau, the state of California expressed its interest by extending help to new associations at the moment of their formation. The producers of peaches, prunes, apricots, and pears still sold fruit the old way, without exerting influence over commission merchants and without promotion. Weinstock's office, the administrative arm of the State Commission Marketing Act Of 1915, brought government into the business of agricultural marketing. After wrestling with the legislature for a year to redefine the goals of the bureau as well as its name, and with the advice of the chief council Aaron Sapiro, who served as the attorney for many California cooperatives, Weinstock found himself in a position to bring order to the countryside in a way that no country-life reformer could have imagined. As head of nation's first state market commission -- charged to advise, promote, assist, foster, and encourage "the organization and operation of cooperative and other associations " -- Weinstock's purpose was nothing less than to change the relationship between California and the American economy and to build agriculture on the West Coast into a major industry. He acted on the premise that what minimized "the waste and expense of distribution, [worked] to the benefit of the consumers." Along with Powell, the market director defended the cooperative as a tool in the public interest and envisioned a collection of regionally based agricultural companies geared for the steady distribution of the American food supply. Yet the rise of cooperation had a more subtle effect. Like any other corporation, the cooperative set out to standardize the quality of its product and exert greater control over every stage of the process and promotion. In this way, the cooperative confirmed the single crop, making it the very preamble of its charter. The American food supply and the California landscape reflected its efficiency and simplicity, a necessary transformation, perhaps, in the conquest of distance (Stoll, 1998: pp ). Summary Statement: A Background History of the California Cooperative - An International and National Perspective The California Cooperative has roots in both the political and economic realms, with Theodore Roosevelt as a motivating spirit promoting the Country-Life Movement, in an effort to bring the farmer into the world of big business. More importantly, the development, adoption, and promotion of the cooperative would also result in the development of a goal-oriented and coordinated agricultural industry to protect the farmer from big business while entering the world of big business. The cooperative may, therefore, be viewed in a multitude of ways. First, it appears as a noble effort, returning all profits to members after operating expenses. As such, the cooperative is a non-profit collective, making and molding the owner/grower into an important link in the modern industrial and social chain. This relatively noble viewpoint is counterbalanced by the alternate viewpoint that holds that California cooperatives are simple money-making machines organized for the sole and single purpose of making a profit. An even more critical comment, however scholarly it may be, concludes that with urban, sophisticated growers as owners, the cooperative, a vehicle for rural uplift became a single-minded business venture.

64 54 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The truth, as it applies to IVG, probably lies somewhere in between these two alternate viewpoints. In effect, the IVG was intended solely as a profit-making enterprise for the owners/growers and The Irvine Company. The idea of the sharing profits was, however, a definite reality and IVG was undoubtedly operated with some degree of social consciousness in this regard.

65 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 55 Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges, and The Irvine Ranch (a Select Reading List) Note: More than one authority is referenced and/or quoted below. The reason for this seeming excess is understandable. Quite simply, the ultimate determination of historic significance for the IVG Packing House (under CEQA Guidelines) is based on the identification of certain themes or events reflecting the broad based patterns of California history. More than one authority is referenced here, to the point of duplication, simply as a means of confirming a consensus among authorities as to the major themes or events that relate to the IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex. This Was Mission Country Orange County California: The Reflections in Orange of Merle & Mabel Ramsey by Warren F. Morgan The following is taken from This Was Mission Country Orange County California: The Reflections in Orange of Merle & Mabel Ramsey, as published in 1973 and as narrated by Warren F. Morgan. It provides excellent background information regarding the establishment of the orange industry in Orange County. ORANGES AND ORANGE COUNTY It is said that the Spaniards first brought the seed of the orange to California from Mexico. They were planted at San Gabriel Mission in 1804 and some of the original trees bore fruit into the 1880 s. (Ramsey 1973: 58) An orchard of oranges was planted in Los Angeles, at Aliso Street, in 1834, and William Wolfskill planted another grove in 1841, on two acres of ground along Alameda Street about where the Southern Pacific Railroad later located its station. It was reputed to be the first commercial orchard in California. By the 1880 s orange groves were planted in numerous districts wherever weather permitted. (Ramsey 1973: 58) The orange came to the area that became known as Orange County in Dr. W. N. Hardin of Anaheim, it is said, extracted the seeds from a couple of barrels of decayed oranges he had obtained from Tahiti, planted them and developed a flourishing business for a number of years, selling seedlings and young trees. His efforts were responsible for many small groves. (Ramsey 1973: 58) Shortly thereafter, A. B. Chapman, who had extensive land holdings in San Gabriel, received seedlings of the Valencia orange (a native of the Azores) from a Thomas Rivers of England. (Chapman with his law partner Andrew Glassel had received land in payment for their services in partitioning Rancho de Santa Ana Chapman later became one of the founders of the city of Orange). Chapman introduced a late ripening orange to Orange County growers. The first commercial grove was on the land east of Fullerton. (Ramsey 1973: 58) Chapman became known as the Father of the Valencia orange Industry as the result of his progressive methods. (Ramsey 1973: 58)

66 56 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Patterson Bowers of Orange then imported the Washington Navel orange from Bahia Brazil in 1873 and, unfortunately, brought with it the red scale infestation which has been a plague to the orange growing industry ever since. (Ramsey 1973: 59) Lemons and grapefruit were also tried without too much success (190 acres in 1930) but the climate proved to be too mild to bring them to mature sweetness. (Ramsey 1973: 59) Two miles east of what was to be the city of Orange, near Santiago Creek, M. A. Peters and John Gregg planted bud trees in Some were still bearing as late as (Ramsey 1973: 59) The first orange grove in Tustin was planted by D. W. A. Wall. He was followed by a Mr. Preble, a Mr. Adams, and Columbus Tustin, the founder of the city of Tustin, who gave his town the reputation of being the center of the orange empire. (Ramsey 1973: 59) An orange grove planted by R. H. Gilman at Placentia in 1875 on forty acres of land received no irrigation water until 1879, yet some of the trees were still bearing in (Ramsey 1973: 59) In 1929 California s crop of oranges was the largest ever produced by the state to date. There were seventy five thousand carloads, totaling thirty five million boxes. (Ramsey 1973: 59) Originally many varieties of oranges were tried like the Mediterranean Sweets and the St. Michaels but the Valencia and the Navel proved to be the most durable and desirable. (Ramsey 1973: 59) ORANGE PEST PROBLEMS The orange, the golden bonanza of Orange County, has lived through many trials and tribulations. Water has always been a problem but an even more serious threat has been a succession of pests, and diseases each of which has caused severe damage before controls were found. (Ramsey 1973: 60) In 1887, the cottony cushion scale threatened to wipe out the orange groves until the Australian lady bird beetle was discovered to be the scales natural enemy. The imported bug devoured scales voraciously. (Ramsey 1973: 60) In 1889 one third of all orange trees in the county were infected by the black and red scale, an even greater menace than the cottony cushiony scale. Trees were cut back and sprayed with a solution of whale oil soap, caustic soda, resin and linseed oil. (Fumigation by hydrocyanic gas was later invented by D. W. Coquillot of Anaheim). (Ramsey 1973: 60) The mealy bug invaded Anaheim in 1921 and by 1929 more than forty five thousand citrus were infected. Once again the little lady bug (or Australian lady bird beetle) was found to be the savior of the oranges. A large insectary was built on Vermont street in Anaheim, great numbers of the bug raised, bottled and sent to the orange growers. The lady bug rapidly stripped the trees of mealy bugs and scales. Naturally this little orange shelled beetle with black polka dots is held in high esteem in Orange County, a symbol of good luck and good fortune. (Ramsey 1973: 60)

67 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 57 In 1939 a new disease appeared in Covina and spread quickly to the groves in Orange County. Called the quick decline by the growers, Tristeza (sadness) by Mexic ans, the infestion turned out to be caused by a virus carried by the Melon Aphid which attacked only orange tree groves on the sour root stock that had been brought in to combat another ailment called gummosis. Little relief or cure has been found for quick decline except to uproot trees and groves and replace them with other than sour root stock trees. It is estimated that two hundred forty three thousand, nine hundred twenty orange trees were lost in Orange County in 1962 alone. (Ramsey 1973: 60) Now, in the seventies, the greatest enemy of the orange industry turns out to be progress. Heavy taxation and the need for land profits has driven orange grove after orange grove out of agricultural use into tract and housing development. Concrete and black top for freeways, streets, parking, housing developments and industry even Disneyland itself (built on an old orange grove), has brought the greatest blight to the golden orange of Orange County. (Ramsey 1973: 60) There are still extensive groves in Orange County. One can see remnants of great orchards in many places, even from the freeways. Santa Ana Freeway (Route 5) cuts across the immense Irvine Ranch and bisects orderly groves as one approaches the U.S. Marine Corps Air Base at El Toro and the fast growing retirement community at Rossmoor Leisure World. Riverside Freeway (Route 91) passes a number of old groves (en route) from Orange County to Riverside and San Bernardino, and Ortega Highway (Route 74) traveling east from San Juan Capistrano takes you close enough to the trees to see the fruit and to catch the fragrance of the orange blossoms that have long beckoned the swallows to return yearly to Capistrano s famous Mission. (Ramsey 1973: 60) Summary Statement: Reflections in Orange This account relates to IVG in a general sense only. It does, however, identify several important events that ultimately help to define the significance of the IVG facility including; 1. the establishment of the orange industry in Orange County, 2. the arrival of the Valencia in Southern California, 3. the importance of Sunkist and the California Fruit Growers Exchange, and 4. the many reasons for the disappearance of the orange in Orange County. Orange County: A Centennial Celebration ( ) by Doris Walker The following book profiles Orange County its history, development and quality of lifestyle at its centennial mark. A large section of the book focuses on profiling successful Orange County businesses. Once again, this book provides excellent background information by which to assess the

68 58 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House significance of the IVG facility in relation to the historical growth and development of Orange County. ORANGE COUNTY A CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION by Doris Walker By the 1920s Orange County was producing a large amount of the world s crop of soft-shelled walnuts, which had been imported here previously. The shells were used for making gunpowder during World War I, and later fertilizer. The nuts continued to be a local product of some significance until the 1960s. (Walker 1989: 90) The Placentia Perfection Walnut, grown throughout the north county, was displayed at the Chicago World s Fair of 1893, where Orange County produce earned 12 gold and four silver medals in national competition. (Walker 1989: 90) A Santa Ana Valley Mid-Winter Fruit and Flower Festival was held in 1886, featuring Anaheim wine as well as prize local produce. The first Orange County Fair was organized in 1890, following formation of the 32 nd District Agricultural Association when the county was created. The fair s first harvest exhibits were displayed in French s Opera House in Santa Ana playing second fiddle to the horse races and livestock displays also organized for these annual agricultural celebrations. (Walker 1989: 90) Orange trees had been a novelty since mission days, though the original fruits introduced by the padres were tart, dry and hardly the delicacy Orange County farms would develop. An Anaheim physician, Dr. William Hardin, is credited with planting the first grove of oranges from Tahitian seed in (Walker 1989: 90, 91) Then experimentation with oranges grafted from Spanish stock produced the Valencia for Richard Gilman of Placentia in 1872, while he was working for the Southern California Semi- Tropical Fruit Company. It would soon cover county land like a friendly virus. The first commercial grove was planted in 1875, on what is now the campus of California State University, Fullerton. (Walker 1989: 91) The advent of the railroad and its early refrigerator cars and special fast fruit trains improved the marketability and therefore increased the importance of citrus to Orange County. It was a $2 million crop by the 1880s, when groves covered the land and packing houses began to open. The first cooperative Orange Growers Protective Union was formed in (Walker 1989: 91) The Southern California Fruit Exchange, which later became part of Sunkist Growers, was created in Fullerton in Still the leading such concern in the world, Sunkist coordinates production and markets fruit around the world for individual growers. From the turn of the 20 th century, orange crops and orange country were advertised across the continent on the boldly-decorated railroad cars that carried the golden cargo to the East. (Walker 1989: 91) At one time in the 1940s, Orange County led the state in Valencia orange growing with about 68,000 acres devoted to this locally-developed fruit. That was more than twice the land

69 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 59 occupied by all county crops in The harvests from one Irvine Ranch grove alone had filled 1,000 railroad cars a year in the 1940s. (Walker 1989: 91) Nearly 50 packing houses once handled the fresh citrus, with an overflow packed in neighboring counties. Fullerton had 11 such operations, generally located along the Santa Fe tracks. There were also packing plants in Anaheim, Placentia, Olive, Orange, Tustin, La Habra, El Modena and San Juan Capistrano. (Walker 1989: 91) By the 1960s, though, oranges covered only 20,000 acres with less than a dozen packing houses remaining. Valencias continued as Orange County s top money product until Then two years late the last cooperative Goldenwest Citrus Association closed. As the 1980s end, only about 4,500 acres remain in citrus, most of them Valencias. Only three packing houses are still in operation. (Walker 1989: 91) A special brand of advertising art decorated the wooden crates that escorted the golden fruit to market lithographed labels that were meant to attract wholesalers. Customers rarely noticed them until they were gone, as the crates were replaced by cardboard boxes in The colorful labels have become collector items, as have the orchard heaters (smudge pots) that kept the groves warm when the temperature dipped too low. (Walker 1989: 91, 92) Orange County brands often had such historic themes as Old Mission, the label depicting a Spanish complex with padres examining fruit. The wording promised the oranges to be scientifically grown and ripened on the tree, grown and shipped by Placentia Orchard Company, operated under personal direction of Charles C. Chapman for over fifty years. Chapman became Fullerton s first mayor in 1904 and had the added good fortune of striking oil in the midst of his golden orange grove. (Walker 1989: 92) Esperanza brand labels from the Yorba Orange Growers Association showed a pretty senorita beside a daintily tissue-wrapped orange, a marketing touch that became a trademark like the Sunkist stamp. The Mother Colony brand reflected the fabled beginning of Anaheim, which had adopted the new fruit as a grape replacement. (Walker 1989: 92) The romance of this area was being advertised throughout the country, emphasized by such romantic orange labels as California Dream which showed a Disneyland-like castle and a pair of peacocks from Bradford Brothers of Placentia. Another Bradford label called Tesoro Rancho depicted that family s ranch house, still a Placentia landmark. Gold Coast, with an orange sun setting into the sea, was from Placentia Orchard Company. (Walker 1989: 92) By the 1920s the healthy aspect of citrus was the theme on such labels as Night Cap, with a retiring couple sipping orange juice together from Anaheim Community Growers. Irvine Valencia Growers had a fancy Madras label, on which perfect orange blossoms decorated a ripe unblemished fruit, as well as a generic label called Irvale, showing an orange from its less-appealing stem end. (Walker 1989: 92) A California Valencia Orange Show opened in Anaheim in 1921, receiving a promotional call from President Warren Harding. It became an annual event for a decade. Then in 1930, several communities joined forces to hold an Orange County Valencia Show and Fair. The Valencia orange also became Orange County s official tree. (Walker 1989: 92)

70 60 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House THE IRVINE COMPANY History and special circumstances including our weather, the water and our topography have come together to create the finest living environment anywhere in the world, says Donald Bren, chairman of The Irvine Company. I believe most of us feel very fortunate that our lives have brought us here. (Walker 1989: 156) Founded by James Irvine in 1876, the history of The Irvine Company parallels the growth and prosperity of Orange County. A land development company and widely acclaimed community builder, The Irvine Company owns 64,000 acres of land in central and southern Orange County or one-sixth of the county. The land stretches from the Pacific Ocean at Newport Beach to the mountains of Cleveland National Forest, and encompasses six cities as well as unincorporated county lands. (Walker 1989: 156) Under the direction and vision of Chairman Donald Bren, The Irvine Company is leading a California renaissance in development that incorporates the best planning, architecture and design from around the world and ble nds them into a series of blended communities. These communities offer a wide range of living environments, job opportunities, schools, parks and recreational facilities, and cultural and shopping experiences that together provide a quality of life unmatched anyplace else. (Walker 1989: 156) With this valuable asset of land and location, The Irvine Company s business emphasis is on the long-term management of its quality developments. The company utilizes the experience and expertise of independent firms to develop, build and manage its commercial, industrial, retail and residential projects. The Irvine Company maintains quality and design control on each project, and also retains ownership to reinforce its continuing commitment to Orange County. (Walker 1989: 156) The Irvine Company is organized into seven operating divisions and companies, each emphasizing a product line or function. They are Irvine Office Company, Irvine Industrial Company, Irvine Hotel Company, Irvine Retail Properties, Irvine Community Development Company, Irvine Pacific Development Company and Irvine Land Management Company which oversees the firm s cattle ranching, row crop and citrus operations. (Walker 1989: 156) The company s office projects include Newport Center, a 600-acre business district overlooking the Pacific Ocean, and home to more than 800 companies and 14,000 employees in the heart of Newport Beach. Adjacent to Orange County Airport are the majestic twin towers of MacArthur Court featuring a stately travertine exterior and stainless steel accents. (Walker 1989: 156) Jamboree Center in Irvine features the 20-story, 5 Park Plaza office tower along with twin, 12- story towers and the Irvine Hilton and Towers. Two more office towers are planned to complete this dynamic 46-acre business center. (Walker 1989: 157) In south Orange County, at the juncture of the San Diego and Santa Ana freeways, is Irvine Spectrum, The Irvine Company s 2,600-acre masterplanned center for research, technology and business. Planned for nearly 30 million square feet of office, industrial, hotel and retail development, Irvine Spectrum is an international business center and currently home to 18 Pacific Rim firms among its 550 companies and 15,000 employees. (Walker 1989: 157)

71 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 61 In order to provide housing opportunities close to these emerging new job centers, The Irvine Company is developing the new communities of Westpark in Irvine, Tustin Ranch in Tustin and Santiago Hills in Orange. Offering a variety of apartments, townhouses and single family detached homes, these communities feature outstanding architectural design, parks and paseos, schools and shopping. (Walker 1989: 157) The company s 16 community and neighborhood retail centers provide convenient shopping alternatives within walking distance for residents. Newport Center Fashion Island and Tustin Market Place offer innovative environments for shopping and entertainment and serve as regional centers. (Walker 1989: 157) Along with jobs and stores, each Irvine Company community offers an abundance of open space. In Irvine, the company has completed a historic agreement that will result in the transfer of nearly 9,000 acres of land to the City of Irvine for permanent open space. In new residential communities planned at the Irvine Coast and Laguna Laurel, 75 percent of the development area will be dedicated to permanent open space. (Walker 1989: 157) Special recreational opportunities are available too in Irvine Company communities. Tustin Ranch includes a championship-quality, 18-hole public golf course. Two resort-quality golf courses will be built at the Irvine Coast. (Walker 1989: 157) There is a strong desire among Orange County residents for a greater sense of community, explains Bren. In the future, we will enjoy a range of optional living styles in separate, distinct and even unique communities that offer an intimate quality of life a suburban home life combined with a more urban town life. (Walker 1989: 157) As part of its role as a community builder, The Irvine Company is a leader in contributing to solutions to the complex issues facing Orange County, especially its transportation problems. In this decade alone, the company has committed to financing more than $200 million for improvements to arterial roads and state freeway interchanges. (Walker 1989: 157) The involvement goes beyond transportation funding. The company works closely with school districts in each of its communities to ensure that the necessary schools are in place for new residents. Fees are also paid for other needed public facilities including libraries, police and fire stations, and child care opportunities. (Walker 1989: 157) The Irvine Company s commitment to Orange County is also evident in its far-reaching philanthropic support in the area of youth and the family, higher education, and culture and the arts. In a recent three-year span, the company s charitable contributions included land donations and discounts, in-kind services and cash contributions totaled more than $45 million. (Walker 1989: 157) As a community builder and community neighbor, The Irvine Company and its employees are working to make Orange County an even better place to be. (Walker 1989: 157) The greatest legacy we can leave our children is to improve upon what nature has given us, reflects Chairman Donald Bren. We are blessed to live in Orange County. Working together with the community, business leaders and elected officials, we can continue to preserve and enhance the quality of life that has attracted all of us here. (Walker 1989: 157).

72 62 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Summary Statement: Orange County: A Centennial Celebration This book provides an excellent outline of the broad patterns of history that have influenced the growth and development of Orange County. Of particular importance to the determination of significance of the IVG Packing House this includes: 1. The establishment of the orange industry in Orange County. 2. The planting of the first Valencia oranges. 3. The importance of the railroad to citrus production. 4. The relative importance of the Valencia orange. 6. The role of the Packing House: glory days and decline. 7. The decline of the orange industry. 8. The role/rule of The Irvine Company in Orange County The themes identified above are central to any understanding of the significance of the IVG Packing House. The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Editor Thomas Talbert The following is taken from the 1963 study of Orange County entitled, The Historical Volume and Reference Works, by Editor Thomas Talbert, with contributions by Mildred Yorba MacArthur, Don C. Meadows, and Rita Ryan. THE VANISHING ORANGE? by Mildred Yorba MacArthur RICHARD H. GILMAN In Orange County the first commercial Valencia grove was that of Richard H. Gilman of Placentia. As early as 1872 he was experimenting with a new variety of citrus, from a Spanish orange that had been secured from a greenhouse in London, England, and brought to San Gabriel by Judge A. B. Chapman. From buds he grafted five acres of his seedlings and obtained a new variety, called Valencias. By 1880 he had planted eighty acres and his success was assured, both as a grower and a nurseryman, for everyone wanted the new variety because it had a longer bearing season, from April to November, and it was easier to pack them than the former favorite, the navel. This last variety matures in California from November to April, so with the two varieties it was possible to provide fruit all of the year. At first California took all of the fruit that could be supplied, so transporting and marketing were no problem, but before long the eastern markets demanded their share and it was then that some means of transportation had to be found to compete with Florida which has ready access to the sea and to waterways.

73 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 63 Mr. Warren has an interesting commentary upon this in his study of the orange industry. He says, The advent of the railroad enlarged and improved the citrus markets for both Florida and California. Again Florida was favored by about fifteen years. Railroads connected Florida with the northern states in the early 1860 s, but it was not until 1876 in California that the Southern Pacific Valley line made connections with the Central Pacific and Union Pacific to the mid-western and eastern states. Careful picking and packing and refrigerated cars for shipping and hauling have now reduced losses in transit to a bare minimum. MEXICAN BRACEROS The greatest portion of the picking is now done by imported Mexican crews. These men are called braceros, from the Spanish word meaning some one who works with his arms and hands. The work call for these men only goes out when the domestic supply of labor is not sufficient. The work of these willing arms has saved millions for California farmers whose produce of all kinds would have otherwise perished in the fields. It has also served as a great bridge of good will between the U.S. and Mexico, for the bracero becomes familiar with American ways and goes to his homeland with glowing accounts of his life in the states. He also goes home laden with American finery for every member of the family, a sewing machine for his wife, and sufficient money saved so that he can go home and plant his own lands. The Mexican worker has proved the most amiable and successful. Men were brought from Haiti during the war years to save the crops, and during World War II there were camps established for German prisoners of war. Japanese nationals have also worked in the Orange County citrus groves during the picking season, but the bracero has proved the most successful. In the past few years many fine groves have been lost due to a virus disease known as quick decline, so in many instances the advent of a subdivision has been just in the nick of time. Citrus is susceptible to frost, bruising winds, pests, and scale. Then too there is the matter of cultivation, irrigation, fertilization, and spraying. Early pest control was handled by fumigation, which was a cumbersome process involving the use of huge tents which were put over the trees. One of the pioneers in this field was the late Clarence McFadden, for many years an Orange County Supervisor. He in vented a tent-raising device which permitted four men to fumigate 250 to 500 trees in a ten-hour period; it had formerly taken that time to fumigate but 60 trees. Now all pest control is done by spraying from the top of a tank truck, and sixty trees can be sprayed in a matter of minutes. Orange growers in the county were a competitive group. Each man had his own methods and procedure, and the men vied with one another to see who would get the best return from his acreage. A net return of $1000 per acre was not uncommon from a hardy new grove. In some sections the groves were plagued by frost; when this happened men set their alarms every hour on the hour to watch the thermometers. If they dropped, the smudge pots went into action. Later came frost warnings, broadcast via radio, and the advent of wind machines which kept the cold air stirring and prevented freezing. Cooperative marketing brought the best results marketwise, so soon there were packing houses springing up all over the county. No longer was the entire crop dumped on the market at once. Villa Park, Orange, Anaheim, Fullerton, La Habra, Placentia, and Yorba Linda had one and sometimes two or three large packing plants. Now there have been many consolidations, with

74 64 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House the cutting of acreage to meet housing needs. However, there are still those who remember the competition between the different houses to see who would hit the highest market. C. C. CHAPMAN, FATHER OF THE VALENCIA Charles C. Chapman of Fullerton was known as the father of the Valencia orange. R. H. Gilman, A. D. Bishop, M. A. Peters, and W. B. Wall preceded him in point of time, but he went in more heavily for the Valencia fruit; he proved that the fruit would hang on the tree until late fall, that its juice content was better if left to tree-ripen, and that it had a better reception on the eastern market if picked later when it did not have to compete with summer fruits and melons. Mr. Chapman had his own packing plant for his Old Mission Brand on his 350-acre tract east of Fullerton. The largest orange grove in the world was also in Fullerton. Five thousand acres of citrus were planted by the Bastanchury brothers on their lands, now the Sunny Hills residential area of Fullerton. Theirs was a vast project requiring that intricate systems of irrigation be installed at ruinous prices and that hills be contoured and graded. All went well until the Depression; then the upkeep was such that the lands passed to other hands. The production of oranges in Orange County is still a major industry. Its groves have been driven back into the bill country, which is proving surprisingly free from frost. The word in packing and marketing is consolida tion. Instead of each town having its own plant, the growers are making one serve several areas, for after all, transportation is no longer a problem with the emergence of larger trucks and faster freeways. At present there are twenty-one packing houses in the county. They are handling about the same amount of fruit as they did in As groves have been pulled out other have been set out, and the result is that oranges still lead the agricultural list with an income of $28,929,600 in At that time there were 25,841 acres of full-bearing Valencias, plus 2,586 acres not yet bearing, so the in dustry is far from through. The coming section that is expected to keep the citrus industry alive for many years is the Irvine Ranch where new groves are thriving. Summary Statement: The Vanishing Orange Much like Doris Walker s Orange County: A Centennial Celebration, Yorba s The Vanishing Orange, underscores several important themes relevant to our better understanding of the significance of IVG in relation to themes and events in California History. This includes: 1. The planting of the first Valencia oranges in Southern California. 2. The importance of the railroad to citrus production. 3. The role of Mexican Braceros in the orange industry. 4. The importance of cooperative marketing. 5. The beginning of the end for orange production in Orange County.

75 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 65 Orange County by Steve Emmons The following is taken from the 1988 publication Orange County, by Steve Emmons, and as published by Henry N. Abrams, Inc. Emmons, much like Walker, provides an excellent overview of the history of the orange industry in Orange County. The first orange tree in Orange County was probably planted by William N. Hardin, a medical doctor and Anaheim's justice of the peace, who, in 1870, bought two barrels of rotten Tahitian oranges and planted some of the seeds. A more portentous event occurred in 1872 when Albert B. Chapman, a founder of the town of Orange, brought some navel orange trees from Florida and set them in his San Gabriel groves. He noticed that a few of the trees were different from the others, and one of his employees, a Spaniard, named them Valencia orange trees, after the region in eastern Spain. (Actually, the Valencia orange came from the Azores.) The name was a distinct improvement over what they were called previously: Hart s Tardiff. Valencia oranges turned out to have tremendous advantages: First, they are much juicier than navels, and second, they ripen at the peak of summer, when their cool juice has much more consumer appeal. (Navels ripen in winter.) In 1875, the first Orange County grove of Valencias was planted by R. H. Gilman of the Southern California Semi-Tropical Fruit Company. His grove was on what is now the California State University campus in Fullerton, and it soon revealed the Valencia s third advantage: Valencias not only tolerate planting nearer the coast, they thrive there. The Valencia grows better in Orange County than anywhere else. More planters tried the Valencia. In 1886, the same year the first diseased vineyard was dug up, the Santa Ana Herald remarked on the new orange, which promises to become a great favorite with growers. The Valencia had arrived at exactly the right time. Not only was a ready supply of land available for the citrus industry, but by 1886, Orange County had a vast irrigation system. The five-mile ditch from the Santa Ana River to the Anaheim vineyards kept the town green during the drought of the mid-1860s, and by 1869 the colony was selling water to outsiders. At about the same time, settlers arriving in the Placentia area discovered that getting water from a well required digging and shoring up a shaft 130 feet deep. They, too, resorted to a ditch from the river and the twelve-mile Cajon Canal but digging it took four years, due to difficult terrain and a string of financial setbacks and lawsuits. It was completed only after a court ordered the formation of the Anaheim Union Water Company to own and manage both the Anaheim and Cajon ditches. Growers across the river in Orange dug their first ditch in 1870, which eventually led to the formation of the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Company. Many smaller companies dug ditches from the river and from major creeks, but well into the twentieth century, the Anaheim Union and the Santa Ana Valley companies provided most of Orange County s irrigation water. Supplemented by winddriven, then engine-driven well pumps, the county s water supply was reliable and ready for a citrus boom. The railroads made the markets for citrus crops accessible and gave the Orange County citrus industry its final shove down the launching ramp. The first railroad shipment from Orange County headed for Des Moines, Iowa in By 1887, the Santa Fe railroad was competing with the Southern Pacific for Orange County s railroad business, and freight rates fell. That year, four hundred railroad carloads were shipped from Orange County.

76 66 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Though rapid, the resulting expansion of the Orange County citrus orchards was not without incident. Tiny scale insects, so called because of the round, waxy scale they secrete and live under, were at times annoying, at times threatening to the entire industry. Black scale appeared almost simultaneously with the orange trees, and while the insects themselves did not attack the trees, the black mold that thrived on their secretions so covered the fruit that each orange had to be hand washed before it could be sold. Red scale, though, killed the branches they inhabited. The insects had been inadvertently imported to Orange County along with Australian navel orange trees in The only defense growers had against the red scale was to prune away infected branches; by the late 1880, the infestation had reduced a third of the orange trees to skeletons. Growers experimented with a mixture of various oils and caustic soda as an insecticide and found it helped control both black and red scale. Later, individual trees were enclosed in tents and hydrocyanic gas was blown inside an effective, if laborious, method. The most effective countermeasure, like red scale itself, was imported from Australia: Rodolia cardinalis, or the Australian ladybug. Turned loose in the orchards, the ladybug ate the scale insects and others besides. Growers also faced freezes, which can destroy the fruit and, if severe enough, split trees when their sap becomes frozen. In 1913, overnight temperatures fell to twenty-two degrees on three consecutive nights. Smudge pots were not common yet, so growers burned bean straw in the orchards to ward off the chill, but without success. Losses were enormous. In 1937, cold nights persisted so long that the supply of smudging oil gave out, and the growers turned to burning tires in the groves. The resulting soot covered Orange County for weeks. Then, in the early 1940s, a virus attacked with devastating results. Its scientific name appropriately was Tristeza, Portuguese for grief. Growers called it Quick Decline, because an infected tree simply withered and died in a remarkably short time, perhaps two or three weeks. Spread by aphids, Quick Decline killed 243,920 Orange County orange trees in one year. There was no protection from the virus for old trees, but introduction of a virus-resistant rootstock brought the disease under control in new orchards. The most threatening pest in the history of the orange industry, however, was the commission merchant, who sold the orange crop and had the Southern California citrus growers at his mercy. In the early years, growers were isolated from their Midwestern and Eastern markets, where sales prices fluctuated so dramatically and so rapidly the growers had no idea what prices to expect. Commission merchants took full advantage and accepted orange crops on consignment only, leaving all risk to the growers. Sometimes a grower received in return only a bill for shipping, with the explanation that the market was glutted the day his crop arrived, and proceeds didn t even cover freight costs. Growers were justifiably suspicious. Twice, the growers tried to form a marketing cooperative of their own, succeeding at last in 1893 with the Southern California Fruit Exchange. It gave growers some bargaining muscle for the first time and dominated the market later as the California Fruit Growers Exchange (1905), then as Sunkist Growers (1952). The value of marketing was learned as early as 1880 when an Orange County grower, Albert B. Clark, started wrapping each orange in tissue before packing it into the crate. Other growers considered this frivolous until they learned that Clark s oranges consistently drew higher prices. When the exchange was formed, it hired sophisticated marketing experts, who set

77 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 67 about creating the image of the orange as the golden glory from the land of sunshine and Old World romance. Their goal was to invade the Midwestern and Eastern markets and there convert the orange from an exotic fruit for Thanksgiving feasts and Christmas stockings into a staple of the daily diet. Billboards touted Oranges for Health California for Wealth. Special trains carrying the fruit eastward were adorned with promotional banners. The sunshine image was incorporated into a trademark, Sunkist, which was test marketed in Iowa in 1905, then adopted for all the exchange s produce. By 1920, Sunkist was stamped on the fruit itself. To encourage consumption, the exchange advertised that anyone mailing in twelve Sunkist wrappers and twelve cents would receive a silver orange spoon. At the time, in fact, virtually all oranges were for eating until the exchange s marketing masterstroke of A bumper crop of oranges was predicted for that year, requiring that the market somehow be expanded quickly. The exchange took a full-page ad in the February 19, 1916, Saturday Evening Post showing a tide of orange liquid and urging readers to Drink an Orange. The exchange convinced the Thatcher Glass Company of Gleannette, Pennsylvania, to produce the nowclassic opaque glass orange reamer for extracting juice. Just how many were manufactured is not known probably around a million but the first shipments sold out speedily, and reamers continued to be popular until electric juicers took their place. In any case, the advertisement and its follow-up put the juicy Valencias at the top of the citrus heap, and Orange County s citrus industry boomed. Even during 1930, when the Depression was setting in, consumption of oranges increased. Orange County agriculture as a whole peaked in 1930, and the tally is a reminder that citrus was only the largest of many profitable Orange County crops. During that year, farmers and ranchers grossed fifty-one million Depression dollars, mostly from citrus, walnuts, beans, sugar beets, peppers, tomatoes, and livestock. The agricultural opulence of the region had been remarked upon by the San Francisco Chronicle back in 1898 in an article headlined One of the Most Prosperous Counties. It referred to the new, $400,000 beet-sugar factory in Los Alamitos, the olive groves in El Modena (now east Orange) and in nearby foothills, the famous celery fields south of Westminster, and the general improvements, such as better roads, extended rail lines, new telephone servic e to San Diego, and new, steam-powered streetcars between Santa Ana and Orange. Orange County farmers also were growing chiles, lima beans, apricots, apples, pears, and avocados. In 1908, the San Joaquin Ranch (part of the Irvine Ranch) was producing more barley, beans, sugar beets, oranges, walnuts, and olives than any other ranch in California. So sovereign was agriculture in Orange County that by 1938, 86 percent of the land was used for farming or ranching, with the largest portion set aside for citrus. World War II brought about great changes in Orange County agriculture. Farm workers, able to draw higher wages in wartime factories, quit the fields, leaving growers with a labor shortage. The result was the bracero program, under which the United States Department of Agriculture imported Mexican nationals as farm laborers, then sent them home at the close of harvest. The first braceros (strong-armed ones) arrived in Orange County in 1941; even so, sixteen hundred Jamaicans and five hundred German pris oners of war as well were farm laborers in Orange County during the war. Though intended to be a wartime emergency measure, the bracero program continued until 1964, due to strong lobbying by growers. In the meantime, thousands of Mexicans attracted by farm wages entered the United States illegally

78 68 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and remained, providing growers and others with a huge pool of black-market labor but also adding to political and social problems, such as overcrowded housing, slumlording, and racial tension, which persisted into the 1980s. The biggest change, however, occurred at war s end. The citrus industry had peaked during the war, when many fields devoted to other crops were converted to orange groves. But as the soldiers returned home, and families began looking for homes, a demand for housing in Orange County arose seemingly overnight and then intensified. Developers found it very easy, and very profitable, to replace an orange grove with a housing tract. The building started near the Los Angeles County boundary and moved southeastward. The result is reflected in the following statistics kept by the Orange County Department of Agriculture. Between 1954 and 1963, 79 percent of Orange County s agricultural land was converted to housing, businesses, schools, and highways By 1967, Orange County s suburban development had reached as far as the Saddleback Valley and suburban crops nursery stock and cut flowers had taken over, accounting for 18 percent of all agricultural income, on their way to 48 percent by There was no stopping the trend, for even growers who wanted to stay put were being forced out by the new urban pressures. A new housing tract built next to an orchard or field was soon full of people who complained to sympathetic city councils about the sound of tractors in the early morning and the smell of manure. Vandalism of farms and orchards became a problem. Even more troublesome, a new housing tract or shopping center increased the value of the adjoining farmland, raising its property taxes by huge amounts. In 1965, an acre of lima bean field in Fountain Valley or Costa Mesa was valued at $20,000 to $60,000. That meant a property tax of between $250 and $1,500, even though the return from that acre was only $200. The easiest, sometimes the only, solution was to sell the land, sending the suburban sprawl that much farther. The Williamson Act of 1965 allowed agricultural preserves to be formed, as a way of keeping farmland taxes down. Counties could agree to tax a grower s land at the lower agricultural rates if the farmer agreed to keep his land agricultural for ten years. Though at one time ninety-three thousand acres were in agricultural preserve in Orange County, the system did not achieve its purpose. Development was so profitable that the back taxes and penalties for canceling agricultural preserves were no deterrent. By and large, the agricultural preserve benefited the large landholders: The Irvine Company and Rancho Mission Viejo. They owned 95 percent of land in agricultural preserve, land they had not intended to develop in the near future in any case. Orange County agriculture adapted by shifting to high-value crops suitable to smaller, scattered plots of land that could be rented while the owner awaited development. Besides nursery stock which, grown in pots, does not require farmland strawberries became a major cash crop. In 1986, the nursery and flower crops totaled more than $121 million, the strawberry crop more than $64 million. This trend went even further in the growing of designer crops genetically engineered for the expanding fruit and vegetable departments of the grocery stores. Researchers developed such oddities as baseball-size lettuce; golf-ball size cantaloupe; pale-green seedless watermelons; and orange, purple, and ivory peppers. By 1987, many were being grown in Orange County.

79 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 69 Will agriculture disappear from Orange County? The question was posed to the county s agriculturists in a 1985 newspaper article. Gilbert Aguirre, vice president of ranch operations for Rancho Mission Viejo, thought Orange County agriculture had only twenty to thirty more years. Randy Keim, who ran the University of California field station in Orange County, thought it would always be present, though in what form he could not predict. Fred Keller, chief of farming operations for The Irvine Company, said his firm was in agriculture only because it made enough to pay the property taxes and break even. If Orange County agriculture disappeared overnight, you d never notice it, Keller said. It wouldn t make a ripple? In 1988, the Irvine Company leased its farmland to outside growers and withdrew from agriculture altogether. Summary Statement: Orange County Emmons provides perhaps the single-best overview of the orange industry in Orange County. He summarizes nearly all of the themes previously noted by Walker, Yorba, and Ramsey. Specifically, he details the history and relative importance of: 1. The first orange in Orange County. 2. The planting of the first Valencia Oranges and their importance. 3. The importance of the railroad to the growth of the orange industry. 4. The importance of the cooperative. 5. Pests and problems associated with growing oranges. 6. The importance of Sunkist. 7. The role of braceros. 8. The disappearance of oranges in Orange County. 9. The Irvine Company: Agriculture and Development. The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland The following is taken from Robert Glass Cleland s historic account The Irvine Ranch. Although Cleland s work is dated, it remains as the benchmark for the early history of the ranch and company. ORCHARDS AND WATER The development of the citrus industry today the most profitable of the Irvine Ranch enterprises began long after most of the other major crops had passed the experimental stage. In 1906, C. E. Utt, a well-known resident of the Santa Ana Valley, conceived a novel

80 70 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House plan. At that time, because of the great expense involved, most citrus orchards were only from ten to forty or fifty acres in size. Utt proposed to his friend Sherman Stevens to lease a thousand acres of rich, adequately watered land and plant the tract to orchards. Utt and Stevens together then interested Irvine in the undertaking, and the three eventually formed a partnership called the San Joaquin Fruit and Investment Company to carry on the work. Under the agreement, Irvine entered the partnership on the same terms as the other two, the Irvine Company agreed to lease a thousand acres of selected land on the Rancho San Joaquin to the partnership for a term of ten years, after four years, the partners had the right to buy all the land that had been set out to orchard at two hundred dollars an acre; the lessees obligated themselves to bear the entire expense of planting and caring for the orchards, water for irrigation was to be developed in the swampy lowlands of the ranch and lifted to the orchards, at the lessees expense; and the Irvine Company, on its part, agreed to sell ten acres of such water-bearing land to the partnership for a thousand dollars. Under this contract, the San Joaquin Fruit and Investment Company planted six hundred acres to walnuts and apricots and four hundred acres to oranges and lemons. Before the orchards came into commercial bearing, the lessees planted lima beans, peanuts, chili peppers, and nursery stock between the tree rows to help defray the heavy costs of the undertaking. At the end of the ten-year period, the Irvine Company deeded the thousand acres to the three partners in accordance with the terms of the lease, and the partners eventually sold some six hundred acres of mature, heavily bearing trees at approximately thirty-five hundred dollars an acre. Long before this, the success of the San Joaquin Fruit Company s venture led the Irvine Company itself to plant many hundreds of additional acres to oranges and lemons. All this land, of course, required irrigation, and fortunately at that time there was ample water on the ranch to meet the additional demands. But serious lack of rainfall during the autumn and early winter of , the driest comparable period in thirty-five years, reduced the beet and bean crops by nearly half and forced the ranch to look for new pasturage for its cattle in the Palo Verde Valley, along the route of the Santa Fe railroad to Phoenix, Arizona. The drought was followed by the Great Freeze of January This proved a major disaster to many of the citrus growers of southern California, but the comparatively young groves of the Irvine Ranch suffered much less than many of the surrounding orchards. (Cleland 1952: 116, 117) Despite the freeze of 1913, the Irvine Company greatly expanded its planting of citrus and other fruit trees during the next twenty years and made a corresponding reduction in field crop acreage. Low-lying areas were drained; considerable land previously devoted to cattle and sheep pasture was brought under cultivation; after 1917 several hundred acres each year were planted to tomatoes and additional large areas to lettuce, cabbage, mustard, peas, rhubarb, and other vegetables, and millions of dollars were spent on water conservation and development. In 1921, the San Joaquin Fruit and Investment Company negotiated a second lease with the Irvine Company that differed in some important details but followed in general the pattern set by the original lease of The new lease included only two hundred and forty acres; it ran

81 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 71 for fifteen years; at the end of that period, the San Joaquin Fruit and Investment Company agreed to pay a thousand dollars an acre for the land, and during the life of the lease the Irvine Company was to receive a twenty-five per cent interest in the share-rental of the property. The lessees planted some two hundred acres of the new tract to avocados and the rest to oranges. In 1930, the Utt Development Company, half of whose stock was owned by the San Joaquin Fruit and Investment Company, bought a section of land near Oxnard in Ventura County and undertook the development of a large lemon orchard. An additional hundred sixty acres were added to the tract in In spite of a number of unforeseen problems, the venture proved an excellent investment. Part of the success of the enterprise was due to the management s careful study of root stocks, desirable buds, and proper methods of pruning. The company also used wind machines in combating damage by frost with good results. In 1950 some forty machines were in operation on the Oxnard ranch. In the mid-twenties the San Joaquin Fruit Company bought another large tract, called Walnut Acres, in the San Fernando Valley, but when it was proposed to subdivide and sell the land, Irvine became skeptical of the outcome of the venture and exchanged his interests in the property for three hundred acres, valued at approximately half a million dollars, that the San Joaquin Fruit Company still held in the Irvine Ranch. Many purchasers of land in Walnut Acres defaulted on their contracts as a result of the panic of 1929, and Utt and Stevens found their San Fernando property a heavy financial liability. Irvine then took over part of Utt s stock to lighten the latter s load (Cleland 1952: 119, 120. Like many other large owners, James Irvine was a strong supporter of the co-operative principle of marketing farm products. The Irvine Ranch joined the California Fruit Growers Exchange (now Sunkist Growers, Inc.) the largest and one of the oldest organizations of its kind in the world at a very early date and sells its oranges through three branches of exchange the Irvine Valencia Growers Association, the Golden West Citrus Association, and the Frances Citrus Association. (Cleland 1952: 123, 124) Summary Statement: The Irvine Ranch Cleland underscores the importance of The Irvine Ranch and The Irvine Company to both the history of Orange County and the orange industry. Specifically, he notes 1. The first leasing of lands for growing oranges. 2. The first planting of oranges by the ranch itself. 3. James Irvine as a supporter of the co-operative principle. 4. The three exchanges of the Irvine Ranch: The Irvine Valencia Growers Association, the Golden West Citrus Association, and the Frances Citrus Association 5. The Irvine Ranch joins the California Fruit Growers Exchange (later Sunkist Growers, Inc.)

82 72 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 10. Orange County: The Case of the Disappearing Orange (A Select Reading List) Note: Please also refer to several of the sources quoted in the previous section entitled Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges, and The Irvine Ranch (A Select Reading List). While several of the previously quoted sources reference the end of orange industry, the selections quoted below specifically focus on the disappearance of the orange in Orange County. In addition, and as noted earlier, more than one authority is referenced and/or quoted below. The reason for this seeming excess is understandable. Quite simply, the ultimate determination of historic significance for the IVG Packing House (under CEQA Guidelines) is based on the identification of certain themes or events reflecting the broad based patterns of California history. More than one authority is referenced here, to the point of duplication, simply as a means of confirming a consensus among authorities as to the major themes or events that relate to the IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex. Orange County through Four Centuries by Leo J. Friis The following is taken from the classic 1965 history of Orange County by Leo J. Friis entitled Orange County Through Four Centuries. Despite being somewhat dated, this book is still used by many as the first serious account of the growth and development of the county. Interestingly, Friis writes prior to realizing the final impacts of the development boom that was only in a stage of infancy as he finished his history. Quick Decline A new plant disease appeared in orange groves near Covina in 1939 and quickly spread to Orange County with its focus in the Placentia area. Usually the affected trees experienced a gradual decline, but there were numerous instances where they suffered a sudden collapse giving rise to the name of quick decline. No doubt the melancholy sight of rows of dying trees rustling their crisp, dead leaves prompted the Spanish to call the disease Tristeza, meaning sadness. In 1946 it was proved that quick decline was caused by a virus carried by the Aphis gossypii, commonly called the melon aphid. The disease attacks only orange trees growing on sour root stock, and has inflicted heavy loss in Orange County where growers, on the advice of government experts, used sour root as a protection against gummosis. There is no known cure for quick decline. The extent of its ravages in the county will never be known because so many groves have been uprooted to make way for subdivisions. Its relentless persistence is reflected in a report of the local agricultural commissioner who declared that in the twelve months ending June, 1962, it killed 243,920 orange trees in the county (Friis 1965: 147).

83 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 73 Summary Statement: Orange County through Four Centuries Friis specifically discusses Quick Decline, a phenomenon that greatly impacted orange production in Orange County. The disease had far-reaching effects. The New California: Facing the 21 st Century by Dan Walters The following is taken from The New California: Facing the 21 st Century by Dan Walters as published in For years, cartoon tycoon Walt Disney had yearned to build a different kind of amusement park, one that would appeal to both adults and children. At first he wanted to locate it near the Disney studios in the San Fernando Valley, but there wasn t enough land. He went south instead, into the orange groves of aptly named Orange County and there, in the sleepy little suburban city of Anaheim, he created Disneyland. The rest, as they say, is history. When Disneyland opened its doors in 1955, Anaheim contained about 35,000 souls and its prime industry was growing fruit. In five years, the population tripled and dozens of motels and restaurants were built to accommodate the millions of tourists who wanted to visit a kingdom ruled by a fictional mouse. Anaheim exploded, but so did the rest of Orange County, from an agricultural backwater to the state s second most populous county, complete with major league sports and the other trappings of metropolitan status, but without the existence of a single dominating city to give it a cultural identity. In 30 years, from 1950 to 1980, Orange County s population increased 10-fold to nearly two million, but Anaheim, the largest city, still has only 11 percent of the population, leaving Orange County in the cultural and media shadow of Los Angeles. The professional football team that plays in Anaheim Stadium, for example, still refers to itself as the Los Angeles Rams, while the professional baseball team was named after Los Angeles and calls itself the California Angels. Orange County, the largest urban area in the country without its own television coverage, gets its television from Los Angeles. What happened in Orange County in the space of a few decades the conversion of farmland into homes, shopping centers and industries is the quintessential story of postwar California. This is the culmination of the American dream, the British Broadcasting Corporation concluded in 1976 when it selected Orange County as one of three American regions to be explored to mark the nation s bicentennial (Walters 1986: 33-34). Summary Statement: The New California Quick Decline had an immediate and negative impact on the production of oranges in Orange County. In reality, however, far greater effects were felt from the urbanization of the county.

84 74 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A Farewell to the Orange Groves by Marv Wolf, New West Magazine The following article from the short-lived New West Magazine focuses on the decline of the orange growing industry within Orange County. The article zeros in on the realities of land development in southern California in the early 1980s, and looks back somewhat romantically on the heyday of the orange growing industry in Orange County. New West Magazine August 25, 1980 A Farewell to the Orange Groves Southern California Journal/Marv Wolf When the engine is ready he selects one of the seven levers before him, and the loader, as this 21-ton behemoth is called, inches forward toward the first tree. This tree, like all the others in the orchard, is laden with ripe fruit. The farmer who used to own it hadn t time to have it picked. Escrow closings often dictate the first day of work, in construction, as in other enterprise, time is money. The buildings that will soon rise on this land are worth far more to the new owners than a few thousand dollars worth of Valencias. A good operator can clear an acre a day, explains Larry Bashaw, the general engineering contractor whose men and machines in 1966 helped transform the orange groves of Anaheim into the huge convention center complex. The best way to clear a bearing orange grove is to cut the trees down first a couple of men with a couple of chain saws and leave a couple of feet of stump. Then take a loader and go through and pick the stumps out, and haul em off to the dump. One way or another, more than 90 percent of Orange County s 66,870 acres of Valencia orange groves have been knocked down and carted off to dumps since It was quite a shock to see more than 500 acres of oranges come down in less than two years over at Northwood, says Dean Buchinger, who manages the 5,500-acre orchard department of the Irvine Company s agricultural operation. Mike Yorba isn t so sure about the 25-year projection. I ll guess that we ve got another fifteen to twenty years of production maybe. You tell me what the economy does, I ll tell you how long we ll have the groves. The biggest danger to an orange crop used to be frost, and after that disease. Now the number one problem is urbanization. That s something we all have to think about. Yorba manages Irvine Valencia Growers, a co-op that picks, washes, waxes and markets its members oranges. The Irvine Company is its largest member. But Mike has concerns that exceed the future of his employment. He is a seventh-generation direct descendant of one of Orange County s first European families. Our agricultural operation is just a landholding operation, explains Buchinger, who has been with the Irvine Company for sixteen years. The only alternatives to farming, while we wait on population growth and then development of what s left, are to either lease the land out or to just leave it fallow and rotodisk it a couple of times a year to keep the weeds down. Farming the land lets us generate some cash. (New West 1980: 78)

85 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 75 By the end of World War II, 50 packing houses were sending Orange County s fruit all over the world. The vast plain of the Santa Ana River and the rolling hills and flatlands of the south county were covered with orange trees. (New West 1980: 79) The blasts come from Phantom jets landing at nearby El Toro Marine Corps Air Station, and they are one of the chief reasons that any remnant of the orange groves remains. That area borders the noise blanket zone, explains Collins. Closer in to the base development is restricted, and that land is ideal for agriculture. But already, most of the flat land that Buchinger calls the finest orange-growing area in the world has given way to development. (New West 1980: 79) In this business you can t make it on one year, because it s all ups and downs, says Laurence Leichtfuss Sr., 66, manager of the Villa Park Orchards in Orange, the third of the county s marketing co-ops. I started in the early thirties, and it s been a good life. You re not going to get filthy rich, but it s the only way for me. I ve got this love for citrus. Seems like once you get started, you can t quit. It s a good, clean atmosphere, a good way to raise a family. Oh, it s a challenge, but I ve made a living from it. Leichtfuss used to own orchards near Villa Park; he sold them a few years ago and used part of the proceeds to buy more orange groves in San Diego County. (New West 1980: 80 & 81) Last year we returned about $2,500 per acre to our members, after picking and shipping costs, says Mike Yorba. We grow exceptionally good Valencias, some of the best around, and we got a premium price, $6.16 a field box. (New West 1980: 81) This is a very strange business, really, says Yorba. It s conducted without a contract, without even a handshake. A man will call and say he wants a carload of Valencias. That s 2,500 boxes, at $5 or $6 a box. So we just ship them. No other business in the world is conducted like that, so everyone s got to be pretty honest or it wouldn t work but it works. (New West 1980: 81) Summary Statement: A Farewell to the Orange Groves By 1980, many predicted the end of the orange industry. Development in Orange County was quite literally exploding and orange acreage suffered accordingly. The reason, as accurately noted in the New West article is, The buildings that will soon rise on this [development] land are worth far more to the new owners than a few thousand dollars worth of Valencias. Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County? The Southern California Citrus Industry in Transition by Edward J. Bachus, Southern California Quarterly This academic publication details the changing nature of the orange growing business in southern California, and the gradual shift from Orange County as the center of the citrus growing industry to Tulare County.

86 76 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Southern California Quarterly The Publication of the Historical Society of Southern California Summer 1981 Edward J. Bachus, Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County? The Southern California Citrus Industry in Transition To anyone visiting Orange County, California, it is obvious that the orange no longer reigns supreme in it economy. What were once acres of citrus groves are now housing tracts, industrial areas, freeways, motels and amusement parks. Orange County is no longer orange country. The same appears to be true for the rest of Southern California, although California itself remains a major citrus producing region. The purpose of this article is to analyze the citrus industry of southern California, its history, twentieth century influences on it, locational changes, methods of survival, and its future in a changing economy. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 157) Throughout the United States there has been a rural to urban migration which may be seen in the fact that the total United States population grew 65% from 1930 to 1970 while the urban population grew 117% during the same period. The immediate results of the urbanization process are shocking in their total destruction of agricultural land and economy. In Los Angeles County for a period in the late 1950s 3000 acres of orange groves were destroyed a day. Also in the fifties, one orange tree was bulldozed every fifty-five seconds. Since the end of World War II Los Angeles and Orange counties, once the center of citrus production, have become almost completely urban. Between 1948 and 1960 the Valencia orange groves decreased by over one-third and this occurred mainly in southern California. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 166, 167) Clearly the citrus farmer could not stop urbanization and its accompanying pressures. Smog since 1944 had slowly driven crops out of contaminated areas while policy conflicts and uncoordinated planning at the state level added to the farmer s burden. Taxes, which increased as urban development approached, plagued him as did the newcomer s pressure to cease the use of chemical insecticides. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 167) All told, pressure on the southern California citrus grower in the twentieth century has been tremendous, yet he survives. Basically, survival has been dependent on the cultivation of new lands, expansion of irrigation, chemical fertilizers, new and better insecticides, attempts to restrict urban sprawl, new methods of farming, and the opening of new markets. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 168) Citrus growers have been able to stay ahead of urbanization by moving away from it through the sale of their land and a migration inland to begin anew. Movement has generally been toward the desert region, and even to western Arizona which has become an important citrus growing region, and northward to California s Central Valley, which, led by Tulare County, has become the new fruit mecca. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 168) In an attempt to prevent the growth of urbanization from repeating its agricultural destruction in the new citrus areas, the State of California has belatedly stepped in. In 1965, a law was passed, amended in 1966, the California Land Conservation Act, which created agricultural

87 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 77 preserves and stated that California cities should grow solid, concentrate and mature (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 169) In the future, the citrus industry of southern California will continue to flourish although acreage will decrease. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 169) In the long run, southern California will continue to be a leading producer of citrus fruit. Current indications are that the phenomenal growth in California s population has, at least for the time, leveled off with as many people leaving the state as entering it. New laws, new lands, new methods, and new markets will insure a place for the citrus industry in the economy. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 170) Who took the oranges out of Orange County? The twentieth century did, but it only moved them to Tulare. (Southern California Quarterly 1981: 170) Summary Statement: Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County? Bachus accurately identifies and details the effects of the pressures of development on the orange industry in Orange County. Specifically, 1. The effects of Post World War II urbanization. 2. The resulting decline in orange acreage. 3. The impacts of the California Land Conservation Act.

88 78 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 11. Orange County: An Alternate View of the Orange A Century of Citrus by Jim Sleeper, The Santa Ana Register This article, written in 1968 by long-time Irvine Company Historian Jim Sleeper, disputes the predicted demise of the citrus industry in Orange County. A Century of Citrus The Story of Orange County s GOLDEN HARVEST By Jim Sleeper Irvine Company Historian (Reprinted from Santa Ana Register November 17, 1968) While it only costs a dime, the rootstock of an orange tree is capable of producing a prodigious amount of fruit. In Orange County it has also produced a prodigious amount of history. Locally, the reign of King Valencia appears to be over, though determined ranchers insist that the king is neither dead nor dying. Be that as it may, acreage figures attest that he has been on a devastating diet for twenty years now. If the writing is on the wall for citrus growers, the message reads: Blight, bugs, tracts, and taxes. The first two are conquerable, possibly even the third will slacken. There is an old adage about the fourth that is hard to back. But if the fat years are past, it is a past worth examining, for the orange sired our county, gave it a name and shaped its attitudes like nothing else has ever done. As Charles Lummis observed, The orange is not just a fruit but a romance. It was Southern California s answer to the gold rush. Indeed, beginning in 1903 citrus surpassed even the state s gold production. Since 1894 oranges have produced nearly three billion dollars for the people of Southern California. Nowhere have more of those gold nuggets been picked and pocketed than right here in Orange County. Despite what looked like a real money-maker, oranges would never have achieved the prominence that they did had it not been for the misfortune of another crop. Grapes dominated the local agricultural scene until 1886 when a devastating blight finished off the vineyards. Five million vines were wiped out by the Anaheim Disease, more particularly, a virus carried by leaf-hoppers. Groping for a substitute, growers turned to citrus. Another impetus was the railroad. The first shipment of local citrus left for a foreign market (as the papers called Des Moines, Iowa) in April of By 1887, the Santa Fe serviced the length of Orange County, which forced the Southern Pacific to drop its freight prices. Four hundred carloads of oranges were shipped that year, a figure that would double in the next ten. Small wonder, then, that when a new attempt was made to carve a separate county out of the southeast corner of Los Angeles, the name proposed was Orange County, in honor of the area s most promising product. A plebescite overwhelmingly ratified separation, and

89 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 79 following an election to select its county seat and officers, the new County of Orange opened for business on August 1, Mirroring the increase of citrus was the rise of the packing house industry. Appropriately, the first house was established by Andrew Cauldwell about 1881 on the southwest corner of Maple, east of the Presbyterian Church. Some years later his Fay Fruit Co. began shipping from the S. P. station (then called West Orange ). Freight on four cars to St. Paul was $750 and it took four weeks to get there. By the turn of the century there were a half dozen packing plants in the county; by 1913 there were 16. In 1929, the Santiago Orange Growers Association at Orange handled and shipped more oranges than any other house in the world 2,000 carloads! The crest was hit in 1943 when Orange County s 65,000 acres of citrus kept 45 packing houses busy. Until replaced in 1956 by fiberboard boxes, oranges were shipped in wooden crates an industry in itself when one considers that as many as ten million boxes left the county in a single year. Pasted on one end were exotic four-color lithographed labels representing their packer s brands. Already citrus labels are bringing premium prices from collectors, the finest collection (1700 different) being owned by the Pomona Public Library. There is a glamour about an orange that you don t find in a black-eyed pea. If Southern California sold oranges, then oranges repaid the favor ten-fold by selling Southern California. Tourism, which began in the mid-eighties, has never faltered. During the twenties, when boosterism ran amuck, the whole world was invited to come to California and Pick an orange. (Fortunately, that offer is no longer open.) Shivering easterners were enchanted with western weather and to own an orange grove in Southern California was the epitome of agricultural aristocracy. Orange trees make a handsome back drop for a suburban home and hundreds were built (to wit: Orange County in the 30 s). Orchards implied status, and the county was populated with gentlemen farmers on two-acre plots who called themselves ranchers. Some, like Ed Utt, C. C. Chapman, Sherman Stevens and James Irvine were determined agriculturists, who invested early in large scale operations. Though mechanization has done much for the citrus industry, much of the work is still done by hand. At harvest time, a first-class packing house still requires a force of 100 people. Another 200 must be in the field, for no mechanical contrivance has yet improved upon the human orange picker. Until World War I, first the Chinese then the Japanese supplied much of the labor. The orientals were considered exceptionally deft and efficient at wrapping an orange with tissue then popping in into a box in a twinkle of an eye. Locally, Mexican residents had always worked in the orchards, but became dominant after Wind and weather have at times been unkind to the Orange Empire, but nothing came closer to tumbling it than did a germ too tiny to see and too elusive to cure. Ranchers called it Quick Decline. In one year alone, Q. D. killed 243, 920 trees.

90 80 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Orange acreage shriveled. At its greatest extent in 1938, valencias accounted for 67,536 acres of county agriculture. Thirty years later, tracts and Tristeza have reduced that figure to 21, 209. Thirty-six of the forty-five packing houses have folded. Today, the staccato of hammers and the screech of Skil-Saws coming from mushrooming subdivisions contrast with the silent, melancholy sight of half-dead trees in weedy orchards across the street from them. Seeing both, one could easily be convinced that Orange County s citrus is either a myth or ancient history. The truth is neither. Like its relative the grapefruit, the valencia may soon give its pallbearers a good squirt in the eye. One of the largest growers, the Irvine Ranch, has actually been increasing its Valencia acreage. Cut to a 500,000-box harvest at the depth of the Q. D. epidemic in 1962, Ranch production last year had recouped to a million boxes and is expected to hit two million by Launching a tremendous replacing program seven years ago, the Irvine orchard department has already replaced 553,615 diseased trees. Counting those unaffected by Q. D. and new seedlings, the Ranch will see its one millionth Valencia go in the ground this year. After the Q. D. set-back of the 50 s, many growers succumbed to subdividers offers and sold out. Now in the mid-sixties, others, though wanting to stay in agriculture, are being forced into desperation sales because of spiraling taxes. Hopeful of maintaining Orange County s pre-eminence, not only in citrus but in other crops, farmers have petitioned the Board of Supervisors to create an agricultural preserve to be taxed on its own potential. If accepted, under provisions of the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, applicants would be committed to keep their land in agriculture for at least 10 years or face stiff tax penalties. Last year valencias slipped to fifth place among Orange County s 11 million dollar crops. Typical comment: In ten years there won t be enough oranges left here to make a good Screwdriver. Don t bet on it. A million new high-producing Q. D.-resistant trees will be reaching maturity within the next four years. With any luck and an Agricultural Preserve, the Valencia orange promises well to recapture its old front-runner spot on the county ticket. With a century of citrus behind it, Orange County is far from reaping its last Golden Harvest.

91 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 81 Summary Statement: A Century of Citrus In 1968, Sleeper was amazingly if misleadingly optimistic. He does, however, underscore one very important point. This point is the fact that The Irvine Company was directly responsible for increasing the overall acreage of Valencias at a time when the profitability of raising oranges was in decline. The actual reason, the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, is immaterial. The fact is that The Irvine Company clearly promoted the production of oranges in Orange County far beyond limits that would normally have been defined by economic reality.

92 82 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 12. The Packing House and the Rules of the Cooperative/Association The following is taken from the 1993 Sunkist sponsored publication entitled Heritage of Gold: The First 100 Years of Sunkist Growers, Inc , as written by Catherine Merlo. This presents a slightly more favorable, and decidedly less scholarly, version of the role of the California Cooperative in the fruit growing industry than that offered by Steven Stoll in his The Fruits of Natural Advantage. It is, however, no less valuable, and is most certainly the official version approved by Sunkist, Inc. PACKINGHOUSES: VITAL TO THE INDUSTRY Packinghouses - or local associations - are intrinsic to Sunkist, serving as one level in the cooperative's three-tiered membership structure and providing the vital role of preparing growers' fruit for market. The packinghouse role has changed considerably in the last 100 years. In the early days, there were hundreds of packinghouses throughout California. Some would be owned by two or three people, maybe a family. Such a packinghouse might stay open for only a month, and pack only Valencia oranges. Back then, of course, fruit packing was done by hand, each piece of citrus individually wrapped in a piece of tissue paper and placed in a wooden crate. And, too, packinghouses handled the citrus only for the fresh fruit market. Many of these associations had their own brand names in addition to "Sunkist" to identify to the trade the quality of their own local fruit. The modernization of the industry changed the citrus packinghouse. In the 1920s, there were over 200 packing associations in the Sunkist network. By 1992, there were only 66 packinghouses in the system. Packinghouses had become larger, sophisticated facilities. Technology brought automation, labor-saving equipment and high technology to the packinghouses. By the 1990s, equipment for sizing, grading, color sorting, and pattern packing was computerized - of the machinery found in a modern packing plant most had been invented and manufactured by Sunkist, under the direction of Maury Johnson. He played a significant role in designing and developing the lemon volumetric sizer, the lemon volume filling machine, the "soft touch" pack machine, bulk bin dumpers, and the enzyme peeling project. He was also a major contributor in the development of the place packer, the electromechanical grader, the sectionizer, and the electro-optical sizer. Today, quality is paramount at a Sunkist packinghouse. The packinghouse manager usually decides when fruit will be harvested and supervises the picking and hauling. At the packinghouse, the fruit is washed and dried, graded and sized, packed and cooled, and the cartons are loaded for shipment. While the cartons will advertise the Sunkist name, the association's local brand name will also be imprinted on the container. The biggest packinghouses, like the Saticoy Lemon Association, may handle as many as 7 million cartons a year. They may represent 250 grower-member entities from 12,000 acres. At

93 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 83 the peak of the January through June season, these large houses may employ as many as 1,200 fruit pickers out in the groves, and 500 full-time packers. As part of Sunkist's federated structure, packinghouses are either grower-owned associations which are members of Sunkist, or they are packing facilities which are licensed to pack the fruit of Sunkist growers. In either case, they cannot pack fruit for anyone but Sunkist growers. This keeps both the cooperative s quality control and its funding assessments in order (Merlo, 1993: pp ). A COOPERATIVE'S DISTINCTIONS Basically, all cooperatives - regardless of type - were born out of economic necessity, as a form of self-help, by like-minded people who believed they could obtain goods and services more effectively and economically as a group than they could as individuals. Standing alone, a farmer lacks bargaining strength and is forced to accept whatever price is offered by buyers - assuming he can locate a buyer. By joining with others in the same plight, a farmer who becomes a member of a cooperative is able to compete with some influence in the marketplace without sacrificing his individual ownership and independent decision-making. He is free to concentrate on what he does best -producing a crop - knowing that his cooperative has on its staff a professional marketing team to sell his crop for the best possible return In many respects, cooperatives are organized like other businesses and operate in much the same way. But in several significant respects, they differ from other forms of business enterprise. Among these distinctions are: One, cooperatives are voluntary membership organizations. If, at any time, the member owners perceive that their cooperative is not operating in their interest or in the public interest, they can initiate program changes, hire new management, form a new organization, or terminate their membership. Two, cooperatives are governed by democratic process. The members elect representatives to serve on the board of directors. Voting control is based on membership or business done with the cooperative, not on the amount of investment as in a stock corporation. Three, cooperatives operate on a non-profit, or cost-of-doing-business basis. Economic benefits after expenses are returned to the members or patrons according to their use of the cooperative's services. Four, the cooperative's members participate in financing their business. Since it is the members who are primarily interested in the success of the business, they must assume the responsibility of providing capital for their cooperative's operations. Five, cooperatives foster free enterprise by allowing members to exercise their own initiative. Farm operators who market their crops or buy their supplies cooperatively still react individually to market price signals in making their production decisions. If prices ever become artificially high, farmers will respond with increased production to take advantage of the good market. That increased production will, in turn, pressure market prices back down

94 84 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House again. With supply and demand in balance, consumers enjoy plentiful supplies of food at reasonable prices. In short, farmer cooperatives play a vital economic role in contributing to the celebrated efficiency of American agriculture... Though farmer cooperatives are under direct attack by some who would make drastic changes in this form of doing business, we at Sunkist Growers, Inc. believe that the unique characteristics of cooperatives make their continued growth clearly in the public interest. We are confident that these organizations will not only survive the challenges facing them, but will continue to thrive as a most dynamic element of America's private enterprise economy (Merlo, 1993: p. 157). - Sunkist Growers, Inc., 1978 Summary Statement: Packinghouses: Vital to the Industry This article underscores the importance of the packing house, and how it relates to the cooperative and to Sunkist. This is of some relevance to the significance of the IVG Packing House, as IVG was associated with Sunkist at the very beginning and for a period of some 50 years.

95 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The Packing House as an Operational Entity Note: The following is taken from the highly informative and historically important book by H. Harold Hume, entitled Citrus Fruits and Their Culture. First published in 1907 and extensively updated in 1957, this treatise describes more than 50 years of experience and contact that Hume had with the fruit growing industry. His is actually the best and most complete contemporary description of the operation of packing houses readily available. Hume s work is even more important here, as it was written in 1957 at a time during which the IVG packing house was both growing and in full operation. The needs, processes, and equipment he describes do, therefore, apply in large part directly to the operation of the IVG packing house and building complex. PACKING THE FRUIT Since 1900, the handling of citrus fruits in southeastern districts has undergone very important and far-reaching changes. The small, individual packing house has disappeared except for the handling of fancy express trade fruit. Formerly nearly every grower picked and packed his own fruit, and there were as many systems of handling, grading, and packing as there were growers. There was little uniformity in these practices, and much variation existed in the product marketed. Now the fruit from large areas is brought together and packed in a single large packing house. This has resulted in greater uniformity in handling, in packing, and in the product placed on the markets. Gathering the crop and preparing it for marketing have been standardized. Packing Houses The packing house should be located where it may conveniently take care of fruit from large areas. It should be on the side of the railroad, or a switch track should be run from the main line to the packing house, with ample track facilities for empty and loaded cars. The size of the packing house will depend on the quantity of fruit to be handled. In sections where an increase in output is to be expected in future years, the house is sometimes planned so as to make enlargement easy. Modern packing houses are constructed of different materials, but the better and larger ones are made with steel frames, tile, brick, or concrete walls, tile roofs, and are practically fireproof. They should be well lighted, with plenty of space for packing supplies (boxes, paper, and the like), for fruit, machinery, and for packing. The interior of an up-to-date citrus packing house bears little or no resemblance to one of former days. Gone are the old-time sizers and more or less crude homemade equipment, and in their place is an array of machinery, conveyers, and labor-saving devices that makes the interior resemble a manufacturing plant. Machinery has replaced hand labor to a very large extent. At a glance one wonders how citrus fruits can be sent through them and come out sound, but the constant effort to safeguard fruit at every stage has met with real success. Much of what is done to or with citrus fruits in packing houses in preparation for the fresh fruit trade is aimed at improving their appearance and making them more attractive to buyers.

96 86 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House They are degreened (at some seasons), washed, dried, polished, waxed, graded, and sized before being packed in containers. To secure satisfactory results, the packing house must be run by a competent manager. He must be acquainted with every detail connected with the handling of citrus fruits and the operation of packing-house machinery. He should also be a good manager of labor, to secure whole-hearted cooperation. Since his contact with the patrons of the packing house is intimate, he must do his work in such manner as to gain and hold their confidence. The labor must be intelligent, conscientious, and interested in building and maintaining the reputation of the house for putting up a high-grade, uniform pack. Everything in and about the packing house should be kept scrupulously neat, clean, and free from decaying or rotten fruit. Delivery of Fruit Fruit is delivered to the packing house by truck and unloaded at a platform outside the building. This unloading platform is placed at a convenient height, and the field boxes [later bins at IVG] of fruit are taken into the packing house by hand truck or on a roller conveyer. There the boxes are placed in degreening rooms [not done at IVG], sent directly to the washer or stacked to await their turn. Degreening [Not Done at IVG] Washing Field boxes are emptied, either by hand or by a special machine, onto a short roller conveyer with rolls so spaced as to allow leaves and other debris to drop through. Empty field boxes are conveyed to the platform outside the building. The fruit goes on by conveyer belt to the soaking tank and then to the washing machine. Soaking tanks are sometimes replaced by equipment that sprays the fruit and brushes it to remove dirt. Nearly all citrus fruit comes to the packing house in such condition that it must be washed to remove dust, soot, and scale insects before being packed. As the fruit enters the washer it receives an application of soap suds from a special applicator, moves along between rotating brushes, and is turned over and over until it passes through the opposite end. When fruit comes through the washer, its appearance is greatly improved. It is necessary to supervise the washing machine closely to prevent injury to fruit. Drying From the washer the fruit is conveyed to the dryer. Sometimes it can be dried by air at usual temperature, but more often it is necessary to heat the air. The dryer is a long closed box through which the fruit is carried on a conveyer. As it passes through, warm dry air is blown with fans over and around it, through several openings, and by the time it reaches the end of the dryer it is entirely dry, unless conditions are very unfavorable. Waxing and Polishing In the processes of cleaning fruit by washing and brushing, the natural luster and the very thin wax-like coating of the rind are lost. It is customary to replace these, after the fruit comes from the washer, by passing it through a polisher where it receives a thin application of wax and is gently brushed mechanically with dry, soft brushes. A commonly used wax is an emulsified

97 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 87 combination of paraffin and carnawba waxes especially prepared for the purpose. This is applied, in a fine spray, from an atomizer such as is used in applying paint. Afterward the fruit goes on to the grading belt. Grading [Process Modernized at IVG in Late 1980s] On leaving the polisher, the fruit is carried before the graders on a broad, slowly moving canvas belt. Several graders sit or stand at the side of the belt and examine the fruit as it passes along. Culls are taken out on one section of the grading belt, and the remaining fruit is separated into as many classes and grades as desired. Each is carried on belts to the sizers; off sizes, scarred sound fruit, and discolored fruit are sent to processing plants. Grading belts must be well lighted, and grading must be very careful and uniform. On the quality and uniformity of the pack depends the reputation of the house, and rigid standards should be adhered to. It means much to any citrus region to establish and maintain a reputation for the production of fruit high in eating and keeping quality, which can be delivered to the consumer in first-class condition. No reasonable effort should be spared to secure such recognition, for it makes the marketing of the crop and the securing of satisfactory returns so much easier. In this connection, nothing is of more importance than careful uniform grading and standardization of all fruit shipped. Sizers Citrus fruits of round or oblate form can be accurately sized by machinery. Lemons and limes must be sized by the eye, either before or at time of packing. A good sizer must possess the following points: It must size all fruit accurately, whether round or flat, passing the fruit through on its greatest diameter. It should be easily adjusted and of sufficient capacity to handle requirements. It must not injure the fruit. In large packing houses, several sizers are usually installed, to facilitate the handling of different classes and grades of fruit. Each sizer is equipped with bins for receiving the fruit after it is sized. These are so placed as to prevent a drop between sizer and bin. It is usual to pad the inside of the bins. Packing Conveniences The fruit runs out from the sizer, each size into its own bin. By the side of the bin, so that the packer can readily reach the fruit, the box is placed on a table of convenient height, with a revolving top. When the end of the box nearest the bin is packed, the box ends are reversed to bring the empty half next to the bin. Small trays should be provided for holding wrapping paper if wrappers are used, and the bottom of these should be made from a piece of board slightly larger than the paper. The back should be of 1/2-inch board, 2 inches high, and the sides of the same material, sloping off in front. The paper can be placed in these trays; the backs and sides will, in some measure, prevent its being blown about.

98 88 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Filling the Boxes [Wrapping Discontinued at IVG in 1950s] After accurate sizing, following proper culling and grading, the fruit is ready for packing. If it is wrapped, the packer picks up a piece of paper with the tips of his fingers, leaving it spread out on his hand, and with the other hand places a fruit on the paper; then the edges are brought together, and a dexterous twist holds it around the fruit. It is then placed in position, in the box. Precooling and Refrigeration [Ice Ultimately Replaced at IVG by Re frigerated R.R. Cars Beginning in 1960s] Decay can be greatly reduced in warm weather if the fruit is cooled before loading and if the temperature in refrigerator cars is held at 40 to 45 degrees F. while in transit. To do this, fruit is placed in cooling rooms where the temperature is held at the proper degree before loading. After loading, cold air is circulated from a cooling room or a refrigerating unit through the car door, and ice is placed in bunkers at each end of the car. These hold two to two and one-half tons of ice. Additional ice is placed in the bunkers from time to time at icing stations enroute. During the cold season it is not unusual to ice cars and leave the ventilators open until the cars reach a section in which there is danger of freezing. Auto-trucks used in shipping fruit are provided with mechanical refrigeration. Summary Statement: The Packing House as an Historic and Operational Entity Much like the ideal packing house described by Hume in his book Citrus Fruits and Their Culture, the IVG packing house had railroad access. It was well lighted, having large skylight sawtooth windows at the roofline, and plenty of space was available for future expansion. Up to and including the last day of operation, fruit was delivered to the IVG packing house by truck, where it was unloaded and delivered into the packing house by hand truck, bin, or a roller conveyor. Following unloading, fruit was then conveyed to a washer, where it was soaked and brushed as a means of removing dirt, soot, insects, and dust. This was a carefully supervised process, in order to prevent damage to the fruit. The fruit was then dried following initial sorting. It was transported to the drier by conveyor, and was blown dry by heated air. During washing and drying, the natural luster of the fruit was generally lost through removal of a thin wax-like coating of the rind. This loss was replaced in the waxer where wax was applied to the fruit. The fruit was then polished by dry, soft brushes, and conveyed to the grading belt/table. Grading was of particular importance, as the reputation of the packing house depended upon it. At the grading area, the fruit was carried before the graders on a slowly moving belt, and the fruit was culled with the remaining fruit being separated into separate grades and classes. This area was extremely well lighted.

99 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 89 At IVG the fruit was then stamped or labeled before being sized. As Hume notes, each sizer is equipped with bins for receiving the fruit after it is sized, and after dropping into the bins the fruit was hand packed. Fruit was then precooled prior to shipping in an effort to reduce decay of the product in warm weather. It was then shipped in either refrigerated railroad cars or trucks to marketing locations and retail outlets. ***** The process described by Hume more or less accurately reflects the daily operation of the IVG packing house. Various improvements and changes were made over time. These include the use of bins for the transfer of fruit from the orchard to the packing house, the extensive use of labeling and/or stamp machines, and the replacement of wooden boxes with cardboard containers for hand packing. The IVG Packing House was unusual in at least one respect. It had a basement where the fruit was unloaded and stored in a more or less climate controlled environment to await processing. Many packing houses had basements, but these were more commonly used during a degreening process not utilized at IVG. One important point is absolutely clear. The IVG packing house may not have been the largest packing house at closure, but it kept pace with the industry for at least seven decades.

100 90 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 14. The Packing House as a Social and Business Entity: An Academic View The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt by Louis Reccow The following is taken from the Doctoral Thesis of Louis Reccow entitled, The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt, as submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of California in This is an academic treatise and it is skewed, in part, by the progressive/socialism prevalent in American educational institutions beginning in the late 1960s and continuing throughout much of the 1970s. Despite this somewhat dated approach, it provides excellent background information by which to better understand, evaluate, and place into proper historical perspective, the growth, development, and role of the Packing House in relation to social issues and movements. THE ORANGE COUNTY CITRUS STRIKES OF : THE FORGOTTEN PEOPLE IN REVOLT In 1935 some fifty packing houses in Orange County packed and processed the fruit grown by area growers. Since the beginning of the first packing house in 1881, a number of the operations within the industry had been revolutionized. In the process, the role of the individual grower had diminished. By 1935, for example, the grower had surrendered many of his former rights to the packing house. Not only was the packing done by the local association, or packing house, but, according to Dr. Paul S. Taylor, a leading agricultural labor economist, even the work in the grove of pruning, fumigating, spraying, picking and so forth, is commonly performed by gangs of laborers under contract, or employed and directed by the manger of a citrus association. In fact, much of the traditional meaning behind the word farm no longer made much sense in the citrus industry. In 1937 Dr. Colt observed that some farmers did no manual work on their farms. In effect, the cooperative took charge of the fruit as soon as it was ready for picking. The packing house told the individual grower when and how his citrus would be picked and processed. Furthermore, the grower had no control over the hiring of the pickers and packers, nor could he tell his association how to market his crops. These functions he had surrendered to the packing house. The processing operation was one of the major functions of the packing houses. Trucks delivered the oranges packed in field boxes to the door of the packing house where they were given a card to identify the grower and the number of his boxes. Placed on a moving belt, the boxes were overturned and the oranges dumped on a presorter, which removed the leaves, trash and rots. In quick succession, the oranges were run through a washer, drier, polished with wax and moved by belts to a grading table. Workers, or graders, then threw the oranges according to grades on certain belts and sizers. Dropping through the sizer rolls, the oranges were counted by an electric machine which registered the number so that the proper grower was given credit. Packers worked both sides of the sizers, wrapping and placing the oranges in

101 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 91 boxes. Another conveyor belt moved the boxes to a press where lids were put on. Then the boxes were placed in a precooling plant for three days and from there shipped by railroad car to market. In carrying out the processing operations, the packing house possessed all the earmarks of a factory and the grower was nowhere in sight. The California Fruit Growers Exchange, which marketed in more than 70 percent of the Orange County crop, presided over the citrus industry in Orange County, most of Southern California and Arizona. The system resembled a pyramid. At the base of the industry were the growers, who were members of the packing house associations. The associations, in turn, were members of the District Exchanges, which performed the shipping service for the industry. Voting for the District Exchange boards was based on volume of business. Only the District Exchanges were members of the Central Exchange. Perhaps Dr. Coit best described the very essence of the major function of the Central Exchange when he wrote: In practically all the shipments made from any local association connected therewith, the District Exchange or the California Fruit Growers Exchange, determines the time when, the market where, and the price at which the citrus fruit of the local association will be marketed. Another source, while conceding it would be stretching a point to call the Exchange a socialistic institution, did note that its members have surrendered control of their economic action to a central authority that subordinates the individual to the group interest. While the members continued to vote Republican, their business was conducted under a planned economy run by an elaborate, but efficient bureaucracy. Some growers grumbled about regimentation, a few even deserted, but most seemed to recognize that the Exchange s policies had enabled them to survive as the solid, prosperous, conservative middle class gentlemen they are. Carey McWilliams, well known writer and keen observer of California society, concluded that the peculiar nature of this organization in the citrus industry largely accounted for the communities in Orange County being complacent, conservative, functionless. The cooperative system of Orange County consisted of some 24 California Fruit Growers exchange houses, three district exchanges, seven Mutual Orange Distributors houses, and about nine independent handlers. These associations varied in membership from twenty-five growers to more than seven hundred. Feuding growers, or families, sometimes split off from the old and formed a new association, resulting in packing house overbuilding in the county. Because state regulations were few, incorporation was generally a relatively easy matter. A board of directors, consisting of no less than five, but more often seven, was elected by the members whose vote was determined by the amount of volume of business they controlled. The new group drew up plans to construct a packing house, and when completed, the investment in the buildings and machinery averaged $100,000 or more. Unsalaried or low paid directors determined policy within the cooperatives or packing houses, while full-time managers handled day-to-day operations. Annual elections for the board of directors often saw the same group of growers, usually those with larger holdings, who had the leisure time and were anxious to receive the first hand information available, returned to office. Meeting twice monthly as a rule, directors sometimes practiced over-the-shoulder management. Managers usually tolerated what often amounted to direct management by the boards. Most managers were so pleased to have the position, a rather important one in the community, that they generally saved their objections for social gatherings with fellow managers.

102 92 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The manager, who often, but not necessarily, came up through the ranks, was considered a jack-of-all-trades in the industry. He was responsible for buying all supplies, hiring the labor force, and arranging for the picking, trucking, processing and delivering of the fruit to the district exchanges. Most managers usually met with their boards twice each month. At these meetings the manager described the expenses incurred by the association, which were usually approved, and the board set guidelines for future activities of the association. Among the duties enumerated above, the manager s major problems included picking schedules and labor relations. Normally, the board of directors laid out a picking schedule for the manager to follow. Sometimes the plan called for dividing the groves into zones based on geographic locations. In that case workers picked the groves in rotation based on the schedule. Yet no board devised, and no manager carried out, a schedule which was completely satisfactory to all the members of the association. As a result disgruntled growers sometimes joined other associations at the start of the next season. In 1935, Orange County citrus associations employed more than 6,500 people during the season in the groves and in the houses, for picking, hauling, storing, packing, loading, and supervision. Picking and hauling costs for the industry totaled approximately $1,750,000 in The industry spent an additionally $2,150,000 for packing house labor. Boxes and packing material cost the industry $2,700,000. Miscellaneous expenses totaled $610,000. Fertilizer involved an expenditure of $1,800,000. Pest control was billed at $1,500,000, while cultivation and irrigation costs totaled $700,000 and $1,000,000, respectively. The importance of the citrus industry to the economic well-being of Orange County was apparent in 1935 to all. The citrus industry offered few of its workers full employment throughout the year. At the beginning and the end of the picking season, the industry required workers for one or two days a week, or only two or three hours a day. Between picking seasons, industry lay-offs for the pickers varied from one to several months. The packing house (in reality, the manager) controlled all employment of citrus labor. A large proportion of the total work force in the Orange County citrus industry, perhaps more than 50 percent, was made up of Mexican aliens. Most packing houses were segregated, and therefore few Mexican men worked inside or drove trucks. Some associations, however, allowed Mexican women to work the packing lines. As for the picking process, managers usually selected the picking foreman, who, in turn, chose the 20 to 25 men he would need for each picking crew. Often, the picking foreman hired members of his own family and friends. Otherwise, the foreman chose his crew from the men gathered outside the packing house in the early hours. In most cases, the foreman transported the crew to the groves in his truck, for which the pickers were charged a fee. At the peak of the season, a packing house might have as many as eight to fifteen crews in the groves. During the Depression some packing houses, in order to spread the work available among as many pickers as possible, restricted crews to certain hours of work or boxes picked. At the end of each working day the manager of the packing house received from every picking foreman a list of pickers and the total number of boxes they had properly picked. This arrangement could and did lead to many difficulties for the pickers, particularly if the foreman was corrupt. At the end of the week, based on the figures the foreman had submitted, the packing house manager handed him the checks for his crew which he then distributed to the

103 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 93 individual pickers. Almost all the pickers were resident Mexicans, usually aliens. In 1935, the workers required to pick the crop varied from 511 in March to 2,350 in August, September, and October, the peak of the season. (Reccow 1972: 10 17) Summary Statement: The Orange County Citrus Strikes of In his 1972 Doctoral Thesis entitled, The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt, Louis Reccow underscores the importance of the citrus strike to the history of the labor movement in Orange County. This was also a critical period in history for the development of a nationwide labor movement, and while the citrus strike in Orange County may only be a footnote in our nation s history, it made headlines in Southern California. Sections of his thesis quoted above relate primarily to the role of the packing house only. The effects of the Citrus Strikes of on the IVG Packing House are difficult to determine. From an examination of the Minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors, the effects were relatively minimal. For example, the Minutes mention only the following: MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS July 11, 1936 It was moved by Hellis, seconded by Jeffrey, that the regular officers of our Association be given the authority to execute, on behalf of this Association, the agreement drawn up by the Committee of the Orange County Protective Association. Motion adopted. MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS July 31, 1936 The Manager announced that after conferring with three of the Board members that he had raised the pay of the pickers ½ cent per box. It was the consensus of opinion of the Board that this was a wise move at this particular time and especially as picking is much poorer at this time of year. The Manager said that the guard and extra night watchman had been ta ken off as the trouble had settled down. The effects of The Orange County Citrus Strikes of at IVG appear to have been minimal. Regardless, the IVG facility was in operation at the time of the strike, and, according to the Board Minutes, was actually a part of it. Few buildings standing in Orange County today can be so linked to this critical event in the history of the county.

104 94 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 15. Laboring in the Packing House: Another Academic View Labor and Community; Mexican Citrus Worker Villages in a Southern California County, by Gilbert G. Gonzalez The text quoted below, by Gilbert Gonzalez, provides a thorough and detailed history of the role of Mexican labor in the citrus industry from the turn of the century through post World War II. In his book, Gonzalez presents a detailed account of what life was like for the packinghouse employee on a day-to-day basis. The change from Chinese and Japanese to a primarily Mexican labor force is the primary focal point of the author. However, he does devote a large portion of a chapter to the realities of life in a Packing House. Labor and Community; Mexican Citrus Worker Villages in a Southern California County, Gilbert G. Gonzalez Very little fruit was shipped without a packinghouse process whether packed into seventypound crates for interstate trade or in loose bulk for intrastate shipment. From the receipt of the fruit in field boxes at the packinghouse loading platform to the stacking of packed boxes in railroad cars, a series of industrial-like precision movements moved the citrus from one step in the process to the next requiring a substantial labor force. Hauled there in open boxes on flatbed trucks, once at the packinghouse the picked fruit was unloaded into large bins and washed, dried, graded, and stamped with a brand (most often Sunkist ). Color is then enhanced in a gaseous chamber, later polished with wax, and then packed. (Gonzalez 1994: 32,33) In packing prepared fruit for long-distance rail shipment to markets, often to auctions or directly to buyers, the appearance of both the fruit and the container had much to do with the price it fetched. It was imperative that the product marketed and advertised by the Exchange or association be impeccable in quality and presentation. Consequently, great care was exerted in the packing operation to ensure that the commodity was visually attractive (looked tasty) and was uniform in flavor and size. The local grower s cooperative packinghouse was often the scene of marathon work schedules when the oranges rolled in, but no sooner did the supply dwindle then idleness set in. Generally the packing in both the Navel and Valencia districts was done only during the harvest season, but at the peak of the season nine- and ten-hour days, six days a week were not uncommon. (Gonzalez 1994: 33) In the California citrus industry approximately 27,000 employees labored in the packinghouse at peak seasons, 65 percent were women, or about 16,500. Of these 10,000 to hired on as packers employed in 248 packinghouses and the fifty-five independent grower-packers. Women predominated in the packinghouse labor force, yet were employed in only a few of the available positions as secretaries, forewomen, graders and packers. Women s labor divided primarily into two exact and demanding tasks: grading and packing. Graders were a distinct category of labor, far fewer in number and paid on an hourly basis and were recruited from the nonminority population. Packers, the majority of packinghouse employees, were piece-rate labor (much like the pickers in the field) and were paid on the basis of the number of boxes packed. Here Mexican women were more likely to find employment as packers. Men were the

105 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 95 other packinghouse workers, the loaders, drivers, technicians, maintenance force, foremen, and supervisors, and they also were paid on an hourly basis. (Gonzalez 1994: 33) The principle packinghouse activity and the job of the packer centered on the precise placement of oranges or lemons of a certain size and quality into a standard-sized crate in a specified manner. Selected fruit was hand-graded according to quality, and if sizing was not already done by the pickers, machinery separated the various sizes. Packing accorded with both size and quality: A 392 was an orange size because 392 oranges filled a shipping crate. A 288 was the largest orange size, a 392 was the smallest. Early in the citrus era, sizing was done entirely by pickers using a set of wire rings. Later on, machines at the packinghouse sorted according to size and rolled oranges down chutes for packing. When the oranges rolled in each packer made sure, as best she could, that her bin would not overflow. As one packer put it, When the oranges came in my adrenaline would go up. In packing, then, she was not just in a race against herself to pack quickly; packers like many industrial workers were pitted against machines that determined the speed of the flow of oranges down the chutes and into each packer s bin. With gloved hands, the workers wrapped each orange with the stem facing downward, the thin tissue folded around the stem with the Sunkist label facing up. The wrapping had to be precise and neat, with the tissue covering the entire orange. Good packers moved with impressive dexterity and swiftness, making them a prized association resource. Their hands flew so fast you couldn t see their hands, commented one former citrus worker. The oranges then had to be packed in the box in straight lines from side to side and back to front. When the oranges were placed in the crate, the Sunkist label needed to face outward, so that it would be visible through the side slats of the crate and the top slat. A common policy among the managers required an upward bulge at the middle of the crate to give the pack a more appealing appearance. This required the packer to squeeze down the oranges at each end, carefully though so as not to break any orange. If the prescribed criteria were not met, the box could be rejected, in which case the packer would earn nothing for her efforts and would be required to repack the box. The largest fruit required less time; smaller fruit more time. For example, a 392 took, on the average, ten to fifteen minutes, while the mid-size orange took only five to ten minutes. The pay in the early 1940s for the mid-size stood at 8 cents a box, increasing to about 16 cents for the smallest-size fruit. (Gonzalez 1994: 34) When fully packed, the seventy-pound box was then lifted by the packer onto a conveyor belt, which then took it to a pressman who operated a machine that nailed a slotted lid onto the box. The packed crate, bulging slightly, with Sunkist displayed through each of the open slats, was then readied for railcar loading and shipment to market. Meanwhile, another box was being filled. The same process was repeated hour after hour. Neither packers nor graders were allowed to talk with each other, to sing, or to talk with anyone (such as a visitor) in the plant. Standing was the rule only on breaks, usually at morning coffee break and noon lunch were they allowed to sit. (Gonzalez 1994: 34) Whether or not packers were physically present their pay depended upon the flow of oranges. If the picking schedules alternated from a slow to a fast pace, packers could have speedups, slowdowns, and complete standstills. Nevertheless their pay depended on the boxes packed, not on the number of hours at the plant. Piecework then was a function of the quickly alternating demand for labor dictated by the nature of the industry. Piece rate, however, guaranteed the grower a cost-efficient labor system, but it did not compensate the total hours

106 96 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House the packer was required to be at the ready. Only an hourly wage could do this. Packing labor, like picking labor, was organized in accordance with the grower s interests and decisions, and the piece rate was the most cost-efficient for them. (Gonzalez 1994: 34, 35) Moreover, the length of the season did not necessarily decide the number of days worked, since most plants average only a few days of packing each week throughout the season. Even lemon-packing plants, which packed the entire year averaged only 180 working days. The average for those plants packing one variety of orange was only 108 days. The typical packinghouse was active for only a part of the week during the packing season. Thus the average number of weeks California plants operated, thirty-five, did not coincide with the average number of packing days during the season, only 126, or about twenty-five weeks of work. (Gonzalez 1994: 35) One federal survey found considerable variation in the length of the packing season from plant to plant. Based on a survey of ninety-four plants, the average season was found to be thirtyfive weeks. But 15 percent operated anywhere from fifteen to twenty-six weeks while onethird operated thirty-nine weeks or more. Packers, like their counterparts in the fields, had neither a full-time nor a year-round job. The variation in work schedules did not necessarily deter women: For Mexican women it was the only employment other than domestic work available to them, and they accepted it. (Gonzalez 1994: 35) Managers generally expected a minimum of fifty packed boxes per nine-hour day, a difficult requirement that led many women to break regulations and pack the bottom rows haphazardly. Naturally packers broke regulations when possible, generally by not wrapping each orange with a full twist called flagging. The foreman, as well as the mechanic and pressman; were on the look-out for flaggers, and were extremely strict. According to one ex-packer, anyone caught flagging was called out by the foreman, taken to the office, and in a loud booming voice he dressed them down. (Gonzalez 1994: 35) The work was demanding and straining resulting in a very tired work force at the end of the day. I mean, recalled Julia Aguirre, we were exhausted. Legs and back ached as the day dissolved into the evening hours when the second shift, cooking, washing, and cleaning house took over. Irma Magana recalled that after work she, like others, stayed home, made dinner, did the wash, and made beer for my dad. After years of packing, Angelina Cruz s mother suffered rheumatoid arthritis, a condition that she and several former packers claim was caused by packing. Other work, the chores at home especially washing probably contributed as well to a pattern of arthritis among former packers. (Gonzalez 1994: 35) Girls, too, worked in an informal apprenticeship system in the packinghouses. At fourteen, Angelina Cruz began packing on a part-time basis alongside her mother, one of five such pairs at the Placentia Orange Growers Association packinghouses. By her eighteenth birthday, Angelina was a skilled veteran, but never reached the campiona level of her mother who could pack a hundred boxes per nine-hour day. Angelina vividly recalls the experience. You were so absorbed in packing that you lost track of time you just kind of lost yourself. (Gonzalez 1994: 35, 36)

107 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 97 Orange County and Valencia Production While the majority of settler-farmers were busy raising temporarily profitable, and therefore successive crops, others were planting citrus trees in modest proportions in various locales. Initial plantings were set out in the early 1870 s in the Fullerton, Placentia, and Orange areas. The first commercial venture in the county, the Semi-Tropic Fruit Company, chose Placentia as the site for a 110-acre ranch. Organized in 1872 at a cost of $17.50 an acre, the company pioneered Valencia orange production in Ranchers originally had other ideas than citrus for market products but nature proved stronger. Thus, during the 1880s and 1890s, when grapes and raisins failed in Anaheim, Tustin, and Orange, oranges stepped in to fill the gap. (Gonzalez 1994: 52) At first growers thought that the summer-maturing Valencia would never amount to much because it would compete with plentiful summer fruits. History proved otherwise. Limited suitable growing conditions and an ideal supply-demand ration were irresistible factors compelling ranchers to cultivate Valencias. Citrus subsequently spread across the Santa Ana River to the east and south. (Gonzalez 1994: 52) Simultaneous with the founding of the Southern California Fruit Growers Exchange in 1893, two Orange County grower associations, the Placentia Orange Growers Exchange and the Santiago Orange Growers Association (in the city of Orange), were formed. Indeed, Placentia leadership played a significant role in the formation of the central exchange. Other county associations were formed over the years, totaling fifty-five packinghouses in 1945, representing 78,000 acres. (Gonzalez 1994: 52) In Orange County citrus spread rapidly during the period from the 1870s to World War II. Shortly after the first Orange County grove was planted at Fullerton, others appeared in nearby areas to the east. But it took twenty-five years for those small initial groves to extend to about 5,000 acres. However, during the following twenty years, the 5,000 acres had expanded to 33,000, and by 1938, 75,000 acres were planted with citrus. Thus, in four decades, citrus production expanded fifteen times! Fullerton provides yet another illustration of spiraling growth: It had 40 acres of planted citrus trees in Sixty years later, Fullerton s Sunny Hills Ranch alone held over 4,000 citrus-bearing acres. Such a rapid transition could have been accomplished only on the foundations established by the first settlers and pioneers in citrus production. From Anaheim in the west to Irvine in the east, and from La Habra and Brea in the north to Santa Ana in the south, citrus groves covered the soft hills and slopes with a deep green and a sweet and somewhat pungent fragrance. (Gonzalez 1994: 52, 53) More people eating more oranges meant more investments in citrus, and the most dramatic increases in the state s production occurred in Orange County, the center of the state s Valencia orange crop. Valencia oranges are juicier than Navels and are picked in the offseason, that is, during the spring and summer months. However, because of climate and moisture conditions, Valencia production is geographically restricted within the citrus belt. Orange County citrus industry operated at full tilt in the spring and summer, while the dryer and hotter inland counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, and much of Los Angeles were active in the fall and winter. The latter counties competed in the winter market, leaving Orange County most of the summer market. By the blessing of nature, Orange County had the lion s share of the summer crop when the consumer was thirstiest. The dramatic increase in Valencia production is partly explained by the wide open market. Not surprisingly, between

108 98 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and , Valencia production increased 249 percent (equaling 7,053,000 boxes). The increase in Navel shipments was considerably less, amounting to 17 percent, or 1,527,000 boxes, during the same period. (Gonzalez 1994: 53) Citrus was produced in seven counties of California, but Valencias were grown in only three, and, of the three, Orange County predominated. In 1939, the smallest of the Orange producing counties sent close to half of the Valencia crop to the market. Orange County produced 407,066 tons of Valencias, or 45 percent of the total, while Los Angeles county was the second-largest producer with 186,147 tons, and Ventura County turned in 92,701 tons, for a combined total of 909,677 tons. No other county had such a large share of any varietal production. San Bernardino County, for example, the leading producer of Navels with 188,953 tons, cornered only 30.4 percent of the State total of 622,081 tons. Consequently, the combination of improvements in citriculture, technology, irrigation, transportation, advertising, and increased demand, as well as an open market, made investment in Valencia production a secure rather than a speculative venture in comparison to most agricultural enterprises. (Gonzalez 1994: 53) Summary Statement: Labor and Community, Mexican Citrus Worker Villages Gonzales highlights several significant points in relation to the IVG Packing House, as the history of the packing house applies to larger social issues. Specifically, he notes 1. The role of the packing house in citrus production and shipping. 2. The role and nature of labor in the packing house. 3. The quality of labor in the packing house. 4. The place (relative importance) of Orange County and Valencia production. Gonzales places the history of packing houses (including the IVG Packing House) into a broad-based academic perspective with particular emphasis on the role of, nature of, and quality of labor utilized in the packing house. In turn, this places the significance of IVG into a more national framework as an event leading to the better understanding of the history of the American labor movement.

109 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Historical Background: The Railroad and the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Santa Fe s Venta Spur by Steve Donalson, Pacific Rail News The following is taken from an article by Steve Donalson, entitled, Santa Fe s Venta Spur, and as appearing in the August 1985 edition of the Pacific Rail News. For many years the longest spur listed in Santa Fe s Coast Lines (California and Arizona) employee timetables was the Venta, or Irvine, Spur in Orange County, California. This line took off from the Fullerton-San Diego Fourth District main line three miles southeast of Santa Ana, and ran 5 ½ miles into agricultural territory lying to the northeast. The first portion of this line was built in 1913 or The initial two miles of the new spur were perpendicular to the main line and headed directly toward the Santa Ana Mountains. It then made a 90-degree bend to the southeast, coming onto an alignment parallel with, but two miles inland from, the main line. The first station encountered was Myford, a spur and 20 x30 platform a half mile beyond the bend and about a quarter mile south of the headquarters of the great Irvine Ranch. Another mile further on a spur was added in 1918 for a packing house of the California Walnut Growers Association at Culver Road. The original objective of this spur was to reach the warehouse of the San Joaquin Fruit Company, an entity which introduced large-scale commercial horticulture on the Irvine in the early 1900s. In the 1920s, the property developed by the San Joaquin Fruit Company was subdivided and sold off to individual growers. Two cooperatives were then established to ship the citrus produced by these successors, one called the Frances Citrus Association (for oranges) and the other the Irvine Citrus Association (for lemons). Both of these associations had packing houses at Frances, a station with siding and crossover trackage three quarters of a mile beyond the walnut house. Trackage Was T-Shaped For much of its life this branch was T shaped, the foot of the letter being the junction with the main line. The right arm of the T was the section from the bend to Frances, and the left arm was a mile-long addition, built in 1917, that reached west from the bend to Newport Blvd. in the community of Tustin. That mile terminated in twin spurs adjacent to a pair of warehouses originally belonging to the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company and later occupied by the Golden West Citrus Association. A team track and freight platform were added in 1918 across the street from a branch of the Southern Pacific which served that same community. Where the two arms at the top of the T split to the east and west, a quarter-mile loading spur ran straight ahead to a 9 x 30 loading platform at Irvine Blvd. This point was named Browning after a man who had been an early manager of the Irvine Ranch and later farmed 160 acres of his own nearby. This spur and platform were built in 1916 but were not named until 1924.

110 100 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House This whole branch was first called the Irvine Spur, even though it connected with the main line at Venta, a point 4.4 miles west of (original) Irvine station. In 1923 it was renamed the Venta Spur, taking its name from the siding where it joined the main line. It would keep this name for the next 40-plus years. ( Venta means market in Spanish.) In 1929 the Frances arm of this spur was extended one mile further east, to a point named Kathryn, to serve yet another new packing house, this one belonging to the Irvine Valencia Growers Association. Kathryn, like Myford and Frances, were named for members of the Irvine family. This extension brought to five the total number of citrus packing plants served by the Venta Spur. When James Irvine II died in 1947, the ranch that bore his name sustained one of the largest Valencia orange groves in the world. During the decade of the fifties and in the early sixties, Irvine Valencia acreage increased about 50 percent, bringing total citrus acreage there to over 5,000 acres. At 100 boxes per acre and 500 boxes per car, the output from Irvine s own operations translated to over 1,000 cars of Valencias annually, shipped primarily through Kathryn. This citrus expansion displaced the stately walnut groves on the ranch, though, and led to closure of the walnut house on this line and removal of its 500-foot spur track about In addition to Kathryn, the Golden West plant at Tustin shipped an average of 1,000 carloads of oranges and grapefruits per year, and the houses at Frances shipped another carloads per year, bringing the total for the spur as a whole to about 3,000 cars during the forties, fifties and sixties class Consolidated type locomotives based at Santa Ana worked this spur, operating over the line subject to train order authority. During the harvest season, which ran primarily from April to November, a steady procession of refrigerator cars was brought in and out for spotting and loading at the packing houses mentioned. The spurs and sidings on the Venta Spur could collectively hold over 130 cars. When business was heavy, switching crews working out of Santa Ana, or sometimes Fullerton, visited the citrus groves along the line as often as three times a day. They not only brought in empties and hauled out the loaded cars, but brought in wood for crating and ice to cool the produce. The loads gathered off the Spur by these local crews would be set out for pickup by a through freight such as the SDX from San Diego, or would be handled directly through to San Bernardino by a citrus turn originating at that point. In 1965, the name Venta was retired and changed to Irvine. At that time the Venta Spur was accordingly renamed, once again the Irvine Spur. (Formerly Irvine was renamed Valencia and remained an agency depot until 1968.) On November 5, 1966, the Orange Empire Trolley Museum operated the only known passenger excursion over the Spur, an eight-car special that originated at Pico Rivera and continued on to Fallbrook. Transition from Crops to Houses While citrus acreage had increased on the Irvine Ranch, such acreage in Orange County as a whole (and statewide) declined dramatically as agricultural lands were converted to urban uses at a rapid rate. Golden West discontinued packing operations at Tustin in 1967, and the

111 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 101 packing houses at Frances closed down in The mile of line from Browning to Tustin was retired and removed in the early seventies, returning the Irvine Spur to its original L configuration. (Santa Fe has since established a new Tustin station on its main line a half mile east of [new] Irvine.) Due partly to the continued conversion of former citrus acreage to urban uses and partly to the changing market destination of most local fruit (most of it now goes to Asia), rail shipments over the Irvine Spur continued to decline. Rail shipments from Kathryn, the sole surviving packing house on the line, dropped to below 50 carloads in recent years. As always, there were shipments of other perishables over this Spur, too, but they were not of sufficient magnitude to sustain continued maintenance of the track. The End Comes in 1984 In keeping with Santa Fe s desire to eliminate marginal branches, notice of abandonment was issued in July The last cars were taken out in April of 1984 and the two-pedal turnout at the main line junction was spiked out of service at that time. Salvage operations began in June of 1984 and were completed a few months later. Today, the first mile of the roadbed of the former Spur passes through tract housing. It still crosses a still-existing bridge built in the mid-fifties to allow the Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) to pass below the track. The land adjacent to the next ¾ mile, parallel to Browning Avenue, and the first mile beyond, is still in row crops, but this land is master-planned to be converted to residential development in the next few years. The last 2.5 miles between Myford and Kathryn pass through field crops, orange groves, and a modern residential development called Northwood. The right-of-way is bordered at several places by old eucalyptus wind breaks, and is crossed by a half-dozen streets whose protection had all been reduced to crossbucks and a few whistle posts by the end of service. Still in place are short I-beam platform bridges which carried the line across drainage washes from upslope Peters, Rattlesnake and Hicks Canyons, perhaps to remain as the only reminders that for seven decades trains penetrated virtual forests of fruit orchards here to haul out substantial tonnages of citrus over Santa Fe rails to national markets. (Victim of Suburban Sprawl Santa Fe s Venta Spur August 1985: Pages 10 14) Summary Statement: Santa Fe s Venta Spur Many authors quoted earlier reference the history and importance of the railroad in the growth of the orange/citrus industry in Southern California. Donalson details this history with specific reference to the Venta Spur. The construction of this spur directly influenced the construction of the IVG Packing House, otherwise known as Kathryn Station.

112 102 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 17. Organization and Business Structure: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Original 1926 Articles of Incorporation of Irvine Valencia Growers Note: The following document is the original 1926 Articles of Incorporation as filed with the state of California for the formation of the Irvine Valencia Growers. The first Board of Directors consisted of five men Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler, J. H. Pankey, and A. J. McFadden. ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION Of IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, the undersigned, a majority of whom are residents of the State of California, have this day voluntarily associated ourselves together for the purpose of forming a corporation under the general laws of the State of California, and for such purpose we hereby certify: -I- That the name of said corporation is and shall be IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS -II- That the purposes for which the same is formed are, without profit and at cost to its stockholders: (a) (b) (c) To assist its stockholders in the proper selection of lands for citrus orchards or other farming purposes; in the proper selection and care and management of nursery stock for the growing of citrus and other fruits; in the planting, management and care of citrus groves and other lands, including the protection of the same against insects, fungus and other pests and diseases; in the picking, packing and marketing of their fruit, and in general to render any service directly or indirectly connected with the propagation of citrus or other fruit, its planting, protection, harvesting, packing or marketing. To furnish any materials or supplies useful or convenient to carry out any or all of the purposes set forth herein, including fertilizer. To purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire or have possession of, and/or to construct one or more packing houses, dehydrating or pre-cooling plants, with such equipment as is proper or necessary to run or maintain the same and to care for, receive, handle,

113 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 103 prepare the fruit for market, and to conduct the same; also to provide in all proper ways for the housing of employees and to arrange for their comfort. (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) To buy, sell, deal in lease, hold or improve real estate, and the fixtures and personal property incidental thereto or connected therewith, and with that end in view, to acquire by purchase, lease, hire or otherwise, lands, tenements, hereditaments, or any interest therein, and to improve the same, and generally to hold, manage, deal with, and improve, the property of the Association; and to sell, lease, mortgage, pledge or otherwise dispose of the lands, tenements and hereditaments or other property of the Association. To manufacture, purchase, or otherwise acquire, goods, wares, merchandise, and personal property of every class and description, and to hold, own, sell, or otherwise dispose of, trade in, and deal with, the same. To purchase, contract for, deal in, handle and sell all packing house supplies and machinery, farm, orchard, and other supplies and machinery, farm, orchard, and other supplies, tools, farming implements, fertilizers, smudge outfits, orchard stoves and heaters, oil and other fuel for the operation thereof. To obtain, register, purchase, or otherwise acquire, to hold, use, own, operate, develop, and introduce; to sell, assign, lease, pledge or mortgage; to acquire or grant licenses in respect of, and otherwise generally to deal in and turn to account any and all copy rights, concessions, trade-marks, distinctive marks, or devices, formulas, secret or other unpatented processes, patents, patent rights, applications for patents, and all inventions, processes, improvements secured under letters patent or otherwise, of the United States of America, or of any other Government or country, relating to, or used, useful, or convenient in the accomplishment of any of the purposes herein set forth. To purchase or otherwise acquire, to hold and to sell, assign, transfer, mortgage, pledge or otherwise dispose of, shares of the capital stock, bonds, debentures or other evidences of indebtedness issued or created by any other corporation or corporations, and while the owner thereof to exercise all the rights and privileges of ownership thereof, including the right to vote thereon. To loan money; to borrow money; to create, contract, or otherwise incur bonded or other indebtedness, and to evidence the same by promissory notes, bonds and other writings obligatory, and secure the payment thereof by note, mortgage, bond or deed of trust or other evidence of indebtedness, or by any other lawful means, and to take and receive notes, bonds, mortgages, deeds of trust or any evidence of indebtedness for the use and benefit of the corporation. To do, perform and conduct every, all or any matter, thing, business or undertaking necessary, proper or lawful to carry into effect any of the foregoing purposes. Each and all of the activities of the corporation above enumerated, or in which it may hereafter engaged, shall be carried on by the corporation at cost and without profit, and each stockholder becoming a stockholder in said corporation takes his stock subject to this provision, and shall have no right to insist on or ask for the creation either of a surplus or the

114 104 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House declaration of any dividend by the Board of Directors, or that any of the activities of the corporation shall be carried on other than at cost. No person, merely by becoming the owner of one or more shares of the stock of this association, shall be entitled to service from it, unless the Association shall, by its Board of Directors, so determine. -III- That the place where the principal business of said corporation is to be transacted is the town of Tustin, Orange County, California. -IV- That the term for which said corporation is to exist is fifty (50) years from and after the date of the incorporation. -V- That the number of Directors of said corporation shall be five (5), and the names and residences of those Directors who are appointed for the first year and to serve until the election and qualification of such officers, are as follows: NAMES RESIDENCES Ralph J. Mitchell Irvine, Orange County, California. W. B. Hellis Tustin, Orange County, California. John L. Wheeler Santa Ana, California. J. H. Pankey Santa Ana, California. A. J. McFadden Santa Ana, California. -VI- That the amount of capital stock of said corporation is Fifty thousand (50,000.00) Dollars, divided into five thousand (5,000) shares, of the par value of $10.00 each. -VII- That the amount of capital stock which has actually been subscribed is five shares, and the following are the names of the persons by whom the same has been subscribed, with the number of shares and the amount that they are to pay for same, set opposite the name of each, to-wit:

115 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 105 NAME OF SUBSCRIBERS NO. OF SHARES AMOUNT Ralph J. Mitchell One (1) $10.00 W. B. Hellis One (1) $10.00 John L. Wheeler One (1) $10.00 J. H. Pankey One (1) $10.00 A. J. McFadden One (1) $10.00 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 7 th day of June, Ralph J. Mitchell (Seal) W. B. Hellis (Seal) John L. Wheeler (Seal) J. H. Pankey (Seal) A. J. McFadden (Seal) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange On this 7 th day of June, 1926, before me, F. H. Cloyes, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, residing therein, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler, J. H. Pankey and A. J. McFadden, known to me to be the persons described in and whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and they acknowledged to me that they executed the same. IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first hereinabove written. Summary Statement: Original Articles of Incorporation The original Articles of Incorporation for Irvine Valencia Growers, as signed on June 7, 1926 and officially approved on June 10, 1928, are similar to many other association articles. Specifically, the language used for the purpose of the organization, or, To assist its stockholders in the proper selection of lands for citrus orchards or other farming purposes; in the proper selection and care and management of nursery stock for the growing of citrus and other fruits, is purposely somewhat vague, allowing for great latitude in the conduct of all business. This was almost standard business practice during the early years of the twentieth century. The first Board of Directors consisted of five men Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler, J. H. Pankey, and A. J. McFadden. This would not appear to be unusual at first glance, but biographical research conducted as part of the preparation of this report (see report section: Biographical Review: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House ) reveals that each of these men was intimately tied to The Irvine Company.

116 106 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The most interesting historical element of the original Articles of Incorporation is, therefore, the apparent control of The Irvine Company over the Irvine Valencia Growers during the initial organization of the company. Original By-Laws of Irvine Valencia Growers Note: The following is an outline of the original By-Laws of the Irvine Valencia Growers. Of particular importance here is the fact that the original name proposed for the group was Valencia Citrus Association. This name was crossed out by hand, and the name Irvine Valencia Growers penciled-in alongside the original typewritten text. BY-LAWS -- OF VALENCIA CITRUS ASSOCIATION 1926 (Name changed to Irvine Valencia Growers) ARTICLE I. Meeting of Stockholders. ARTICLE II. Board of Directors. ARTICLE III. Power of Directors. ARTICLE IV. Duties of Directors. 3 rd. The Board of Directors shall enter into such business relations with the Orange County Fruit Exchange, or other organization forming a part of the California Fruit Growers Exchange, for the marketing of fruit and such other matters as they deem necessary to best promote the interest of this Association, and may adopt such rules and regulations with reference to the officers and members of this Association in the handling and marketing of their fruit as they shall deem best to promote the objects for which this Association is created.

117 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 107 ARTICLE V. OFFICERS ARTICLE VI. PRESIDENT ARTICLE VII. SECRETARY ARTICLE VIII. TREASURER ARTICLE IX. Books & Papers ARTICLE X. Certificates of Stock ARTICLE XI. Transfer of Stock ARTICLE XII. Voting ARTICLE XIII. Indebtedness

118 108 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House ARTICLE XIV. Manager ARTICLE XV. Miscellaneous ARTICLE XVI. Marketing and other Agreements Between Stockholder and Assn. ARTICLE XVII. Grading and making payments. ARTICLE XVIII. Brands. ARTICLE XX. Sale of Orchards ARTICLE XXI. Seal ARTICLE XXII. Amendments

119 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 109 Summary Statement: Original By-Laws of the Irvine Valencia Growers From a purely historical standpoint, the most interesting features of the original By-Laws of Irvine Valencia Growers is that, much like the original Articles of Incorporation, the language utilized is more or less standard for the time period during which they were written. In addition, it should be noted that the original name considered for the organization appears to have been Valencia Citrus Association. This name, typewritten on an early draft of the By-Laws, was crossed out and the name Irvine Valencia Growers penciled in. Once again, this leads to the tentative conclusion that The Irvine Company was exerting at least a subtle influence on the association through the use of the Irvine name. Meeting Minutes of the Board of Directors and/or Stockholders Note: The Minutes of the Board of Directors and/or Stockholders contain a wealth of information on the operation of the association. However, only a very small fraction of the available material has been quoted below. Specifically, only the very first meeting notes of the stockholders and directors are quoted. The first meeting does, however, set a pattern that was repeated almost without change throughout the period of time extending from 1926 to at least Minutes of First Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers We, the undersigned, the stockholders and subscribers for stock of Irvine Valencia Growers, being the owners and holders of all the subscribed capital stock of said corporation, viz., one share each, do hereby give our written consent to the holding of this, the first stockholders meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers this 27 th day of July, 1926 at the hour of 4 o clock P.M. in the office of said corporation at Tustin, Orange County, California, and we do hereby certify that all the stockholders and subscribers of said corporation are at this meeting now here present. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto subscribed out names this 27 th day of July Ralph J. Mitchell W. B. Hellis John L. Wheeler J. H. Pankey A. J. McFadden Pursuant to a call and notice duly given and the above written consent, this, the first meeting of the stockholders of Irvine Valencia Growers was held on the 27 th day of July 1926, at 4 o clock P.M., in the office of said corporation at Tustin, Orange County, California. Present five shares, owned, held and represented as follows: A. J. McFadden, Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler and J. H. Pankey, each the owner of one share.

120 110 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS July 27 th 1926 A meeting of the Board of Directors was held immediately after first meeting dealing with organization, to carry out further business. A. J. McFadden acted as chairman and W. B. Hellis as Secretary. All directors were present. On motion of Director Wheeler, seconded by Director Pankey the Secretary was authorized and instructed to make application for membership in the Orange County Fruit Exchange. Summary Statement: Minutes of the Board of Directors and/or Stockholders Board of Directors meetings of IVG were carried out, minimally, on a monthly basis. More frequent meetings were held during times of intense activity, including initial construction of the packing house and the construction of various additions (see report section: Construction of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House). The basic pattern, established at the first meeting, was to have a stockholders meeting followed by a meeting of the Board of Directors. This is not at all unusual, and should be regarded as standard business practice. The precise role of The Irvine Company with regard to any and all decisions made by the stockholders and the board is somewhat difficult to establish. However, several general observations may be made with some confidence. First, almost every stockholder was intimately tied to the Irvine Company (see report section: Biographical Review: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House ). Second, The Irvine Company both sold land to and/or loaned moneys to IVG at several critical junctures (see report section: Construction of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House). This leads to the rather obvious conclusion that The Irvine Company was in control at the outset.

121 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Construction of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Initial/Preliminary Planning for Construction of a Packing House Note: The early packing of IVG fruit was accomplished in coordination with Frances Citrus Association. IVG fruit was, in fact, packed solely at the Frances Citrus Packing House for the first two seasons (1927 and 1928), located to the immediate north of the site of the future IVG Packing House. It was the first stop on the Venta Spur. Not surprisingly, discussions among the stockholders and board members soon focused on the establishment of a packing house for IVG fruit. These discussions included the acquisition of land from The Irvine Company, and the construction of a railway extension to the new packing house. Minutes recording such discussions include the following: MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS May 26 th, 1927 A meeting of the Board of Directors was held at the temporary office of the association at the Irvine Walnut Growers house at 4 o clock P.M. this date. A. J. McFadden acted as chairman and W. B. Hellis as secretary. All directors were present. The meeting was called for the purpose of discussing the need of starting on the construction of the new house and procuring the site, rail extensions, etc. Several applications were on file for the position of manager which were discussed tentatively but no action taken. It was the consensus of opinion that no further action toward construction etc. should be taken until the set of fruit for the coming year is more accurately determinable. John L. Wheeler moved and R. J. Mitchell seconded that the President and Secretary be authorized to conclude with The Irvine Company the purchase of a tract of land in Lot #239 comprising five acres at $ per acre. There being no further business the meeting was on motion adjourned. MINUTES OF ANNUAL STOCKHOLDERS MEETING OF IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS February 6 th 1928 The regular annual meeting of stockholders of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the office of the Irvine Walnut Association, Tustin, California, (Temporary office of this Association) on the sixth day of February 1928, at 2:00 o clock P. M. Present thirty five (35) shares owned, held and represented as follows: -

122 112 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Shares W. B. Hellis 2 John L. Wheeler 2 A. J. McFadden 2 C. E. Smith 1 Herbert W. Walker 2 W. G. Mitchell 2 Robt. Jeffrey 2 Owen A. Murray 1 The Irvine Co. 10 George H. Veeh 2 Bennie Osterman 2 Los Alisos Co. (by W. West) 2 Mary Jeffrey Proxy to R. Jeffrey 2 Geo. Jeffrey Proxy to R. Jeffrey 2 G. P. Ferrell Proxy to R. Ferrel 1 A. J. McFadden President in the chair. A general discussion of the affairs of the Association was had. Robert Jeffrey moved and Walter West seconded a motion ratifying the action of the Board of Directors in arranging the purchase of five (5) acres for packing house site near Frances at $ per acre from The Irvine Company. Motion carried unanimously. John L. Wheeler moved and Herbert Walker seconded a motion requesting the incoming Directors to appoint a committee to conclude arrangements with Frances Citrus Association, if possible, and report back to stockholders for ratification without delay. Motion carried unanimously. W. G. Mitchell moved and John L. Wheeler seconded motion requesting Directors if unable to conclude satisfactory arrangements with Frances Citrus Association to proceed with construction of own packing house and procure brands, etc., to have everything in readiness to pack 1929 fruit. Unanimously carried. The Frances Citrus Association Connection Interestingly, as late as February 1928, the IVG stockholders and board members were negotiating with Frances Citrus Association regarding consolidation of both associations. STOCKHOLDERS MEETING April 2 nd 1928 The purpose of the meeting was to advise the stockholders of the results of the negotiations for consolidation of the Frances Citrus Association and Irvine Valencia Growers. The stockholders were duly notified that the negotiations had fallen through and that we had been formally notified to make arrangements to pack our own fruit after the 1928 season.

123 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 113 The stockholders were informed as to the directors actions in engaging Mr. C. W. Post as Manager and discussion was had as to methods of financing and type of construction of the new packing house etc. The majority seemed to favor the employing of a capable man at an agreeable fee to superintend construction and draw plans instead of placing contract or working on the cost plus system. Hollow tile or concrete seemed to be favored for construction and limited to one unit only at this time. Plans Rushed to Build Packing House As a direct result of the breakdown of negotiations with the Frances Citrus Association, the IVG quickly moved to build their own packing house. In effect, Frances Citrus appears to have refused to pack IVG fruit after the 1928 season. Within less than two months, IVG had secured a contractor for construction of their own facility, and negotiations with The Irvine Company and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway were pushed forward. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following: STOCKHOLDERS MEETING April 2 nd 1928 The stockholders were informed as to the directors actions in engaging Mr. C. W. Post as Manager and discussion was had as to methods of financing and type of construction of the new packing house etc. The majority seemed to favor the employing of a capable man at an agreeable fee to superintend construction and draw plans instead of placing contract or working on the cost plus system. Hollow tile or concrete seemed to be favored for construction and limited to one unit only at this time. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING June 4 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS was held at the temporary office of the association at 4 o clock P. M. on Monday the 4 th of June, The purpose of the meeting was the awarding of contractors contract for building of the new packing house. There were present at said meeting the following directors: - A. J. McFadden W. B. Hellis Robt. Jeffrey R. J. Mitchell J. L. Wheeler being absent, Mr. C. W. Post Manager elect of the Association being also present. The propositions of the following contractors were considered and rejected: -

124 114 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House David J. Haire W. P. Shepherd Mr. Mahl The proposition of Mr. F. S. Bishop for full supervision, all plans and specifications, all necessary equipment, etc., for the flat price of $ was accepted and he was notified by letter of the favorable action of the directors on his proposition. The unsuccessful bidders were also notified. The following were elected as a building committee: A. J. McFadden Robt. Jeffrey R. J. Mitchell But it was also the sense of the meeting that all directors give all attention possible to the details of construction. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING August 17 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Corporation at 4 o clock P. M. on Friday the 17 th of August The purposes of the meeting were the consideration of plans and specifications of the new packing house and office which is to be constructed in the near future. The plans were gone over in detail and alterations etc., penciled in. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING October 16 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Association at 4 o clock P. M. on Tuesday the 16 th day of October The purpose of the meeting was the awarding of orders on bids for lumber, steel, gravel and cement to be used in construction of the new packing house. All directors were present at the meeting. Barr Lumber Company were successful bidders on lumber and cement. Baker Iron Works, successful bidders on steel. Santa Ana Commercial Company were successful bidders on gravel.

125 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 115 MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING November 16 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Association on Friday the 16 th of November 1928 at 9 o clock A. M. The following directors were present: - A. J. McFadden W. B. Hellis Walter West R. J. Mitchell Robert Jeffrey being absent. West made motion, seconded by Mitchell that the officers of this Association negotiate loan up to $75, with The Irvine Company, for the purchase of land, building of packing house and office, etc. The following resolution was made by Mitchell, seconded by West and carried unanimously: RESOLVED: That an account be opened with the First National Bank at Santa Ana for the handling of funds of this Association and same be subject to checks for withdrawal signed by the President or Secretary and countersigned by the Manager. On Post s recommendation it was decided to build a corrugated iron shed for housing of picking boxes instead of attempting to store same in the unit of the packing house now being constructed. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 21 st 1929 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the packing house of the Association on Monday, 21 st of January, 1929, at 1:30 P. M. The following directors were present: A. J. McFadden Walter West R. J. Mitchell W. B. Hellis Absent --- Robert Jeffrey. The meeting was called for the purpose of considering details of construction and installation in the new packing house. Plans and specifications for the steam plant to be used for heating the wash tanks, sweat rooms, and steaming the picking boxes and equipment as submitted by Campbell were considered and on motion by Hellis, seconded by West, this proposition accepted at $ for the steam plant and approximately $ for complete equipment, unanimously carried.

126 116 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 28 th 1929 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the packing house of the Association on Monday, 28 th of January, 1929, at 1:30 P. M. The following directors were present: A. J. McFadden R. J. Mitchell W. B. Hellis Absent: Robert Jeffrey Walter West Mr. Post, the manager, submitted bids received from various contractors on wiring the packing house and office as per Heaslip specifications as follows: - Acquisition of Land from The Irvine Company Note: The following document, described as LAND CONVEYANCE DOCUMENT #1, consists of an agreement between The Irvine Company and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the transfer of a five-acre parcel of land. THIS INDENTURE, made the 1 st day of July in the year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Nine, between THE IRVINE COMPANY, a Corporation organized under the laws of the State of West Virginia, with its principal place of business at Tustin, California, the party of the first part, and IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, a California Corporation, the party of the second part. WITNESSETH: - That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) lawful money of the United States, to it in hand paid, by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does by these presents grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the said party of the second part, and to its assigns forever all that certain lot, piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the County of Orange, State of California, bounded and particularly described as follows to-wit: - Commencing at a point, which point bears South 40 deg. West 1320 feet from the most Northerly corner of Lot 239, Block 105 of Irvine s Subdivision of Ranchos San Joaquin and Lomas de Santiago and Flint and Bixby s allotment in Ranchos Santiago de Santa Ana, as per map Book 1, page 88 Miscellaneous Records of said Orange County, thence South 50 deg. East 660 feet; thence South 40 deg. West 330 feet; thence North 50 deg. West 660 feet; thence North 40 deg. East 330 feet, containing five (5) acres. Reserving thirty (30) feet for road purposes along the entire Northwesterly end. The party of the first part reserves the right for a right-of-way for all necessary ditches, pipe lines, flumes, telephone and power lines, over and across the land above described.

127 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 117 Together will all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, all and singular the said premises together with the appurtenances unto the said party of the second part, and to its assigns forever. IN WITNESS THEREOF, THE IRVINE COMPANY has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed and its corporate seal to be affixed by its President and Secretary thereunto duly authorized by resolution of its board of directors, the day and year first above written. THE IRVINE COMPANY BY James Irvine (signature) President By W B Hellis Secretary (signature) Agreement between IVG and the Santa Fe Railroad The following legal historical document is a contract between the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the construction, operation and maintenance of a track or track extension at or near the station of Kathryn. THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY COAST LINES GRAND CANYON RAILWAY Freight Traffic Department 348 Kerckhoff Building 560 South Main Street Los Angeles, Cal. Telephone Mutual 0111 T. F. Conway Industrial Agent July 18 th 1929 Mr. W. B. Hellis, President Irvine Valencia Growers C/o Irvine Company Tustin, California

128 118 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Dear Sir: Attached is completed copy of contract for foot track which serves the packing house at Kathryn. This document is for your files and keeping. Yours truly, F. T. Conway (signature) Form 1659 Standard Approved by General Solicitor CONTRACT FOR INDUSTRY TRACK AGREEMENT Made this 19 th day of April 1929, between THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY a Kansas corporation, hereinafter called the Railway Company party of the first part, and IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, a California corporation hereinafter (whether one or more persons or corporations) called the Industry, part [illegible] of the second part. RECITALS: - The Industry has requested the Railway Company to construct, operate and maintain a track or track extension, as the case may be, about feet in length, hereinafter in its entirety referred to as The Track, at or near station of Kathryn, Orange County, California to serve a packing house (thereinafter called the Plant ), to be operated by the Industry. That portion of The Track, about feet in length, which shall belong to the Railway Company, is shown by red coloring, and that portion of The Track, if any, which shall belong to the Industry, is shown by yellow coloring upon the print hereto attached, marked Exhibit A and made a part hereof, and said red and yellow colored portions are hereinafter for convenience separately referred to as Red Track and Yellow Track, respectively. First Addition to the Packing House Note: IVG Stockholders and members of the Board of Directors quickly realized that they needed to expand their newly built facility. The reason behind the need so soon after initial construction is not particularly clear, but it is likely that the business had grown and in order to keep pace with the competition an addition was necessary. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following: MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS August 25, 1931 The Directors discussed the advisability of soon getting busy on our new unit and after looking at a tentative plan that was presented to them by the Manager it was moved by Hellis,

129 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 119 seconded by West that Mr. Post be instructed to get in touch with several Architects and have them submit their proposition in regard to the cost of plans and specifications, and also, their cost of supervision in the erection of the plant. This data to be presented to the Board at our next meeting. Carried. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS October 12, 1931 The meeting was called for the purpose of deciding on an Architect for the erection of the new unit. After a general discussion of the prices of the various Architects and carefully considering the merits of each it was moved by Hellis, seconded by Mitchell that we employ as Architect, Mr. Clarence P. Tedford to furnish plans and specifications and superintend the construction of the addition to our present packing house, according to Mr. Tedford agreement hereby incorporated in the minutes. I propose to draw up complete plans and specifications, take bids, and superintend the construction to satisfactory completion of your addition to present packing house for sum equal to three per centum (3%) of actual cost of said addition Insurance Bond for Addition #1 The following document is a California Contract Bond entered into between Jules Markel and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the sum of $18, (and backed by the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company) for the construction of an addition to the packing house. HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT THIS BOND MUST BE RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE CONTRACT IS TO BE PERFORMED IN ORDER TO FULLY COMPLY WITH THE STATUTE AND FULLY PROTECT ALL PARTIES AS PROVIDED IN SAID STATUTE. Know All Men by these Presents: That JULES W. MARKEL of Santa Ana, California, (hereinafter called the Principal), as Principal, and the HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut, and duly authorized to transact a surety business in the State of California, (hereinafter called the Surety), as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto THE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, of IRVINE, CALIFORNIA (hereinafter called the Obligee) in the sum of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND AND NO/100 Dollars ($18000,00) for the payment whereof to the Obligee the Principal and the Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

130 120 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House WHEREAS, the Principal and the Obligee have entered into a certain contract (hereinafter called the contract) dated December 9, 1931 for construction of an addition to packing house, composed of basement and first floor, 110 x 112 square with truckway 12 x 155 feet in accordance with plans. The following Notice of Completion is for an addition to the original packing house and also for the construction of a truckway. The contractor was Jules Markel, and the work was completed in March of Notice of Completion for Addition #1 NOTICE OF COMPLETION STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Irvine Valencia Growers being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that they now, and were upon the 8 th day of December, 1931, the owner in fee simple and under contract of that certain real property situated in the southwest portion of the County of Orange, State of California, and particularly described as follows, to-wit: 5 acres of land in Irvine Sub division Section 329 Tract #105 described as, so West 330 northerly 1650 no westerly 660 to Jeffery Road, as per map recorded in Book page of in the office of the County Recorder of said County. That as such owner of said land, affiant, about the 8 th day of December, 1931, entered into a contract with one Jules Markel, General Contractor for the erection and construction, upon the land above described, of certain building, to wit: one story and basement addition to present packing house, x with 12 x 110 truckway. That said building has been duly constructed and completed in full accordance with contract and the same was actually completed on the 30 th day of March This notice is given in pursuance of the provisions of Section 1187 of the code of Civil Procedure of this State. Subscribed and Sworn to before me this 30 th day of March 1932 Ruth Robertson Notary Public in and for said County and State.

131 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 121 Second Addition to the Packing House Note: By the late 1940s, IVG Stockholders and members of the Board of Directors quickly realized that they needed to expand for a second time. Specifically, an ice plant was needed. This was an absolute necessity if IVG was to keep pace with the industry standard. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS Jan y 31, 1939 Manager West reported that he was getting propositions from three different firms for building an ice plant so as to be ready if the members approved building an ice plant at the annual meeting of February 13, MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS Irvine, Calif. June 6, 1939 Moved by W. B. Hellis and seconded by J. H. Pankey that the group express its appreciation to the Kohlenberger Engineering Co. for their splendid cooperation during the construction of our very excellent ice plant. Motion carried. Notice of Completion for Addition #2 The following Notice of Completion is for a one-story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and miscellaneous machinery. The addition was completed in May of 1939 by contractor Jules W. Markel. NOTICE OF COMPLETION STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Irvine Valencia Growers being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that his address is Irvine, Calif.; that he is now, and was upon the 30 th day of March, 1939, the owner in fee simple of that certain real property situated in the city of, County of Orange, State of California, and particularly described as follows, to-wit: No. Jeffrey Road, in the City of said County and State, which premises are particularly described as follows, to-wit: Lot 239, Block 105, Irvine Subdivision as per map recorded in Book 285 page 465 of Official Records in the office of the County Recorder of said County. That as such owner of said land, affiant, about the 30 th day of March, 1939, entered into a contract with Jules W. Markel as per permit (if any) No. 2526, dated March 30, 1939, for the

132 122 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House erection and construction, upon the land above described, of a certain building and work of improvement, to-wit: a one story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and miscellaneous machinery. That said building has been duly constructed and the whole work of improvement has been performed and the same was actually completed on the 20 th day of May, 1939, by Jules W. Markel. The record owner in fee simple under contract of the lot at the time the construction was commenced was Irvine Valencia Growers. This notice is given in pursuance of the provisions of Section 1187 of the Code of Civil Procedure of this State. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange W. L. WEST FOR IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS being duly sworn, deposes and says, that he (they are) the owners of the property described in the foregoing notice; that he has read the same and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge. Subscribed and Sworn to before me this 22 day of May, 1939 Ethel J. Petersen Notary Public in and for said County and State. Summary Statement: Planning, Initial Construction and Early Additions to IVG Packing House A review of significant historical documents in IVG files including Letters and Correspondence, Original Articles of Incorporation, Insurance Records, Notices of Completion, and the Minutes of Stockholders and Board Members meetings reveals the following: 1. Planning for construction of the IVG Packing House began as early as May of Early plans included the construction of a jointly shared facility along with the Frances Citrus Association. 3. Plans for a jointly operated warehouse were abandoned by April 2, By June 4, 1928 contracts were awarded for construction of the packing house. 5. An agreement was reached with the AT&SF railroad for construction of a railroad spur to the IVG facility on April 29, Land for the IVG facility was formally acquired from The Irvine Company on July 1, 1929

133 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Planning and revisions to plans for the IVG Packing House were carried out until January Significant additions to the original packing house were constructed in 1931, circa 1937, and 1939.

134 124 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 19. Daily Operation of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Job Profiles The following job profiles are from the files of the Irvine Valencia Growers. The job descriptions cover the entire spectrum of labor required in order to run a successful and competitive packing house in Orange County. With 36 categories of employment, most workers had a distinct area of specialization, and each particular job category carried its own unique set of capabilities. The following job descriptions are generally arranged to be read and understood in a manner that provides for a better understanding of the passage of fruit through the packing house. Packing House Superintendent Packing House Superintendent will report to the Assistant Manager and President. Supervise and coordinate activities of Foreman engaged in receiving, storage, inspection, processing, grading, packaging and shipping of citrus. Will be responsible for all activities within the packing house and direct such activities. Interprets company policies to employees. Sees that basic labor laws are enforced. Conducts a safety and job training program for each person under supervision. Purchases all packing house supplies as needed by the association. Must make and verify all growers reports for each lot of fruit run. Will make arrangements for the delivery of fruit-by-products with contracted trucking companies. Ensures proper cooling conditions of pre-coolers. Ensures packing house is in a safe operating condition at all times. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen (18 ) above the floor. Assistant Packing House Superintendent Assistant Packing House Superintendent will report to the Packing House Superintendent. Assist the Packing House Superintendent in supervising and coordinating activities of employees engaged in receiving, storage, inspection, processing, gradin g, packaging and shipping of citrus. Interprets company policies to employees. Sees that basic labor laws are enforced. Conducts a safety and job training program for each person under supervision. Assist in purchasing all packinghouse supplies as needed by the association. Assist with the verification of all growers reports for each lot of fruit run, also, aid in making arrangements for delivery of fruit by-products with contracted trucking companies. Ensures proper cooling conditions of pre-coolers. Ensures packinghouse is in safe operating condition at all times. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen (18 ) above the floor. Field Supervisor Will be responsible for all field harvest activities, co-ordinates harvest operations with packing house operations, insures field readiness for harvest, insures size, color and condition of fruit harvested. Also, verifies daily pick records, orders field supplies and assists Harvest Crew

135 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 125 Supervisor with department of labor regulations. Will direct a farm labor certification program. May be required to lift pounds to heights of five (5) feet. Understanding of basic labor law. Regularity of attendance. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen (18 ) above the floor. Harvest Crew Supervisor Crew Supervisor will report to the Field Supervisor. Supervises and coordinates the activities of workers engaged in harvesting of citrus fruit. Directs workers in methods of picking crops. May specify fruit size, color or defects not to be picked. Enforces quality control program for defects, long stems and cuts. Insures that equipment such as ladders, bags, clippers and bins are present and properly distributed. Moves toilets and ladder trailers with the crews as they progress through the field. Keeps lunch and break areas clean of trash. Assigns each worker trees by the set. Checks harvested fruit for quality control and informs employees of condition of fruit. Supervises the movement, placement and loading of bins in the orchard. Maintains time cards for time and units produced per employee. In charge of employee safety program. Orients and trains new employees to company standards. Regularity of attendance. Understands basic labor laws. Packing Supervisor Directs all activities of packers, tally persons and packer supply persons. Conducts a safety and job training program for each person under your supervision. Insures management packing standards are in compliance. Will assist maintenance personnel as needed with repairs and operations of Packing House Equipment. Calculates tally sheets daily and verifies with tally person. Regularity of attendance. Understand basic labor laws. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen inches (18 ) above the floor. Shipping Supervisor Shipping Supervisor will report to the Packing House Superintendent. Directs all fruit loading activities, load sheet documentation, fruit inventory and fruit rotation. Will direct training and safety programs for personnel under supervision. Co-ordinates shipping activities with Packing Supervisor, Grade Supervisor, and shipping office. Regularity of attendance. Understand basic labor laws. Assistant Shipping Clerk Shipping Clerk originates and coordinates all shipping related activities with the various departments. Individual will prepare legible, accurate documents to include manifests, daily shipping records, Bills of Lading, etc. Must be able to type accurately and operate a ten key adding machine accurately. Will coordinate shipping activities with the Assistant Manager and Shipping Supervisor. Exhibit telephone courtesy at all times. Regularity of attendance. Will be familiar with procedures for door sales of fruit.

136 126 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Grade Supervisor Grade Supervisor will report to the Packing House Superintendent. Conducts a safety and training program for each employee under supervision. Insures management grade standards are in compliance, and will instruct graders on such standards. Insures fruit is properly stamped, and makes out a fruit condition report on each lot as needed. Prepares day off schedules. Regularity of attendance. Understand basic labor law. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen (18 ) inches above the floor. Transportation Maintenance Supervisor Report to the President and Assistant Manager. This supervisory position directs all activities of the Truck Mechanics, Parts Supply Person and fruit Handling Companies. Co-ordinates with Field Crew Foreman and the activities of Crane Drivers and Operators. Supervise equipment maintenance with mechanics and establish priorities. Follow-up, re-check and test equipment that has been repaired. Take measures to insure work being done on equipment is done safely and that the equipment is in a safe operational condition. Verify daily loading and Hauling records. Maintain daily maintenance sheets, monthly inventories. Maintain adequate inventory of repair parts, and Truck Safety. Mechanic Supervisor Mechanic Supervisor will report to Packing House Superintendent. Inspects, repairs, maintains functional parts of automotive and mechanical equipment and machinery such as rollers, conveyor belts, sizers, carton sealers, forklifts, trucks, wagon, electric motors, compressors, loading and unloading equipment. Inspects, dia gnoses, and repairs defective equipment and malfunctions using motor analyzers, pressure gauges, chassis charts, factory manuals and general knowledge of packinghouse processes and equipment. Disassembles and overhauls internal combustion engines, electric motors, pumps, rollers, conveyor belts, fruit sizers, dumpers, cranes and other loading equipment using hand tools, power tools and hoists. Operates equipment to test its functioning. Changes oil, repairs tires and tubes; lubricates equipment and machinery. Regularity of attendance. Understanding of basic labor law. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen inches (18 ) above the floor. Shipping Clerk Shipping Clerk originates and coordinates all shipping related activities with the various departments. Individual will prepare legible, accurate documents to include manifests, daily shipping records, Bills of Lading, etc. Must be able to type accurately and operate a ten key adding machine accurately. Will coordinate shipping activ ities with the Assistant Manager and Shipping Supervisor. Exhibit telephone courtesy at all times. Directs activities of Assistant Shipping Clerk. Regularity of attendance. Will be familiar with procedures for door sales of fruit.

137 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 127 Citrus Fruit Harvester Citrus Fruit Harvester will report to his Crew Supervisor. Harvests oranges as a member of a crew. Is provided with picking ladder, orange clippers and harvest bag. Is assigned trees in sets across field. Places ladder in tree: checks for stability and goes to top of tree to begin harvest. Places clippers on first and index fingers; uses other hand to search for and hold fruit. Operates clippers by pressing index finger against first finger or palm of hand. Clips fruit right at button leaving no stem, and must not pull button from fruit. Places fruit in harvest bag. After harvesting top of tree, will harvest lower portion of tree without ladder. Places fruit carefully in harvest bins. Regularity of attendance. Bin Loader Driver Bin Loader Truck Driver will report to the Crew Foreman and Field Supervisor. Operates two (2) axle open cab flatbed with a permanently mounted bin loader, with loads of up to nine bins in citrus orchards. Enters orchard and drives up orchard rows and maneuvers truck in such a manner that bin loader operators can safely pick up filled bins and place them on the flatbed area of the truck. Drives and operates truck so bin loader operator may place empty bins ahead of pickers. Places truck for transfer of bins from bin loader truck to packinghouse delivery truck with filled bins, or to receive and distribute empty bins. Will move partial bins and supply pickers with bins as needed. Checks truck during each shift for fuel, oil, water, tire pressure and other safety supplies and items. Report vehicle breakdowns or repairs to mechanic or transportation supervisor. Hold valid California Driver s license and operates vehicle according to commercial driving rules and orchard safety precautions. Regularity of attendance. Forklift Operator Head Receiver Forklift Operator Head Receiver will report to Plant Superintendent. Operator unloads bins from field trucks, may run through drench and place in proper sweat room according to grower numbers. May take fruit from sweat room to processing conveyor. Required to keep written record of received fruit by grower and keep bin tally. Loads empty bins into truck and isolates damaged bins. Takes empty bins off processing line and stores in specified areas. Head Receiver will understand how to use sweat room controls and how to administer ethylene gas. From time-to-time may transport other material as required. Forklift Operator Assistant Receiver Forklift operator-assistant receiver will report to the Plant Supervisor. Operator unloads bins from field trucks, may run through drench and place in proper sweat room according to growers number. May take fruit from sweat room to processing conveyor. Required to keep written record of received fruit by grower and keep bin tally. Loads empty bins onto truck and isolates damaged bins. Takes empty bins off processing line and stores in specified areas. From time-to-time may transport other material as required. Receiver will understand how to use sweat room controls and how to administer ethylene gas.

138 128 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Forklift Operator In Plant Forklift operator (in plant) will report to the Plant Superintendent. Employee will operate forklift to move cartons and packing material to packing area and move binned or palletized fruit to shipping area or prescribed locations. Will unload other types of commodities and store in proper areas from time to time. Will perform field level service of forklift on daily basis. Forklift Operator Basement (Set Off) Forklift operator-basement will report to the Plant Superintendent. Operator unloads bins from field trucks, may run through drench and place in proper sweat room according to growers numbers. May take fruit from sweat room to processing conveyor. Required to keep written record of received fruit by grower and keep bin tally. Loads empty bins onto truck and isolates damaged bins. Takes empty bins off processing line and stores in specified areas. From timeto-time may transport other material as required. Bad Fruit Extractor Bad fruit extractor will report to Packing House Superintendent. Employee tends bin dump machine to see that bins enter the machine correctly and do not malfunction during dump cycle. If malfunction occurs, stops machine, corrects to best of ability or calls for assistance, when needed, from processing control operator or supervisor. May be required to lift pounds to heights of 6 feet. Carton Inventory Operator Forklift operator (in plant) will report to the Plant Superintendent. Employee will operate forklift to move cartons and packing material to packing area and move binned or palletized fruit to shipping area or prescribed locations. Will unload other types of commodities and store in proper areas from time to time. Will perform field level service of forklift on daily basis. Pack Supply Person Pack Supply Person will report to the Pack Supervisor. Employee keeps packers supplies flowing to packers, including various size boxes and bags. Forms boxes and bags for pack. Ink and stamp supplies must be kept available and the ink stamp must have enough ink to be easily read. Provide diphenyl paper, towel paper and silicone to packers and pack machine operators. Must be able to stamp cartons and provide packers with cartons on a timely basis. Will be required to move pack machines and pack tables, keep fruit flowing to pack machines from pack bins, and assists in changeover from grapefruit to oranges. Must keep fruit, excess cardboard, plastic strips and broken pallets off the floor at all times. Must keep box conveyors moving. Must stay busy at all times and keep socializing to a minimum during working hours. Must have regular attendance.

139 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 129 Graders Graders will report to the Grade Foreman. Employee is positioned at moving grade belt and selects culls, juice and choice fruit and other grades as required. Employee will place fruit in cull shoot for rots, juice shoots for by-products and choice shoot for second grade. Must use gloves to handle fruit at all times. Position requires standing or sitting in one location up to 8 10 hours each shift. Tally Person Tally person will report to the Packing Supervisor. Employee records packers carton count of packed fruit. Must maintain accurate and legible records. Position requires sitting in one location up to 8 10 hours each shift. Regularity of attendance is required. Packers and Machine Operators Reports to Packing Supervisor. Employee must be able to reach and pull fruit from holding bins in a continual motion. Pack sufficiently and rapidly to maintain piece rates above minimum wage. Must have the ability to stand for long periods of time. Will be required to form cartons, place Di-phenyl sheets as directed, stamp cartons, bag containers and will handle fruit with gloves. Pack Machine Operators will fit a carton into the machine conveyor then start the machine. If the machine malfunctions during a pattern cycle, the machine will stop. The operator will inspect the machine for problems such as missing fruit, carton blockage, or inadequate fruit flow. Operator will be required to maintain the machine for cleanliness and to free stic king parts. Will be required to machine pack, hand pack, bag, re-condition and grade fruit as requested by your supervisor. Employee must be responsible at all times while working with rapidly moving parts, belts, slide rollers and guides. Employee must keep the area clean from fallen fruit and diphenyl paper. May be required to pull, lift and set cartons weighing 40 to 60 pounds on a conveyor belt, bench or floor. Perform all other duties as required by Supervision and Management. Case Sealer Operator Case Sealer Operator will report to the Packing House Superintendent. Operator tends machines which applies glue and seals flaps of packed cartons of fruit. Keeps machine supplied with adhesive, watches for and corrects malfunctions, and controls flow of cartons. Keeps machine and area clean and in an uncluttered condition. Cleans and services machine at end of day run. Direct unauthorized individuals from machine while in operation. Regularity of attendance.

140 130 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Stackers and Loaders Stackers and Loaders will report to the shipping supervisor. Employee will move pound carton from a conveyor to a pallet or from a pallet into a truck or trailer. Must be able to distinguish between grade size and label when stacking and loading. May be required to restack, strap, re-strap and move pallets of fruit. Must be able to build neat clean stacking patterns and must keep from damaging cartons and inside fruit. Set Off Person Loaders Set off person will report to the Shipping Supervisor. Employee removes pound cartons from set-off line and stacks in a predetermined pattern on pallets by grade, size and label, until pallet is fully loaded. Replaces filled pallets with new pallets from supply stack. May be used at a variety of different tasks when no loading is required, such as box making, loading and clean up. Regularity of attendance. Loaders will report to the Shipping Foreman. Employee takes packed fruit delivered to his loading area on pallets, unloads individual cartons, and transfers and reloads in trucks and railcars. May re-palletize by transferring individual cartons in the truck or car. From time-to-time will be used as set-off person. Forklift and Power Worker Operator Shipping Forklift and Power Worker operators in shipping will report to the Shipping Supervisor. Operates forklift and power worker to move palletized fruit from set-off and storage areas to loading areas of truck, cold storage and railroad cars. Will be required to bring filled and palletized fruit from packing area to storage, trucks, or railroad cars. Transfer other commodities where forklift is needed. Responsible for field level maintenance of forklift. May be required to help load trucks and railroad cars. May be required to lift pounds to a height of at least six (6) feet. Regularity of attendance. Basement Mechanic Basement Maintenance Operator will report to the Maintenance Supervisor. Employee observes and controls flow of fruit from destacker to bin dumper, pregrader and appropriate conveyor belts and vertical lift. In addition to regulating flow operator will stop process at any malfunctions and call for Maintenance Supervisor to correct malfunction. Must have knowledge of all circuit panels, shut down procedures and required flow patterns. May be required to lift up to 60 pounds to heights of at least 6 feet. Regularity of attendance.

141 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 131 Truck Mechanic Truck Mechanic will report to driver operator Supervisor. Inspects, repairs, maintains functional parts of automotive and mechanical equipment and machinery such as rollers, powerchain drive, trailers, electric motors, loading and unloading equipment. Inspects defective equipment and diagnoses malfunctions using motor analyzers, pressure gauges, chassis charts, factory manual and general knowledge of equipment. Disassembles and overhauls internal combustion engines, electric motors, pumps, rillers, and other loading equipment using hand tools, power tools, welders and hoists. Operates equipment to test its functioning. Changes oil, lubricates equipment and machinery. Fills out and completes vehicle maintenance reports. Regularity of attendance. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen inches (18 ) above the floor. Assistant Truck Mechanic Assistant Truck Mechanic will report to Driver Operator/Supervisor. Inspects, repairs, maintains functional parts of automotive and mechanical equipment and machinery, such as rollers, powerchain drive, trailers, electric motors, loading and unloading equipment. Inspects defective equipment and diagnoses malfunctions using motor analyzers, pressure gauges, chassis charts, factory manuals and general knowledge of equipment. Disassembles and overhauls internal combustion engines, electric motors, pumps, rollers, and other loading equipment. Uses hand tools, power tools, welders and hoists. Operates equipment to test its functioning. Changes oil, lubricates equipment and machinery. Fills out and completes vehicle maintenance reports. Regularity of attendance. All welding activities in the garage area will be conducted eighteen inches (18 ) above the floor. General Clean Up Employee uses brooms, shovels, mop, buckets, cleaning supplies and other appropriate tools in central work areas, at completion of the day s run. Removes excess and misplaced fruit, litter, culls and trash, then places it in the proper containers. Cleans packing and storage areas to meet required sanitation and safety standards. From time to time, will assist in the loading of fruit cartons. Lead Night Clean Up Lead night clean up will report to the packing house superintendent. Employee will be in charge of the night clean up crew. Will delegate job duties for each individual or team. Will ensure the completion of all required duties according to check list. Will be using brushes, brooms, towels, buckets, cle aning supplies, mops and pressure washers to clean dumping, conveying, grading, sizing, packing, stacking and shipping areas. Removal of fruit, litter, culls, cardboard, lumber and pallets into the proper containers and areas. Will need to sanitize all areas of packing house. May be needed to stack, load or handle cartons at times. Will need to use a checklist to complete duties.

142 132 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Night Clean Up Watchman Night clean up person will report to the lead night clean up or packing house superintendent. Employee uses brushes, brooms, towels, buckets, cleaning supplies, mops and pressure washers to clean dumping, conveying, grading, sizing, packing, stacking and shipping areas of the operation. Removal of fruit, litter, culls, cardboard, lumber and pallets into the proper containers and areas. Will need to sanitize all areas of the packing house. May be needed to stack, load or handle cartons at times. Will need to use a checklist to complete duties. Watchman will report to the Field Supervisor. Employee is responsible for plant security, checks gates, doors, windows and other points of entry. Must be able to operate fire extinguisher and notify proper authority or supervisor as needed in emergency situations. During shipping season, is given responsibility for night loading and completion of required paperwork. Regularity of attendance. Fruit Sales Person Salesperson will report to the Assistant Manager. Salesperson will conduct the sales of the Association s fruit to customers. Must be friendly and courteous to customers at all times. Individual must be able to make and count change from sales, have legible handwriting, prepare sales slips as directed and speak English. Will be required to lift fruit cartons weighing from pounds and place them in customer s vehicle. Summary Statement: Job Descriptions: Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The daily operation of the IVG Packing House depended on the coordinated efforts of a number of specialized and, in some instances, highly knowledgeable and highly trained employees. The above noted job descriptions, adapted from IVG company records, describe both the job requirements and the actual processes involved in the daily operation of the IVG Packing House in great detail. These job descriptions preserve a valuable historical record, down to the most minute and surprising facets of orange packing.

143 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Trademarks of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The following Patents and Trade-Marks are on file regarding the Valencia Oranges processed and packed by the Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. They represent the seven labels packaged and shipped by IVG. Linen Registered Nov. 13, 1928Trade-Mark 249,335 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, OF IRVINE, CALIFORNIA Application Filed July 25, 1928.Serial No. 270,128. LINEN Statement. To the Commissioner of Patents: Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The trade mark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant s business since July 7, IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, W. B. HELLIS Secy. Satin Registered Jan. 1, 1929Trade-Mark 251,277 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, OF IRVINE, CALIFORNIA Application filed September 5, 1928.Serial No. 271,934. SATIN Statement. To the Commissioner of Patents:

144 134 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The trade mark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant s business since July 7, IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, W. B. HELLIS Secy. Tweed Registered Jan. 29, 1929Trade-Mark 252,221 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, OF IRVINE, CALIFORNIA Application Filed July 25, 1928.Serial No. 270,129. TWEED Statement. To the Commissioner of Patents: Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The trade mark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant s business since July 7, IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, W. B. HELLIS Secy.

145 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 135 Velvet Registered May 28, 1929Trade-Mark 256,970 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, OF IRVINE, CALIFORNIA Application filed September 5, 1928.Serial No. 271,935. VELVET Statement. To the Commissioner of Patents: Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The trade mark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant s business since July 7, IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, W. B. HELLIS Secy. Madras Registered June 7, 1938Trade-Mark 357,641 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE Irvine Valencia Growers, Irvine, California Application May 14, 1937.Serial No. 392,758 MADRAS Statement. To whom it may concern: Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The trade mark has been continuously used and applied to said goods in applicant s business since July 7, The mark has been in bona fide use for not less than one year in interstate commerce by the applicant.

146 136 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, W. L. WEST Secretary Irvale Registered August 9, 1949Registration No. 513,354 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE Irvine Valencia Growers, Irvine, California Application December 8, 1947.Serial No. 543,714 IRVALE Statement. Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The mark was first used in 1931, and first used in commerce among several States of the United States which may lawfully be regulated by Congress, in IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, KENNETH RICE Secretary Serge Registered August 9, 1949Registration No. 513,355 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE Irvine Valencia Growers, Irvine, California Application December 8, 1947.Serial No. 543,715 SERGE Statement. Irvine Valencia Growers, a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, Located at Irvine, California, and doing business at Irvine, California, has adopted and used the trademark shown in the accompanying drawing, for FRESH CITRUS FRUITS The mark was first used in 1929, and first used in commerce among several States of the United States which may lawfully be regulated by Congress, in 1929.

147 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 137 IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, KENNETH RICE Secretary An Interesting Historical Sidelight The story of the Irvine Valencia Growers trademarks and patent labels is contained in the October 15, 1952 edition of The Tweed News, in an article entitled Mystery of Tweed Oranges Solved. The newspaper was published in Tweed, Ontario, a small village in the Canadian Province of Ontario. The article Reads: Miss Ana Thompson Of Barnett s Staff Secures Answer From Distributors: The mystery of how the Tweed orange got its name has been finally solved, thanks to Miss Ana Thompson, who is the kind of young lady who likes to know the reason why. Miss Thompson, who heads the sales staff of Barnetts s Grocery, took it upon herself to write the distributors of the oranges bearing our Village imprint, and received a very interesting letter from the Secretary- Manager of the Irvine Valencia Growers, Mr. Kenneth Rice of Irvine, California. Mr. Rice reveals that the Tweed brand is one of a number of their own varieties of oranges all named after different kinds of fabric s, such as velvet, Satin, Madras and Serge. The choicest is the Satin variety and the closest to perfection is the Tweed. Our thanks to Ana, for this revealing information. It is curiosity such as yours that makes good newspaper reading. And as you intimated, it is more than a coincidence that Mr. and Mrs. Bill Tweed can eat Tweed oranges in Tweed, wearing Tweed suits. That s a real home-town buildup. The article underscores the importance of the Satin label, and is also an interesting example of how IVG treated customers in a Home-Town manner. The fact that Kenneth Rice, manager of IVG, replied at all would be unusual by today s business standards. Finally, some light may here be shed on the designing of the labels themselves. The Minutes record: MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING IRVING [E] VALENCIA GROWERS February 18 th, 1929 Special meeting of the Directors of the Irvine Valencia Growers was held February 18 th, A. J. McFadden, President of the Board presiding. Members of board present: A. J. McFadden, W. B. Hellis, Walter L. West, Robt. Jeffrey, Ralph Mitchell Mr. Lentz of the Schmidt Lithograph Company met with the Directors to take up the matter of stock and standard labels. After some discussion it was moved by Hellis, seconded by Jeffrey that the matter be left to the consideration of the Manager. Carried.

148 138 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House It would appear, therefore, that the Schmidt Lithograph Company may have had a hand in the design of one or more of the IVG labels. Summary Statement: Trademarks of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The trademarks of the IVG Packing House were in integral part of identifying, grading, marketing, advertising, and shipping the fruit. IVG Valencia oranges were shipped worldwide. Accordingly, the IVG labels were recognized worldwide.

149 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A Contemporary (Historic) View of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Citrus Packing Industry Creates Fame for County by Pat Coe, The Santa Ana Register Note: The following article was written at the peak of importance of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House. It describes a business that both kept pace with the industry nationwide, and one that set a local standard of excellence. Citrus Packing Industry Creates Fame For County The Register Santa Ana, Cal. Sunday, August 10, 1958 By Pat Coe Clean, cool and busy Packing houses currently are processing citrus for shipping at a rate to place Orange County within the top 15 ranking agricultural counties in the nation. The largest industry in the county seems to also be one of the cleanest. Walter L. West can point with pride to one of the 29 packing houses in the county Irvine Valencia Packing House, in which approximately 50 growers are partners. Member of the board of directors since 1930 and manager of the packing house for 13 years, the vice president says, We don t look for growers they have to look for us. A co-operative citrus organization, the packing house is a member of the Sunkist group, which is a selling organization only. Besides, to its own board of directors, Irvine has a member on the district exchange board, which in turn, has a member on the Sunkist board. Products Trucked The packing house sends the men into the groves to pick the fruit, which is trucked into the processing plant at SW Jeffrey Rd., Irvine. The crates of oranges are stacked in the basement when men move them onto portable conveyor belts, moving them to the main belt. Conveyed upstairs, the crates are automatically tipped, dumping the fruit onto another conveyor belt. As the fruit rolls onto the conveyor belt on the main floor of the packing house, women sort out the rotten oranges. Going through an automatic sizer, oranges too small for packing are dropped onto [illegible words].

150 140 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Put In Cartons Women sort the fruit by hand into three categories, juice, choice and Sunkist. The fruit then rolls through an automatic sizer. It is automatically stamped before being packaged into cardboard cartons. There were originally six different boxes of fruit shipped out of the Irvine Valencia Packing House, which was constructed at the five-acre site in Still used by Sunkist is the Satin, Linen and velvet lines. Velvet for practical purposes is not in use, although some boxes are made up to order each year in order to keep the brand in existence. The second grade boxes of the packing house are the Tweed and the non-sunkist first are Madras. The sixth of the cloth-named boxes originally used was Serge. Packed by hand by women who are paid per box and can earn up to $15 a day, the boxes are automatically closed on a package machine, which Rice says is the only machine of the citrus business that is also used in other industries. Losing its identity as it enters the 15-room three story cooler, the fruit is no longer the product of any one of the 50 growers. Here it is stored until packed into a bright car or a truck for delivery. The plant can easily send cartons a day, West says. Eight cars leave the packing house daily and trucks are used for short-run deliveries, he explained. Freight Cars Iced The freight cars are iced from the private ice plant of the packing house. We ve got an ice plant, where we can make 80 tons of ice a day, if we want to, he says. It takes only two men to ice a car here, West says. One man, at the beginning of the conveyor belt feeds the ice onto the rollers and a man at the end of the belt swings it into the freight car. In the spring and fall, the ice will last into New York, but during the summer months, it is necessary to replace the seven tons of ice in each car at Kansas City, according to West. Summary Statement: A Contemporary (Historic) View of IVG The pride that the author of the article Citrus Packing Industry Creates Fame for County captures in quoting those cited in the article is remarkable. For example, Walter L. West, member of the board of directors beginning in 1930 and manager of the packing house for 13 years, crowed, We don t look for growers they have to look for us. In summary, in the late 1950s the IVG facility had clearly kept pace with the industry. It fulfilled a vital role in the agricultural industry in Orange County. The success of the orange industry was, in fact, such a success that it placed Orange County within the top 15 ranking agricultural counties in the nation.

151 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Biographical Review: The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Preliminary biographical research was conducted for IVG Board Members and Stockholders either listed as founding members or members at the time that construction of the Packing House was first discussed in detail. This list included: Ferrel, G. P. Mitchell, W. G. Ferrel, R. Murray, Owen A. Hellis, W. B. Osterman, Bennie Irvine Company Pankey, H.J. Jeffrey, Geo. Smith, C.E. Jeffrey, Mary Veeh, George H. Jeffrey, Robert Walker, Herbert Los Alisos Company West, Walter Mc Fadden, A. J. Wheeler, John L. Mitchell, Ralph J. In-depth biographical research was not conducted for each and every individual associated with IVG, or for each and every individual listed above. This would have been impossible. In addition, such research would have been unwarranted. Quite simply, virtually every individual associated with IVG was also intimately associated with The Irvine Company. They were on the board or were a stockholder simply due to their association with James Irvine, the Irvine Ranch, or The Irvine Company. The following general sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants Santa Ana City Directory 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 G. P. Ferrel No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants

152 142 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Santa Ana City Directory 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 R. Ferrel No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants Santa Ana City Directory 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 William Bradford Hellis General biographical information about William Bradford Hellis is contained in the following source of information: The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland In addition, the following sources of information were consulted but did not contain information about William B. Hellis: The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants William Bradford Hellis had a long and warm relationship both with The Irvine Company and with its president, James Irvine. According to Robert Glass Cleland in The Irvine Ranch, William Bradford Hellis had been in the employ of the Irvine Ranch since as early as In 1923 he had been made secretary of the company and ten years later had become its general manager (which he remained until his retirement in May 1959) with extensive control over all the activities of the ranch. To its owner, he was friend, companion, and advisor. (Cleland 1952: 135, 136) In fact, it was Hellis who was with James Irvine in August of 1947, on the day that Irvine died while fishing a stream that cut across his Montana ranch, the Flying D, near Bozeman, Montana. The two men often fished and hunted together. The two men were fishing apart that day, when Hellis came upon Irvine s lifeless body. (Cleland 1952: p. 135, 136, 137) Consultation of city directories contained the following listings:

153 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Santa Ana City Directory (Tustin Section) Hellis W Bradfor[d] timekpr Irvine Company r Irvine Ranch 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Hellis Wm B bkpr r R D 7 Box 442 The Irvine Company and/or James Irvine See section of this report entitled: Orange County, Oranges, and the Irvine Ranch. George Jeffrey Biographical information about George Jeffrey is contained in the following source of information: The Historical Volume and Reference Works, Volume I, by Thomas Talbert In addition, the following sources of information were consulted but did not contain information about George Jeffrey: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland George Jeffrey arrived in California in 1884 at the age of seven, when his parents decided to relocate the entire family from their native Scotland. At that time, the family consisted of father William, mother Mary, and siblings Alex, Andrew, Robert, Margaret, and Mame. After spending 10 years farming in the Antelope Valley followed by 3 years in the San Fernando Valley, the family settled in Irvine in That year, the Irvine Company leased William Jeffrey 500 acres on which he planted lima beans and grain. Working with his father until this time, George became interested in telegraphy. After studying for a year, he then worked as a telegrapher and railroad brakeman until For two years he went back to farming, renting 1,500 acres from The Irvine Company, raising beans and barley. Jeffrey then decided to attend college ( ), an ambition that lasted for one year. From 1908 until 1922 he went back to farming, this time planting Valencias on 86 acres of land leased from The Irvine Company. (Talbert 1963 Vol I.: p. 770, 771) Persuaded to run for County Supervisor in the early 1920s, George Jeffrey held that post from 1922 until During his years in office he was instrumental in promoting a number of well-known projects. His was the deciding vote in favor of designating Newport Beach a pleasure harbor rather than a commercial harbor. Jeffrey is credited with being the founder of the Ortega Highway, a joint effort of the county of Orange, the county of Riverside, and the State, which was completed in 1934 at a cost of $582,000. Along with James Irvine, Jr., George Jeffrey was a co-founder of the Santa Ana Country Club. He was also a noted boating enthusiast. George Jeffrey passed away in November of (Talbert 1963 Vol. 1: p. 770, 771)

154 144 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Consultation of city directories contained the following listings: 1918 Santa Ana City Directory (San Joaquin District Irvine P. O.) Jeffrey George farmer Irvine 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Jeffrey Geo rancher r Irvine Mary Jeffrey No other biographical information was found on Mary Jeffrey other than from city directories. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Consultation of city directories resulted in the following listing: 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Jeffrey Mary Mrs. r Irvine Robert Jeffrey No other biographical information was found on Robert Jeffrey other than from city directories. NOTE: Robert Jeffrey is most likely the brother of George Jeffrey, as referenced in Talbert. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Consultation of city directories resulted in the following listing: 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Jeffrey Robert rancher r Irvine

155 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 145 Los Alisos Company No information was found on this entity. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory A. J. McFadden General biographical material about Arthur J. McFadden is contained in the following sources of information: The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland History of Orange County California, Volume II, by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert In addition, the following source WAS consulted but did not contain information about A. J. McFadden: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor Any record of the beginning of the development of what is now Orange county by Americans would not be complete without specific reference to the local interests and activities of the McFadden family, of the second generation of which in this locality Arthur J. McFadden, of Santa Ana, is a worthy representative. (Pleasants 1931: p. 177) Arthur J. McFadden, the son of Robert and Flora McFadden, was born in Santa Ana on August 2, Brought up in Orange County, McFadden received his law degree from Harvard University in After practicing law in Santa Ana for three years, McFadden took over an 80-acre parcel of land located at the north corner of Jeffrey Road and Valencia in Santa Ana, where he first grew walnuts, then later citrus. (Talbert 1963: p. 352) In 1919, McFadden became president of the Irvine Walnut Grower s Association, a position he held for 40 plus years. He formed the Irvine Valencia Growers Association in 1929, where he served as president for many years. He was also president of the Persimmon Growers Association of Orange County and was a director of the California Fruit Exchange. In the late 1940s he served for two years as president of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives in Washington, D.C. From 1942 until 1958 he was president of the State Board of Agriculture. (Talbert 1963: p. 352) Arthur J. McFadden s fifty-six year association with the Irvine Ranch speaks well for both his horticultural and organizational abilities; he has been a vice president of the Irvine Foundation for twenty-three years and served as president of the Irvine Company from January 1959 until October

156 146 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House (Talbert 1963: p. 350) McFadden took over the post of president after Myford Irvine s death in January of The directors elected as new president of the company Arthur J. McFadden, rancher, long-time business associate and loyal friend of the Irvines, and trustee of the foundation since its inception. (Cleland 1952: p. 147) Consultation of city directories contained the following listings: 1918 Santa Ana City Directory McFadden Arthur J. (Anna) rancher Irvine 1921 Santa Ana City Directory McFadden Arthur J (Anna K) farmer r Irvine Arthur J. McFadden is also listed in a number of Who s Who Books including: 1949 Who s Who on the Pacific Coast, page Who s Who in California by Alice Catt Armstrong, page Marquis Who s Who in the West, Vol. 6, page 515 Ralph J. Mitchell General biographical material about Ralph J. Mitchell is contained in the following source of information: History of Orange County California, Vol. II by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants In addition, the following sources of information were consulted but did not contain information about Ralph J. Mitchell: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert Ralph John Mitchell, son of Willis G. and Emily Sarah (Green) Mitchell, grew up in Orange County, California. Like his father, he went to work for the Irvine Company as a young man. His brother, Willis Frederick, was also employed by the Irvine Company. Both brothers lived and worked on the Irvine Ranch, along with their sister, Florence. (Pleasants 1931: p. 103) A consultation of city directories contained the following listings: 1918 Santa Ana City Directory Mitchell Ralph J auto trimmer Dale & Co r 621 N Shelton 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Mitchell Ralph J (Harriet) trimmer Dale & Co h 705 W 3d

157 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 147 Willis G. Mitchell General biographical material about Willis G. Mitchell is contained in the following sources of information: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California, Vol. III by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants In addition, the following sources of information were consulted but did not contain information about Willis G. Mitchell: The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert Born in London, Canada, in 1867, Willis G. Mitchell relocated to the United States in 1889 with his family, father Ralph, mother Johanna, and two siblings. His father engaged in ranching in Tustin, eventually becoming owner of his own farm. (Pleasants 1931: p. 103) In due time he became a citizen of his adopted country and for the past thirty-one years has been connected with the citrus industry. He is also well versed in general agriculture. Since 1890 he has been associated with the Irvine Company, and occupied the important position of manager of the ranch and his knowledge of general ranching in California makes him a valuable man for the position.... Mr. Mitchell has the entire oversight of these vast holdings with its many cares and responsibilities, including looking after the leases. (Armor 1921: p. 388) Being very optimistic over the future greatness of Orange County land, and particularly of oranges and walnut groves, Mr. Mitchell many years ago purchased lands which he developed and set out to oranges and walnuts and he has seen to it that they have had such excellent care that they are among the most attractive properties of their kind in the district. (Armor 1921: p. 388) Regarding his personal life, In September, 1893, occurred the marriage of Mr. Mitchell and Miss Emily Sarah Green, who was born in Middleton, Dane County, Wisconsin, and is a daughter of Mr. and Mrs. John W. Green. To this union were born three children, namely: Ralph John, aged thirtyfive years, is with the Irvine Company; Willis Frederick, aged thirty-four years, also with the Irvine Company, and Mrs. Florence Margaret Veeh, all of whom are living at the Irvine Ranch. (Pleasants 1931, Vol. III: p. 103) Willis G. Mitchell died in March of Consultation of city directories contained the following listings: 1918 Santa Ana City Directory Mitchell W G mgr Irvine Ranch 1921 Santa Ana City Directory (Santa Ana, Tustin, Garden Grove) Mitchell Willis G (Emily) rancher r Tustin Mitchell W.G. manager The Irvine Co Tustin Box B res Irvine Ranch Tel 47-W

158 148 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Owen A. Murray No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Bennie Osterman General biographical information for Bennie Osterman is contained in the following source of information: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor Consultation of city directories contained the following listing: 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Osterman Bennie W rancher r El Toro J. H. Pankey No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory C. E. Smith No other biographical information was found on C. E. Smith other than from city directories. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor

159 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 149 History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory A consultation of city directories contained the following listings: 1918 Santa Ana City Directory Smith Charles E (Jennie M) rancher h 1615 Hickey 1921 Santa Ana City Directory (Santa Ana, Tustin, Garden Grove) Smith Chas foreman Irvine Co r Tustin George H. Veeh General biographical information about George H. Veeh is contained in the following sources of information: The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants In addition, the following sources of information were consulted but did not contain information about George H. Veeh: History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor The Irvine Ranch by Robert Glass Cleland 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory George Veeh was born in Kansas in November 1902 to John F. and Freda (Hempler) Veeh. George H. Veeh received his educational training in the public schools of Orange and early became identified with the fruit raising industry. His home ranch, under lease with The Irvine Co., comprises eighty acres of excellent land, and is located near Irvine. It is highly improved, sixty acres being planted to Valencia oranges and twenty acres in lemons. In addition to this fine ranch, he cultivates an acreage on The Irvine Ranch, on which beans are raised. (Pleasants 1931: p. 227) In 1922 Mr. Veeh was united in marriage to Miss Florence M. Mitchell, a daughter of the late Willis G. and Sarah Emily (Green) Mitchell, and whose father was for thirty years with the famous Irvine ranch and was manager of the ranch for fifteen years of that period. Mr. and Mrs. Veeh are the parents of two children, George Mitchell and Norman. Mr. Veeh is a member of the Orange County Farm Bureau and keeps in close touch with the latest advances in the art of horticulture and agriculture. (Pleasants 1931: p. 227) Mr. Veeh was also very active in his community, especially in matters pertaining to water issues. For fourteen years he has been a member of the Santa Ana Valley Irrigation Board, connected with all of its committees, is on the board of the Santiago Aqueduct Commission, is chairman of the East

160 150 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Orange County Water District, and was active in the formation of the El Toro Water District, currently serving as its first chairman (Talbert 1963: p. 379) There were no listings for George Veeh in either the 1918 or the 1921 Santa Ana City Directories. Herbert Walker No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Walter West No biographical information was found on this individual in the following sources of information: Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory West was, however, a member of the IVG Board of Directors beginning in1930 and manager of the packing house for 13 years (see section: A Contemporary View (Historic) of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House ). John L. Wheeler No biographical information was found on this individual. The following sources of information were consulted:

161 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 151 Biographical Card Catalog Los Angeles Richard Riordan Central Library The Historical Volume and Reference Works by Thomas Talbert History of Orange County California with Biographical Sketches by Samuel Armor History of Orange County California by Mrs. J. E. Pleasants 1918 Santa Ana City Directory 1921 Santa Ana City Directory Summary Statement: A Biographical Review of IVG The biographical research effort was limited to some degree by the sheer number of individuals associated with the IVG Packing House. Hence, biographical research was conducted only for IVG Board Members and Stockholders either listed as founding members or members at the time that construction of the Packing House was first discussed in detail. It is likely that additional biographical information could be developed given unlimited time, but it is unlikely that any information so gathered would reveal any individual of overwhelming local significance or importance in relation to the IVG Packing House. Very simply, every individual researched, and for which some information has been found, has some local significance. However, it must be understood that these individuals were a part of an Association and that no single individual researched had a singular influence on the establishment, construction, growth, and/or development of either IVG or the IVG Packing House. Specifically, their individual home might be of significance (if it remains standing today), but the IVG Packing House cannot be regarded as significant in association with any one individual. This would include James Irvine himself. His signature is on the Land Conveyance document giving title of Irvine Company lands to IVG, but if every property having Irvine s signature on a document related to it were made significant, then half of Orange County would be potentially significant. No significant individual may, therefore, be said to be associated with the IVG Packing House. Rather, The Irvine Company as an event in the development history of Orange County (see Item #1) is of significance.

162 152 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 23. Historical Summary Statement: Determination of Significance for the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House State: California Register Items (1-4) 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to this item. Numerous significant events are discussed in detail in sections of this report entitled: Background History: The California Cooperative/Association -- An International And National Perspective Historical Background: Orange County, Oranges, And The Irvine Ranch (A Select Reading List) Orange County: The Case Of The Disappearing Orange (A Select Reading List) The most significant events that the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and Building Complex are associated with, and/or that have made a significant contribution to the broad patters of California local history are: 1. The development of the California citrus industry and the California Cooperative. 2. The development of the Valencia orange industry in Orange County. Note here that the Valencia was identified at the official tree of Orange County in The development of The Irvine Ranch and/or The Irvine Company, and as a representative example of how the pervasive influence of the company was expressed in a version of the California Cooperative. 4. The association of the IVG Packing House with the Citrus Strikes of , and the significance of this event in the labor history of Orange County. 5. The association of the IVG Packing House with the decline of the orange industry in Orange County, and as a symbol of time and time past. 6. As an example of a packing house as a social, cultural, and business entity in California. These events are of true and undoubted significance. Additional events might also be considered (the role of the railroad, etc.), but the identified events (relevant to the broad

163 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 153 patterns of California history) are sufficient to warrant a positive determination of significance in relation to this item. 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Despite the fact that the biographical research effort was limited to some degree by the sheer number of individuals associated with the IVG Packing House, it is unlikely that additional biographical information would identify any individual of overwhelming local significance or importance in relation to the IVG Packing House. Very simply, every individual researched, and for which some information has been found, has some local significance. However, it must be understood that these individuals were a part of an Association and that no single individual researched had a singular influence on the establishment, construction, growth, and/or development of either IVG as a business or the IVG Packing House. Specifically, their individual home might be of significance (if it remains standing today), but the IVG Packing House cannot be regarded as significant in association with any one individual. This would include James Irvine himself. His signature is on the Land Conveyance document giving title of Irvine Company lands to IVG, but if every property having Irvine s signature on a document related to it were made significant then half of Orange County would be potentially significant. No significant individual may, therefore, be said to be associated with the IVG Packing House. Rather, the IVG Packing House is here regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (see Item #1). 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Alterations to the historic IVG Packing House Building Complex include the following: Addition to Main Building/Packing House 2. Circa 1937 Pre Cooler Addition and 1969 Pre Cooler Addition Refrigeration and Equipment Storage Building 4. Demolition of Original Office Building (In Front of Main Building) 5. Shed Additions (Eventual Demolition of Several) 6. Garage and Storage Building Addition (Eventual Demolition of Same) 7. Boiler House Construction 8. Demolition of Several Equipment/Yard Features (Pump House, etc.) 9. Construction of Present Irvine Packing & Cooling Building 10. Construction of Additional Fruit Packing Buildings 11. Construction of Irvine Farm Management Buildings

164 154 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 12. Numerous Small Additions (Platforms/Sheds/Docks) In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised. The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition, and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building additions are historic. Regardless, the primary significance of the packing house is not related to architecture. Rather, the IVG Packing House is best regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (see Item #1). Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance. 4. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #4 at the present time. No previously identified archaeological resources are known to be associated with the project area, and no resources were identified during the survey conducted as part of the present study. Summary: California Register The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #1. Summary: Potential as District Contributor This building does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing as a contributing feature to any type of architectural and /or historic district in accordance with California Register guidelines.

165 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Discussion of Alternatives Note: This is intended as an OUTLINE ONLY. In-depth analysis, including consultation with architects and engineers, was not a part of the scope-of-work for this report. As a result, the following alternatives analysis cannot be regarded as fully compliant in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. Defining the Alternatives for Analysis According to Section of the CEQA Guidelines: An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. Alternatives and Their Relationship to Project Impacts The alternatives included in this document were designed to address impacts according to CEQA Guidelines Section (b)(1): Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project s impact on historical resources shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant. Alternatives that are designed to comply in part or in full with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards would avoid or substantially lessen historic resource impacts. A brief background on the Secretary of the Interior s Standards is provided below. Secretary of the Interior s Standards The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties) provide four treatment approaches for dealing with historic structures:

166 156 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 1. Preservation This is defined as the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property: - Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. - Exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment. - The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation project. 2. Restoration This is defined as the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features from the restoration period. 3. Reconstruction The act or process of depicting, by means of new construction, the form, features, and detailing of a non-surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. 4. Rehabilitation The act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features that convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. The two alternatives included in this document that address potential historic resource impacts are examples of restoration, reconstruction, and rehabilitation treatments. Relocation of the building is not presented as an alternative. The State Historic Resource Commission discourages removal from historical location (see Chapter 5). The resource s significance is largely association with events, not architectural. Even if a new location were compatible with the building s original character and use, relocation would not substantially lessen project impacts. Analysis of Alternatives Alternative #1 - No Project/No Change Note: The following alternative analysis applies to the No Project/No Change Alternative as well as the Preservation and Restoration of Existing Building Alternative.?? Historic Resources This alternative would result in no impacts to historic resources.

167 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 157?? Feasibility This alternative presents feasibility constraints with regards to the long-term operation of the facility.?? Project Objectives This alternative would not achieve the City s objective of providing additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project. Alternative #2 - Preservation, Restoration and Adaptive Reuse of Packing House Building Complex This alternative would result in beneficial impacts to historic resources, through the preservation and restoration of the IVG Packing House.?? Feasibility There are a number of feasibility constraints associated with this alternative. Specifically, the restoration and preservation of the IVG Packing House building would be a time consuming and expensive proposition. Meeting current building codes and reversing the numerous alterations to the building units are also a consideration. The Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse, Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, estimated a cost of approximately $14M to $16M for preservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse.?? Project Objectives The cost of preservation and restoration would reduce the City s ability to provide additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project as planned. Alternative #3 - Preservation of Original Old Packing House Building Only?? Historic Resources This alternative would have a minimal impact on historic resources as it would first involve the demolition of a portion of the building complex (Pre Cooler, Refrigeration Building, and metal sheds) prior to reconstruction and preservation of the Old Main Building. The main building is, in fact, the original packing house, and the preservation and restoration of this building unit would result overall in beneficial impacts to historic resources.

168 158 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House?? Feasibility There are a number of feasibility constraints associated with this alternative. Specifically, the restoration and preservation of the IVG Packing House main building would be a time consuming and expensive proposition. Meeting current building codes and reversing the numerous alterations to the building units are also a consideration. The Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse, Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, estimated a cost of approximately $14M to $16M for preservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse.?? Project Objectives The cost of preservation and restoration would reduce the City s ability to provide additional recreational opportunities through the Jeffrey Open Space Spine project as planned.

169 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Thresholds for Determining Significance of Impacts CEQA Guidelines According to CEQA Guidelines: A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. Substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired. The significance of an historical resource is materially impaired according to CEQA Guidelines Section (4)(b)(2) when a project: (A) (B) (C) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historic resource that convey its historic significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to section (k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historic resources survey meeting the requirements of section (g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historic significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA. Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties According to CEQA Guidelines: Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior s Standard for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource.

170 160 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Thresholds for Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact occurs when a proposed project, in combination with other past, current and probably future projects, will have an impact on the environment. ***** As noted previously, this Thresholds for Determining Significance discussion explains the nature of an historic resource impact, as defined by CEQA. Specifically, 1. Does the project area contain a significant historic resource? The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House has been identified as a potentially significant historic resource in relation to California Register of Historic Places guidelines (Criterion 1). 2. Will the project result in a significant impact to historic, architectural, and/or archaeological resources? The proposed project will result in a significant impact to a potentially significant historic resource (The IVG Packing House) in relation to Threshold (A). 3. Will the project result in a significant impact to any historic district? Approach to Evaluating Impacts to Historic Districts Neither CEQA nor OHP provides guidance on specific thresholds of significance to use when evaluating potential impacts to historic districts verses impacts to individual buildings determined to be historical resources. In addition, neither CEQA nor the OHP provides specific guidance on how much material alteration can occur to a district before it loses its historical significance. National Register Bulletin 15 does provide some general guidelines for determining whether a district retains its integrity. According to the Bulletin: For a district to retain integrity as a whole, the majority of the components that make up the district s historic character must possess integrity even if they are individually undistinguished. In addition, the relationship among the district s components must be substantially unchanged since the period of significance. When evaluating the impact of intrusions upon the district s integrity, take into consideration the relative number, size, scale, design, and location of the components that do not contribute to the significance. A district is not eligible if it contains so many alterations or new intrusions that it no longer conveys the sense of a historic environment. No district has been identified in association with the IVG packing house.

171 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 161 Summary Statement: District Impacts The project will not have a significant impact on any future proposed architectural or historical district.

172 162 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 26. Mitigation Measures Introduction CEQA Guidelines provide the following guidance in determining whether impacts to an historic resource have been fully mitigated: (1) Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction or the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitation, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the project s impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance and thus is not significant. Alternatives that provide varying degrees of mitigation pursuant to (1) above are presented in the Discussion of Alternatives section of this report. (2) In some circumstances, documentation of an historic resource, by way of historic narrative, photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur. HABS Outline Format Documentation The following mitigation measure, pursuant to Section (b) of the CEQA Guidelines, will reduce but not eliminate significant project impacts: A HABS outline format narrative description of the property, contemporary and historic photographs, and other relevant documentation shall be prepared by a historic consultant approved by the City. The report shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Director of Irvine, and an approved original deposited in the City of Irvine Public Library (or other suitable repository) prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the subject property.

173 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Level of Significance after Mitigation The proposed mitigation measures will reduce, but not eliminate:?? Significant impacts to potential historic/architectural resources on the project site (Threshold A) resulting from their demolition.?? Project impacts to historical resources will remain significant after mitigation.

174 164 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 28. Impacts Overview Note: This is section intended as an OUTLINE ONLY. In-depth analysis was not a part of the scopeof-work for this report. As a result, the following impacts overview cannot be regarded as fully compliant in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. Growth Inducing Impacts The proposed project is growth inducing as it would foster population growth. Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact occurs when a proposed project, in combination with past, present and probable future developments, produces an impact that is considerable. No significant cumulative impacts on cultural resources are anticipated with regards to the proposed project. (Please refer to the August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by the Keith Companies Inc.) The proposed project is, at the present time, the only major project that could adversely affect the potential historical significance of the IVG Packing House and building complex. The buildings are not associated with any proposed or potential architectural district. No other projects that would affect this potential are currently proposed. There are, therefore, no cumulative historic resource impacts. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts The proposed project would result in the following unavoidable adverse impacts:?? The proposed project would result in significant unmitigated impacts to a potential historic resource as a result of the demolition of that resource.?? The project as proposed will result in significant unmitigated historic resource impacts to architectural resources (The IVG Packing House Building Complex) on the site. Significant Irreversible Environmental Change The proposed project would result in the irreversible loss of a potential historic resource. This would be an irreversible effect of the proposed project.

175 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 165 Mitigation Measures for the Alternatives The following mitigation measures would apply to all but the No Project/No Change alternative, in order to ensure that development is consistent with any alternative approved by the City of Irvine. Documentation: Prior to any demolition or significant modification of buildings on the project site, a HABS outline format narrative description of the property, contemporary and historic photographs, and other relevant documentation shall be prepared by a historic consultant approved by the City of Irvine. The report shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Director of the City of Irvine and an approved original deposited in the City of Irvine Public Library (or other suitable repository) prior to issuance of the demolition permit for the project. Environmentally Superior Alternative All of the alternatives are environmentally superior to the proposed project that would result in the demolition of the IVG Packing House.

176 166 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 29. Bibliography Books and Reports Armor, Samuel 1921 History of Orange County California With Biographical Sketches. Historic Record Company, Los Angeles, California. Cleland, Robert Glass 1952 The Irvine Ranch. Revised 1962 by Robert V. Hine. The Huntington Library, San Marino. Emmons, Steve 1988 Orange County A History and Celebration. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Publishers, New York. Friis, Leo J Orange County Through Four Centuries, Pioneer Press, Santa Ana. Gonzalez, Gilbert G Labor and Community, Mexican Citrus Worker Villages in a Southern California County, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago. Hallan-Gibson, Pamela 1986 The Golden Promise, An Illustrated History of Orange County. Windsor Publications, Inc. Hume, H. Harold 1957 Citrus Fruits and Their Culture. The MacMillan Company, New York. McClelland, Gordon T. and Jay T. Last 1995 Fruit Box Labels, An Illustrated Price Guide to Crate Labels. Hillcrest Press, Inc., Santa Ana. Meadows, Don 1966 Historic Place Names in Orange County. Paisano Press, Inc., Balboa Island, California. Merlo, Catherine 1993 Heritage of Gold: The First 100 Years of Sunkist Growers, Inc Sunkist Growers Inc., Los Angeles. Pleasants, Mrs. J. E History of Orange County California, Volumes II & III. J. R. Finnell and Sons Publishing, Los Angeles.

177 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 167 Ramsey, Merle and Mabel 1973 This was Mission Country Orange County California. Mission Printing Co., Laguna Beach, California. Reccow, Louis 1972 The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt, Doctoral Thesis, the University of California, Irvine. Slayton, Robert R. and L. Estes Leland 1988 Proceedings of the Conference of Orange County History Department of History, Chapman College, City of Orange. Stoll, Steven 1998 The Fruits of Natural Advantage: Making the Industrial Countryside in California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Talbert, Thomas B Historical Volume and Reference Works, Volumes I & III, Orange County. Historical Publishers, Whittier, California. Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc 2001 Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, City of Irvine, September 6, Walters, Dan 1986 The New California: Facing the 21 st Century, California Journal Press, Sacramento. Walker, Doris 1989 Orange County a Centennial Celebration. Pioneer Publications, Inc., Houston. City Directories 1918 Santa Ana City Directory Published and Compiled by the Santa Ana Directory Co Santa Ana, Tustin, Garden Grove, El Toro, and Irvine City Directory Compiled and Published by Western Directory Co.

178 168 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Libraries Los Angeles Public Library (Richard Riordan Central Library) Tomas Rivera Library, University of California, Riverside University of California at Irvine Library, Special Collections Maps/Drawings U.S.G.S. Topographic Maps Various Historic Maps on File IVG Archives Feasibility Study Floor Plans, etc. Newspapers Squeezed Down to One, May 7, 2000, Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, Section B, Pages B1, B12, B18, B19 Orange County s Citrus Industry is Growing, going, gone, April 25, The Orange County Register, Business Section, Pages 1 & 12 A Century of Citrus, The Story of Orange County s Golden Harvest, November 17, The Santa Ana Register Periodicals New West, August 25, Southern California Journal A Farewell To The Orange Groves Pages Pacific Rail News, August Victim of Suburban Sprawl, Santa Fe s Venta Spur Pages Southern California Quarterly, Summer 1981 (Volume LXIII, Number 2). Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County?: The Southern California Citrus Industry in Transition Pages Technical Bulletins And Reports Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and National Park Service 1988 Identification of Historic Properties: a Decision making Guide for Managers. ACHP, Washington, DC.

179 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 169 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1989 Public Participation in Section 106 Review: a Guide for Agency Officials. ACHP, Washington, DC. Austin, Kay 1990 Certified Local Governments. Local Preservation Programs Newsletter (November 1990): 2-3. California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #1, California Environmental Quality Act and Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #2, Historical Resource Registration Programs in California. Sacramento. California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #3, California Register of Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #4, California Register of Historical Resources Q&A for Local Governments. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #5, California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #6, California Register and National Register: A Comparison. Sacramento, California McDonald, Travis C. Jr Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. Preservation Brief No. 35. National Park Service, Washington D.C. Nelson, Lee n.d. Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character. Preservation Brief No. 17. National Park Service, Washington D.C. National Park Service 1983 Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. 48 FR National Park Service 1988 The Section 110 Guidelines: Guidelines for Federal Agency Responsibilities Under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 53 FR National Register Bulletin 15: How To Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin 16: Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Forms, September 30, National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning, 1977, revised 1985.

180 170 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House National Register Bulletin 38: Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties, 1990, revised National Register Bulletin 39: Researching a Historic Property, National Trust for Historic Preservation 1993 Preservation and the Recent Past. Information Booklet No. 69 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. General Outline and Summary Statement. National Park Service. Revised March 6, 1999 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Standards for Rehabilitation. Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. National Park Service. The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Standards for Restoration. Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. National Park Service. Revised March 6, Secretary of the Interior s Standards and Guidelines (As Amended and Annotated) 2000 Archeology and Historic Preservation. National Park Service. Revised August 16, United States Department of the Interior Historic Preservation Needs Assessment: Report to Congress Regarding the Preservation needs of Historic and Archeological Properties in the United States. Prepared by the National Park Service and State Historic Preservation Officers, May Respondents Gavin Archer The Keith Companies Chris Drover The Keith Companies Staff Irvine Valencia Growers Minutes of the Board of Directors Meetings Minutes of the Board of Directors Meetings Irvine Valencia Growers July 27, 1926 May 26, 1927 June 4, 1928 August 17, 1928

181 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 171 October 16, 1928 November 16, 1928 January 21, 1929 January 28, 1929 February 18, 1929 August 25, 1931 October 12, 1931 (Special Meeting) June 30, 1936 July 11, 1936 (Special Meeting) July 31, 1936 January 31, 1939 June 6, 1939 Minutes of Stockholders Meetings Minutes of First Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers July 27, 1926 Minutes of (Special) Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers April 2, 1928 Minutes of Annual Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers February 7, 1927 February 6, 1928 Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws Articles of Incorporation Irvine Valencia Growers June 7, 1926 with Directors Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler, J. H. Pankey, and A. J. McFadden. By-Laws of Valencia Citrus Association (Irvine Valencia Growers) Adopted July 27, 1926 Real Estate Options July 15, 1929 between The Irvine Company and Irvine Valencia Growers $10.00 to be paid to The Irvine Company by Irvine Valencia Growers for rights to a piece of property containing five acres. Signed by James Irvine (President) and W. B. Hellis (Secretary) of The Irvine Company.

182 172 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Correspondence/Miscellaneous Documents Contract Bond Issued by Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company December 9, 1931 Parties: Jules Markel of Santa Ana, CA and The Irvine Valencia Growers of Irvine, CA. For the sum of $18, For construction of an addition to packing house, composed of basement and first floor, 110 x112 square with truckway 12x155 feet in accordance with plans. Notice of Completion December 8, 1931 Jules Markel General Contractor For the erection and construction of one story and basement addition to present packing house, x with 12 x 110 truckway. Notice of Completion March 30, 1939 Permit No Jules Markel General Contractor For the erection and construction of a one-story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and miscellaneous machinery. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Railroad Contract Contract sent to W. B. Hellis, President, Irvine Valencia Growers Dated July 18, 1929 Attached is completed copy of contract for foot track which serves the packing house at Kathryn. Appraisal Reports Appraisal Report June 11, 1976 by the General Appraisal Company

183 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 173 Valuable Trade-Mark Records Records on file IVG offices: Linen Satin Tweed Velvet Madras Irvale Serge Employee Job Descriptions Packing House Superintendent Assistant Packing House Superintendent Field Supervisor Harvest Crew Supervisor Packing Supervisor Shipping Supervisor Assistant Shipping Clerk Grade Supervisor Transportation Maintenance Supervisor Mechanic Supervisor Shipping Clerk Citrus Fruit Harvester Bin Loader Driver Forklift Operator Head Receiver Forklift Operator Assistant Receiver Forklift Operator In Plant Forklift Operator Basement (Set Off) Bad Fruit Extractor Carton Inventory Operator Pack Supply Person Graders Tally Person Packers And Machine Operators Case Sealer Operator Stackers And Loaders Set Off Person Loaders Forklift & Power Worker Operator Shipping Basement Mechanic Truck Mechanic

184 174 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Assistant Truck Mechanic General Clean Up Lead Night Clean Up Lead Night Clean Up Will Report To The Packing House Superintendent. Night Clean Up Watchman Fruit Sales Person

185 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-1 Appendix A - Figures

186 A-2 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Figure 1 - Vicinity Map

187 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-3 Figure 2 - Location Map. Tustin 7.5 minute quadrangle map showing Kathryn Station and IVG packing house general site plan (photorevised 1981)

188 A-4 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Figure 3 - Historic 1945 Santa Ana topography map showing Kathryn and Frances packing houses/sidings (railroad alignment highlighted). 15 minute quad.

189 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-5 Figure 4 - Original (1929) IVG site/building plan.

190 A-6 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Figure 5 - Contemporary aerial.

191 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-7 Figure 6 - Site plan (existing) IVG packing house. 30th Street Architects.

192 A-8 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Figure 7 - Section/upper floor packing house. 30th Street Architects.

193 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-9 Figure 8 - Lower floor IVG packing house.

194 A-10 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Figure 9 - Pre cooler section/floor plan. 30th Street Architects.

195 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House A-11 Figure Insurance appraisal map. Site plan and building location/use.

196

197 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-1 Appendix B - Photographs

198 B-2 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 1 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking westerly along Jeffrey.View azimuth 210 degrees.

199 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-3 Photograph 2 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking easterly along Jeffrey. View azimuth 45 degrees.

200 B-4 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 3 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view looking northerly. View azimuth 310 degrees.

201 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-5 Photograph 4 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view packing house east elevation. View azimuth 170 degrees.

202 B-6 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 5 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view packing house / pre cooler east elevation. View azimuth 270 degrees.

203 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-7 Photograph 6 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Entry elevation (north) packing house. View azimuth 160 degrees.

204 B-8 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 7 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall packing house / sheds along Jeffrey. View azimuth 80 degrees.

205 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-9 Photograph 8 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Packing house skylight detail.

206 B-10 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 9 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Packing house loading platform shed. View azimuth 140 degrees.

207 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-11 Photograph 10 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: basement access ramp north elevation.

208 B-12 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 11 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: basement access ramp south elevation.

209 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-13 Photograph 12 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Interior packing house main floor looking southerly.

210 B-14 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 13 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Interior packing house basement.

211 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-15 Photograph 14 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: connection between packing house and pre cooler.

212 B-16 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 15 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall pre cooler south and west elevations. View azimuth 340 degrees.

213 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-17 Photograph 16 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. South elevation refrigeration and equipment. View azimuth 270 degrees.

214 B-18 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 17 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Easterly elevation pre cooler. View azimuth 295 degrees.

215 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-19 Photograph 18 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Detail: pre cooler art deco influence. View azimuth 225 degrees.

216 B-20 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 19 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Office building (13248). View azimuth 105 degrees.

217 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-21 Photograph 20 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Overall view metal sheds. View azimuth 140 degrees.

218 B-22 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 21 - Irvine Valencia Growers packing house. Construction detail metal shed.

219 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-23 Photograph 22 - New (non-historic) fruit packing building. View azimuth 155 degrees.

220 B-24 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 23 - Gargiulo packing building (13252 Jeffrey). View azimuth 90 degrees.

221 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-25 Photograph 24 - Irvine Farm Management (13256 Jeffrey). View azimuth 240 degrees.

222 B-26 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 25 - Irvine Packing & Cooling (13250 Jeffrey). View azimuth 240 degrees.

223 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-27 Photograph 26 - Home of entry sign for building complex businesses.

224 B-28 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 27 - Gas pumps. View azimuth 345 degrees.

225 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House B-29 Photograph 28 - IVG office / mobile offices. View azimuth 165 degrees.

226 B-30 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph 29 - Entry sign along Jeffrey: Irvine Packing & Cooling.

227 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-1 Appendix C - Amended DPR 523 Form

228 C-2 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House AMENDED DPR 523: Shall be appended to original Keith Co. 8/22/01 form. PRIMARY RECORD Resource Name: Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) Packing House and Building Complex P1. Other Identifier: BR-2 P2.Location: (See Figures 1-10) a. County: Orange USGS 7.5 Tustin Quadrangle Photorevised: 1981 (1965) T 5S; R 8W Sec: S.B.B.M c. Address: Block of Jeffrey Road, Irvine, California d. UTM: me mn; Zone 11 e. Other Locational Data: The site is 2 kilometers from the East-bound off-ramp of Interstate 5. The entrance to the building complex is on the south side of Jeffrey Road, north/east of Trabuco Road and south/west of Irvine Boulevard. P3a.Description: For a more detailed description, please refer to: A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, The IVG facility has been described several times prior to preparation of the above noted report. Most notably, it was described: 1.) in a 1976 Insurance Appraisal report as prepared by General Appraisers, 2.) in a Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, as prepared for the City of Irvine by Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc., and dated September 6, 2001, 3.) and in an August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared by the Keith Companies, Inc. Each of the above noted descriptions have been reviewed, and significant elements incorporated into the Architectural Description: Existing Conditions section of this report.

229 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-3 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: EXISTING CONDITIONS The following descriptions are purposely concise. They are written in a manner that avoids duplication of any previous description. Site (Photographs 1,2,3) Irvine Valencia Growers Facility The overall site/built environment is comprised of both the historic packing house, and a number of newer fruit packing and farm management buildings. The larger site is bounded on the east by a strawberry field, on the north by Jeffrey Road, on the west by the Irvine Packing & Cooling complex and the Irvine Farm Management complex, and on the south by the Gargulio fruit packing facility. The overall impression is one of an agricultural/industrial building complex. Interestingly, despite the fact that the majority of buildings comprising the overall site/building complex are of recent construction and are not significant architecturally, the agricultural/industrial design theme is philosophically the same as that of the original 1928/1929 building complex. The historic building complex is comprised of the Main Building: Old Packing House, a Pre Cooler Building with Additions, a Refrigeration Building, Metal Sheds, and an Office. Historic Building Complex Main Building: Old Packing House (Photographs 4-14) The main building is designed in an Industrial/Utilitarian architectural style. It is constructed in a rectangular building plan, and has a main floor with basement. It has several additions. The Main Building consists of a 133 x 212 basement and one story wood and steel frame structure. The basement has a gross floor area of 29,022 sq. ft., the first floor has a gross floor area of 28,196 sq. ft, ramps 2,769 sq. ft., platforms 614 sq. ft., and a canopy of sq. ft., for a TOTAL area of 63,021 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the walls of reinforced concrete with concrete wall beam, and the floors are of reinforced concrete (some maple flooring). The roof is built-up composition roofing. The main elevation (entry façade) fronts on Jeffrey Road. It is of a simple, utilitarian design, and is dominated by what have previously been described as sawtooth skylights. While interesting, these skylights are not an unusual architectural feature for an industrial building of this age. Specifically, many industrial buildings constructed before the advent of air conditioning and the heavy use of artificial lighting, incorporated similar skylights into their design. The purpose was to save costs on electricity for lighting, and to provide ventilation.

230 C-4 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House The building has been altered by several major additions, and by numerous minor modifications. This includes: an addition to the westerly side of the building, the addition of two Pre Cooler and Refrigeration buildings to the south, removal of all original equipment, the removal of the original office, and the addition of various canopies and platforms. Pre Cooler with Additions and Refrigeration Building (Photographs 14-18) The building that is generally referred to as the Pre Cooler, actually consists of three different buildings, with associated platforms. These are: the original Pre Cooler, a circa 1939 Refrigeration and Storage Building, and a 1969 Pre Cooler Addition. The original Pre Cooler building is designed in an Industrial/Utilitarian architectural style with an element (minimal) of Art Deco influence. It is constructed in a rectangular building plan, and has several additions. This consists of a 64 x 110 concrete building. It has a basement with a second story. The basement has a floor area of 7268 sq. ft, the first floor has an area of 7,553 sq. ft., and the second floor has an area of 7,040 sq. ft., for a TOTAL floor space of 21,861 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the exterior walls of reinforced concrete, the first and second floors have D & M flooring, and the roof is of built-up composition roofing. The building has been altered by the addition of a Refrigeration and Equipment Storage building to the south and by the addition of a 1969 Pre Cooler Addition to the north. The building does have some minimal Art Deco design detailing, but it is relatively undistinguished architecturally. The Refrigeration and Equipment Storage building consists of a approximately 31 x 101 concrete and wood and steel frame structure. It has a gross floor area of 5,678 sq. ft. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, the walls are of concrete, and the flooring is D & M flooring on concrete. The roof is tar and gravel roofing on cork. The building is purely of an Industrial/Utilitarian design and is undistinguished architecturally. The1969 Pre Cooler Addition consists of an approximately 42 x 77 concrete block and wood frame structure with a mezzanine and loading dock. The building has a gross floor area of 6,417 sq. ft. It is single story in height. The foundations are of reinforced concrete, and the walls are of reinforced concrete block. The floors are of reinforced concrete, and the roof is built-up composition roofing. The building is purely of an Industrial/Utilitarian design and is undistinguished architecturally. Office (Photograph 19) The office consists of a single story concrete block (exterior walls) and wood frame (interior walls) structure. The building is designed in a simple and utilitarian manner with few distinguishing architectural features apart from a large wooden cornice which extends upwards to a flattened composition roof and roofline. It is built in an essentially rectangular building plan and has approximately 2,300 square feet of floor space. The foundation is of reinforced concrete, and the

231 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-5 exterior walls are of reinforced concrete block. The interior walls are of wood stud, and plaster construction. The floor is of reinforced concrete, and the roof is of composition roofing. The office may be considered both as an addition, and an alteration to the historic IVG building complex. Constructed in 1969, it is architecturally undistinguished, and while utilitarian in nature, the building is incompatible (in terms of design) with the historic portions of the IVG Packing House including the old main building, the pre cooler and additions, and the old metal sheds. Metal Sheds (Photographs 20, 21) There are three historic metal sheds (constructed between 1938 and 1944) associated with the historic IVG Packing House building complex. These generally have concrete wall footings, with corrugated metal siding and roofs. They are purely Industrial/Utilitarian in design and are undistinguished architecturally. Site/Buildings (Photographs 22-29) Associated Fruit Packing Buildings The overall site includes a number of buildings that are not historically a part of the Irvine Valencia Growers historic building complex. This includes: Irvine Farm Management Buildings Irvine Packing & Cooling Building Present-Day Irvine Valencia Growers Office Various Gargiulo Packing Buildings Several Mobile Trailer Offices These buildings are all of recent construction. They are all Industrial/Utilitarian in design, and have no architectural significance or importance. Summary Statement Conclusions: Alterations to IVG Building Complex Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Specifically, a comparison of Figure 4: 1929 IVG Site/Building Plan to Figure 5: Contemporary Aerial, reveal that numerous changes have taken place since construction of the facility beginning in The complex was completed in The various alterations to the historic IVG Packing House Building Complex include the following:

232 C-6 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 1.) 1931 Addition to Main Building/Packing House 2.) Circa 1937 Pre Cooler Addition and 1969 Pre Cooler Addition 3.) 1937 Refrigeration and Equipment Storage Building 4.) Demolition of Original Office Building (In Front of Main Building) 5.) Shed Additions (Eventual Demolition of Several) 6.) Garage and Storage Building Addition (Eventual Demolition of Same) 7.) Boiler House Construction 8.) Demolition of Several Equipment/Yard Features (Pump House, Etc.) 9.) Construction of Present Irvine Packing & Cooling Building 10.) Construction of Additional Fruit Packing Buildings 11.) Construction of Irvine Farm Management Buildings 12.) Numerous Small Additions (Platforms/Sheds/Docks) In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1928/1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised (See Also Figure 4: Historic 1929 Site/Building Plan). The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition, and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building additions are historic. Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance. P3b. Resource Attributes: HP8 (industrial Building), HP33 (Farm/Ranch), FP 39 (Agricultural Building) P4. Resources Present: Building(s) P5a: Photo or Drawing: See Figures #1-10, and Photographs #1-19. P5b. Description of Photo: See Photo Captions P6. Date Constructed -- Age and Sources: 1928/1929; Historic Additions 1931, c.1937, and For a more detailed discussion of construction, please refer to: A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, 2002.

233 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-7 P7. Owner and Address: Irvine Community Development Company 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, California P8. Recorded By: Roger Hatheway Hatheway & Associates Post Office Box 3246 Crestline, CA P9. Date Recorded: June 10-30, 2002 P10. Survey Type: Phase II Evaluation P11. Report Citation: August 22, 2001 report entitled, A Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory for Planning Area 9 Irvine, California, as prepared for the Irvine Community Development Company by the Keith Companies, Inc. ATTACHMENTS: 1.) Building, Structure and Object Record 2.) Figures: FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2: LOCATION MAP U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC/QUAD MAP FIGURE 3: HISTORIC 1945 U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC/QUAD MAP FIGURE 4: HISTORIC 1929 IVG SITE/BUILDING PLAN FIGURE 5: CONTEMPORARY AERIAL FIGURE 6: 30 th STREET: SITE PLAN (EXISTING) IVG PACKING HOUSE FIGURE 7: 30th STREET: SECTION/UPPER FLOOR IVG PACKING HOUSE FIGURE 8: 30th STREET: LOWER FLOOR IVG PACKING HOUSE FIGURE 9: 30th STREET: PRE COOLER SECTION/FLOOR PLAN FIGURE 10: 1976 INSURANCE APPRAISAL MAP 3.) Photographs: Photograph #1: Overall View Looking Westerly Along Jeffrey: VAZ 210 Degrees Photograph #2: Overall View Looking Easterly Along Jeffrey: VAZ 45 Degrees

234 C-8 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Photograph #3: Overall View Looking Northerly: VAZ 310 Degrees Photograph #4: Overall View Packing House East Elevation: VAZ 170 Degrees Photograph #5: Overall Packing House/Pre Cooler East Elev: VAZ 270 Degrees Photograph #6: Entry Elevation (North) Packing House: VAZ 160 Degrees Photograph #7: Overall Packing House/Sheds Along Jeffrey: VAZ 80 Degrees Photograph #8: Packing House Skylight Detail Photograph #9: Packing House Loading Platform Shed: VAZ 140 Degrees Photograph #10: Packing House Detail: Basement Access Ramp North Elevation Photograph #11: Packing House Detail: Basement Access Ramp South Elevation Photograph #12: Interior Packing House Main Floor Looking Southerly Photograph #13: Interior Packing House Basement Photograph #14: Detail: Connection Between Packing House and Pre Cooler Photograph #15: Overall Pre Cooler South and West Elevations: VAZ 340 Degrees Photograph #16: South Elevation Refrigerator and Equipment: VAZ 270 Degrees Photograph #17: Easterly Elevation Pre Cooler: VAZ 295 Degrees Photograph #18: Detail Pre Cooler Art Deco Influence: VAZ 225 Degrees Photograph #19: Office Building (13248 Jeffrey): VAZ 105 Degrees Photograph #20: Overall View Metal Sheds: VAZ 140 Degrees Photograph #21: Construction Detail Metal Sheds Photograph #22: New (Non-Historic) Fruit Packing Building: VAZ 155 Degrees Photograph #23: Gargiulo Packing (13252 Jeffrey) Building: VAZ 90 Degrees Photograph #24: Irvine Farm Management (13256 Jeffrey): VAZ 240 Degrees Photograph #25: Irvine Packing & Cooling (13250 Jeffrey): VAZ 240 Degrees Photograph #26: Gas Pumps: VAZ 345 Degrees Photograph #27: IVG Office/Mobile Offices: VAZ 165 Degrees Photograph #28: Entry Sign Along Jeffrey: Irvine Packing & Cooling Photograph #29: Home Of Entry Sign For Building Complex Businesses 4.) Phase II Evaluation Report A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, ) Bibliography BOOKS AND REPORTS Armor, Samuel 1921 History of Orange County California With Biographical Sketches. Historic Record Company, Los Angeles, California.

235 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-9 Cleland, Robert Glass 1952 The Irvine Ranch. Revised 1962 by Robert V. Hine. The Huntington Library, San Marino. Emmons, Steve 1988 Orange County A History and Celebration. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Publishers, New York. Friis, Leo J Orange County Through Four Centuries, Pioneer Press, Santa Ana. Gonzalez, Gilbert G Labor and Community Mexican Citrus Worker Villages in a Southern California County, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago. Hallan-Gibson, Pamela 1986 The Golden Promise An Illustrated History of Orange County. Windsor Publications, Inc., Hume, H. Harold 1957 Citrus Fruits and Their Culture. The MacMillan Company, New York. McClelland, Gordon T. and Jay T. Last 1995 Fruit Box Labels An Illustrated Price Guide to Crate Labels. Hillcrest Press, Inc., Santa Ana. Meadows, Don 1966 Historic Place Names in Orange County. Paisano Press, Inc., Balboa Island, California. Merlo, Catherine 1993 Heritage of Gold: The First 100 Years of Sunkist Growers, Inc Sunkist Growers Inc., Los Angeles. Pleasants, Mrs. J. E History of Orange County California, Volumes II & III. J. R. Finnell and Sons Publishing, Los Angeles. Ramsey, Merle and Mabel 1973 This was Mission Country Orange County California. Mission Printing Co., Laguna Beach, California. Reccow, Louis 1972 The Orange County Citrus Strikes of : The Forgotten People in Revolt, Doctoral Thesis, the University of California, Irvine. Slayton, Robert R. and L. Estes Leland 1988 Proceedings of the Conference of Orange County History Department of History, Chapman College, City of Orange. Stoll, Steven 1998 The Fruits of Natural Advantage: Making the Industrial Countryside in California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Talbert, Thomas B Historical Volume and Reference Works, Volumes I & III Orange County. Historical Publishers, Whittier, California.

236 C-10 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc 2001 Feasibility Study for Adaptive Reuse Irvine Valencia Packing House and Pre Cooler Building, City of Irvine, September 6, Walters, Dan 1986 The New California: Facing the 21 st Century, California Journal Press, Sacramento. Walker, Doris 1989 Orange County a Centennial Celebration. Pioneer Publications, Inc., Houston. CITY DIRECTORIES 1918 Santa Ana City Directory Published and Compiled by the Santa Ana Directory Co Santa Ana, Tustin, Garden Grove, El Toro, and Irvine City Directory Compiled and Published by Western Directory Co. LIBRARIES Los Angeles Public Library (Richard Riordan Central Library) Tomas Rivera Library, University of California, Riverside University of California at Irvine Library, Special Collections MAPS/DRAWINGS U.S.G.S. Topographic Maps Various Historic Maps on File IVG Archives Feasibility Study Floor Plans, etc. NEWSPAPERS Squeezed Down to One May 7, 2000, Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, Section B, Pages B1, B12, B18, B19 Orange County s Citrus Industry is growing, going, gone April 25, 2000 The Orange County Register, Business Section, Pages 1 & 12 A Century of Citrus The Story of Orange County s Golden Harvest November 17, 1968 Santa Ana Register PERIODICALS NEW WEST August 25, Southern California Journal A Farewell To The Orange Groves Pages

237 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-11 PACIFIC RailNEWS August Victim of Suburban Sprawl Santa Fe s Venta Spur Pages SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA QUARTERLY Summer 1981 (Volume LXIII, Number 2). Who Took the Oranges Out of Orange County?: The Southern California Citrus Industry in Transition Pages TECHNICAL BULLETINS AND REPORTS Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and National Park Service 1988 Identification of Historic Properties: a Decision making Guide for Managers. ACHP, Washington, DC. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1989 Public Participation in Section 106 Review: a Guide for Agency Officials. ACHP, Washington, DC. Austin, Kay 1990 "Certified Local Governments." Local Preservation Programs Newsletter (November 1990): 2-3. California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #1, California Environmental Quality Act and Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #2, Historical Resource Registration Programs in California. Sacramento. California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #3, California Register of Historical Resources: Questions and Answers. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #4, California Register of Historical Resources Q&A for Local Governments. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #5, California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process. Sacramento, California California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Series #6, California Register and National Register: A Comparison. Sacramento, California McDonald, Travis C. Jr Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. Preservation Brief No. 35. National Park Service, Washington D.C. Nelson, Lee n.d. Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character. Preservation Brief No. 17. National Park Service, Washington D.C. National Park Service 1983 Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines. 48 FR National Park Service 1988 The Section 110 Guidelines: Guidelines for Federal Agency Responsibilities Under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 53 FR National Register Bulletin 15: "How To Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation," National Register Bulletin 16: "Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Forms," September 30, 1986.

238 C-12 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House National Register Bulletin 24: "Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning," 1977, revised National Register Bulletin 38: "Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties," 1990, revised National Register Bulletin 39: "Researching a Historic Property," National Trust for Historic Preservation 1993 Preservation and the Recent Past. Information Booklet No. 69 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. General Outline and Summary Statement. National Park Service. Revised March 6, 1999 The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Standards for Rehabilitation. Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. National Park Service. The Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1995 Standards for Restoration. Technical Preservation Services for Historic Buildings. National Park Service. Revised March 6, Secretary of the Interior s Standards and Guidelines (As Amended and Annotated) 2000 Archeology and Historic Preservation. National Park Service. Revised August 16, United States Department of the Interior Historic Preservation Needs Assessment: Report to Congress Regarding the Preservation needs of Historic and Archeological Properties in the United States. Prepared by the National Park Service and State Historic Preservation Officers, May RESPONDENTS Gavin Archer The Keith Companies Chris Drover The Keith Companies Staff Irvine Valencia Growers MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTOR S MEETINGS Minutes of the Board of Directors Meetings Irvine Valencia Growers July 27, 1926 May 26, 1927 June 4, 1928 August 17, 1928 October 16, 1928 November 16, 1928 January 21, 1929 January 28, 1929 February 18, 1929 August 25, 1931 October 12, 1931 (Special Meeting)

239 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-13 June 30, 1936 July 11, 1936 (Special Meeting) July 31, 1936 January 31, 1939 June 6, 1939 MINUTES OF STOCKHOLDERS MEETINGS Minutes of First Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers July 27, 1926 Minutes of (Special) Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers April 2, 1928 Minutes of Annual Stockholders Meeting of Irvine Valencia Growers February 7, 1927 February 6, 1928 ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION AND BY-LAWS Articles of Incorporation Irvine Valencia Growers June 7, 1926 with Directors Ralph J. Mitchell, W. B. Hellis, John L. Wheeler, J. H. Pankey, and A. J. McFadden. By-Laws of Valencia Citrus Association (Irvine Valencia Growers) Adopted July 27, 1926 REAL ESTATE OPTIONS July 15, 1929 between The Irvine Company and Irvine Valencia Growers $10.00 to be paid to The Irvine Company by Irvine Valencia Growers for rights to a piece of property containing five acres. Signed by James Irvine (President) and W. B. Hellis (Secretary) of The Irvine Company. CORRESPONDENCE/MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS Contract Bond Issued by Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company December 9, 1931 Parties: Jules Markel of Santa Ana, CA and The Irvine Valencia Growers of Irvine, CA. For the sum of $18, For construction of an addition to packing house, composed of basement and first floor, 110 x112 square with truckway 12x155 feet in accordance with plans.

240 C-14 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Notice of Completion December 8, 1931 Jules Markel General Contractor For the erection and construction of one story and basement addition to present packing house, x with 12 x 110 truckway. Notice of Completion March 30, 1939 Permit No Jules Markel General Contractor For the erection and construction of a one-story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and miscellaneous machinery. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Railroad Contract Contract sent to W. B. Hellis, President, Irvine Valencia Growers Dated July 18, 1929 Attached is completed copy of contract for foot track which serves the packing house at Kathryn. APPRAISAL REPORTS Appraisal Report June 11, 1976 by the General Appraisal Company VALUABLE TRADE-MARK RECORDS Records on file IVG offices: Linen Satin Tweed Velvet Madras Irvale Serge EMPLOYEE JOB DESCRIPTIONS Packing House Superintendent Assistant Packing House Superintendent Field Supervisor Harvest Crew Supervisor Packing Supervisor Shipping Supervisor Assistant Shipping Clerk

241 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-15 Grade Supervisor Transportation Maintenance Supervisor Mechanic Supervisor Shipping Clerk Citrus Fruit Harvester Bin Loader Driver Forklift Operator Head Receiver Forklift Operator Assistant Receiver Forklift Operator In Plant Forklift Operator Basement (Set Off) Bad Fruit Extractor Carton Inventory Operator Pack Supply Person Graders Tally Person Packers And Machine Operators Case Sealer Operator Stackers And Loaders Set Off Person Loaders Forklift & Power Worker Operator Shipping Basement Mechanic Truck Mechanic Assistant Truck Mechanic General Clean Up Lead Night Clean Up Lead Night Clean Up Will Report To The Packing House Superintendent. Night Clean Up Watchman Fruit Sales Person Please also refer to: A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, 2002.

242 C-16 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD B1. Historic Name: Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) Packing House and Building Complex B2. Common Name: Same B3. Original Use: Orange Packing House For more detailed information, please refer to: A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, B4. Present Use: Cleaning and packaging agricultural produce/citrus (no oranges). B5. Architectural Style: Industrial/Utilitarian Minimal Art Deco Influence B6. Construction History: INITIAL/PRELIMINARY PLANNING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A PACKING HOUSE Note: The early packing of IVG fruit was accomplished in coordination with Frances Citrus Association. IVG fruit was, in fact, packed solely at the Frances Citrus Packing House for the first two season (1927 and 1928), located to the immediate north of the site of the future IVG Packing House. It was the first stop on the Venta Spur. Not surprisingly, discussions among the stockholders and board members soon focused on the establishment of a packing house for IVG fruit. These discussions included the acquisition of land from The Irvine Company, and the construction of a railway extension to the new packing house. Minutes recording such discussions include the following: MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS May 26 th, 1927 A meeting of the Board of Directors was held at the temporary office of the association at the Irvine Walnut Growers house at 4 o clock P.M. this date. A. J. McFadden acted as chairman and W. B. Hellis as secretary. All directors were present. The meeting was called for the purpose of discussing the need of starting on the construction of the new house and procuring the site, rail extensions, etc. Several applications were on file for the position of manager which were discussed tentatively

243 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-17 but no action taken. It was the consensus of opinion that no further action toward construction etc. should be taken until the set of fruit for the coming year is more accurately determinable. John L. Wheeler moved and R. J. Mitchell seconded that the President and Secretary be authorized to conclude with The Irvine Company the purchase of a tract of land in Lot #239 comprising five acres at $ per acre. There being no further business the meeting was on motion adjourned. MINUTES OF ANNUAL STOCKHOLDERS MEETING OF IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS February 6 th 1928 The regular annual meeting of stockholders of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the office of the Irvine Walnut Association, Tustin, California, (Temporary office of this Association) on the sixth day of February 1928, at 2:00 o clock P. M. Present thirty five (35) shares owned, held and represented as follows: - Shares W. B. Hellis2 John L. Wheeler2 A. J. McFadden2 C. E. Smith1 Herbert W. Walker2 W. G. Mitchell2 Robt. Jeffrey2 Owen A. Murray1 The Irvine Co.10 George H. Veeh2 Bennie Osterman2 Los Alisos Co. (by W. West)2 Mary Jeffrey Proxy to R. Jeffrey2 Geo. Jeffrey Proxy to R. Jeffrey2 G. P. Ferrell Proxy to R. Ferrel1 A. J. McFadden President in the chair. A general discussion of the affairs of the Association was had. Robert Jeffrey moved and Walter West seconded a motion ratifying the action of the Board of Directors in arranging the purchase of five (5) acres for packing house site

244 C-18 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House near Frances at $ per acre from The Irvine Company. Motion carried unanimously. John L. Wheeler moved and Herbert Walker seconded a motion requesting the incoming Directors to appoint a committee to conclude arrangements with Frances Citrus Association, if possible, and report back to stockholders for ratification without delay. Motion carried unanimously. W. G. Mitchell moved and John L. Wheeler seconded motion requesting Directors if unable to conclude satisfactory arrangements with Frances Citrus Association to proceed with construction of own packing house and procure brands, etc., to have everything in readiness to pack 1929 fruit. Unanimously carried. THE FRANCES CITRUS ASSOCIATION CONNECTION Interestingly, as late as February 1928, the IVG stockholders and board members were negotiating with Frances Cirtus Association regarding consolidation of both associations. STOCKHOLDERS MEETING April 2 nd 1928 The purpose of the meeting was to advise the stockholders of the results of the negotiations for consolidation of the Frances Citrus Association and Irvine Valencia Growers. The stockholders were duly notified that the negotiations had fallen through and that we had been formally notified to make arrangements to pack our own fruit after the 1928 season. The stockholders were informed as to the directors actions in engaging Mr. C. W. Post as Manager and discussion was had as to methods of financing and type of construction of the new packing house etc. The majority seemed to favor the employing of a capable man at an agreeable fee to superintend construction and draw plans instead of placing contract or working on the cost plus system. Hollow tile or concrete seemed to be favored for construction and limited to one unit only at this time. PLANS RUSHED TO BUILD PACKING HOUSE As a direct result of the breakdown of negotiations with the Frances Citrus Association, the IVG quickly moved to build their own packing house. In effect, Frances Citrus appears to have refused to pack IVG fruit after the 1928 season. Within less than two months, IVG had secured a contractor for construction of their own facility, and negotiations with the Irvine Company and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway were pushed forward. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following:

245 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-19 STOCKHOLDERS MEETING April 2 nd 1928 The stockholders were informed as to the directors actions in engaging Mr. C. W. Post as Manager and discussion was had as to methods of financing and type of construction of the new packing house etc. The majority seemed to favor the employing of a capable man at an agreeable fee to superintend construction and draw plans instead of placing contract or working on the cost plus system. Hollow tile or concrete seemed to be favored for construction and limited to one unit only at this time. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING June 4 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS was held at the temporary office of the association at 4 o clock P. M. on Monday the 4 th of June, The purpose of the meeting was the awarding of contractors contract for building of the new packing house. There were present at said meeting the following directors: - A. J. McFadden W. B. Hellis Robt. Jeffrey R. J. Mitchell J. L. Wheeler being absent, Mr. C. W. Post Manager elect of the Association being also present. The propositions of the following contractors were considered and rejected: - David J. Haire. W. P. Shepherd. Mr. Mahl. The proposition of Mr. F. S. Bishop for full supervision, all plans and specifications, all necessary equipment, etc., for the flat price of $ was accepted and he was notified by letter of the favorable action of the directors on his proposition. The unsuccessful bidders were also notified. The following were elected as a building committee: A. J. McFadden Robt. Jeffrey R. J. Mitchell But it was also the sense of the meeting that all directors give all attention possible to the details of construction.

246 C-20 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING August 17 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Corporation at 4 o clock P. M. on Friday the 17 th of August The purposes of the meeting were the consideration of plans and specifications of the new packing house and office which is to be constructed in the near future. The plans were gone over in detail and alterations etc., penciled in. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING October 16 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Association at 4 o clock P. M. on Tuesday the 16 th day of October The purpose of the meeting was the awarding of orders on bids for lumber, steel, gravel and cement to be used in construction of the new packing house. All directors were present at the meeting. Barr Lumber Company were successful bidders on lumber and cement. Baker Iron Works, successful bidders on steel. Santa Ana Commercial Company were successful bidders on gravel. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING November 16 th 1928 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the temporary office of the Association on Friday the 16 th of November 1928 at 9 o clock A. M. The following directors were present: - A. J. McFadden W. B. Hellis Walter West R. J. Mitchell Robert Jeffrey being absent. West made motion, seconded by Mitchell that the officers of this Association negotiate loan up to $75, with The Irvine Company, for the purchase of land, building of packing house and office, etc.

247 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-21 The following resolution was made by Mitchell, seconded by West and carried unanimously: RESOLVED: That an account be opened with the First National Bank at Santa Ana for the handling of funds of this Association and same be subject to checks for withdrawal signed by the President or Secretary and countersigned by the Manager. On Post s recommendation it was decided to build a corrugated iron shed for housing of picking boxes instead of attempting to store same in the unit of the packing house now being constructed. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 21 st 1929 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the packing house of the Association on Monday, 21 st of January, 1929, at 1:30 P. M. The following directors were present: A. J. McFadden Walter West R. J. Mitchell W. B. Hellis Absent --- Robert Jeffrey. The meeting was called for the purpose of considering details of construction and installation in the new packing house. Plans and specifications for the steam plant to be used for heating the wash tanks, sweat rooms, and steaming the picking boxes and equipment as submitted by Campbell were considered and on motion by Hellis, seconded by West, this proposition accepted at $ for the steam plant and approximately $ for complete equipment, unanimously carried. MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING January 28 th 1929 A special meeting of the Board of Directors of Irvine Valencia Growers was held at the packing house of the Association on Monday, 28 th of January, 1929, at 1:30 P. M. The following directors were present: A. J. McFadden R. J. Mitchell W. B. Hellis Absent --- Robert Jeffrey Walter West

248 C-22 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Mr. Post, the manage submitted bids received from various contractors on wiring the packing house and office as per Heaslip specifications as follows: - Acquisition of Land from The Irvine Company Note: The following document, described as LAND CONVEYANCE DOCUMENT #1, consists of an agreement between The Irvine Company and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the transfer of a five-acre parcel of land. THIS INDENTURE, made the 1 st day of July in the year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Nine, between THE IRVINE COMPANY, a Corporation organized under the laws of the State of West Virginia, with its principal place of business at Tustin, California, the party of the first part, and IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, a California Corporation, the party of the second part. WITNESSETH: - That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) lawful money of the United States, to it in hand paid, by the said party of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does by these presents grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the said party of the second part, and to its assigns forever all that certain lot, piece or parcel of land situate, lying and being in the County of Orange, State of California, bounded and particularly described as follows to-wit: - Commencing at a point, which point bears South 40 deg. West 1320 feet from the most Northerly corner of Lot 239, Block 105 of Irvine s Subdivision of Ranchos San Joaquin and Lomas de Santiago and Flint and Bixby s allotment in Ranchos Santiago de Santa Ana, as per map Book 1, page 88 Miscellaneous Records of said Orange County, thence South 50 deg. East 660 feet; thence South 40 deg. West 330 feet; thence North 50 deg. West 660 feet; thence North 40 deg. East 330 feet, containing five (5) acres. Reserving thirty (30) feet for road purposes along the entire Northwesterly end. The party of the first part reserves the right for a right-of-way for all necessary ditches, pipe lines, flumes, telephone and power lines, over and across the land above described. Together will all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, all and singular the said premises together with the appurtenances unto the said party of the second part, and to its assigns forever.

249 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-23 IN WITNESS THEREOF, THE IRVINE COMPANY has hereunto caused its corporate name to be signed and its corporate seal to be affixed by its President and Secretary thereunto duly authorized by resolution of its board of directors, the day and year first above written. THE IRVINE COMPANY BY James Irvine (signature) President By W B Hellis Secretary (signature) Agreement between IVG and the Santa Fe Railroad The following legal historical document is a contract between the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the construction, operation and maintenance of a track or track extension at or near the station of Kathryn. THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY COAST LINES GRAND CANYON RAILWAY Freight Traffic Department 348 Kerckhoff Building 560 South Main Street Los Angeles, Cal. Telephone Mutual 0111 T. F. Conway Industrial Agent July 18 th 1929 Mr. W. B. Hellis, President Irvine Valencia Growers C/o Irvine Company Tustin, California Dear Sir:

250 C-24 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Attached is completed copy of contract for foot track which serves the packing house at Kathryn. This document is for your files and keeping. Yours truly, F. T. Conway (signature) Form 1659 Standard Approved by General Solicitor CONTRACT FOR INDUSTRY TRACK AGREEMENT Made this 19 th day of April 1929, between THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY a Kansas corporation, hereinafter called the Railway Company party of the first part, and IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, a California corporation hereinafter (whether one or more persons or corporations) called the Industry, part [illegible] of the second part. RECITALS: - The Industry has requested the Railway Company to construct, operate and maintain a track or track extension, as the case may be, about feet in length, hereinafter in its entirety referred to as The Track, at or near station of Kathryn, Orange County, California to serve a packing house (thereinafter called the Plant ), to be operated by the Industry. That portion of The Track, about feet in length, which shall belong to the Railway Company, is shown by red coloring, and that portion of The Track, if any, which shall belong to the Industry, is shown by yellow coloring upon the print hereto attached, marked Exhibit A and made a part hereof, and said red and yellow colored portions are hereinafter for convenience separately referred to as Red Track and Yellow Track, respectively. FIRST ADDITION TO THE PACKING HOUSE Note: IVG Stockholders and members of the Board of Directors quickly realized that they needed to expand their newly built facility. The reason behind the need so soon after initial construction is not particularly clear, but it is likely that the business had grown and in order to keep pace with the competition an addition was necessary. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following:

251 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-25 MINUTES OF DIRECTORS MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS August 25, 1931 The Directors discussed the advisability of soon getting busy on our new unit and after looking at a tentative plan that was presented to them by the Manager it was moved by Hellis, seconded by West that Mr. Post be instructed to get in touch with several Architects and have them submit their proposition in regard to the cost of plans and specifications, and also, their cost of supervision in the erection of the plant. This data to be presented to the Board at our next meeting. Carried. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS October 12, 1931 The meeting was called for the purpose of deciding on an Architect for the erection of the new unit. After a general discussion of the prices of the various Architects and carefully considering the merits of each it was moved by Hellis, seconded by Mitchell that we employ as Architect, Mr. Clarence P. Tedford to furnish plans and specifications and superintend the construction of the addition to our present packing house, according to Mr. Tedford agreement hereby incorporated in the minutes. I propose to draw up complete plans and specifications, take bids, and superintend the construction to satisfactory completion of your addition to present packing house for sum equal to three per centum (3%) of actual cost of said addition Insurance Bond for Addition #1 The following document is a California Contract Bond entered into between Jules Markel and the Irvine Valencia Growers for the sum of $ (and backed by the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company) for the construction of an addition to the packing house. HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT THIS BOND MUST BE RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE CONTRACT IS TO BE PERFORMED IN ORDER TO FULLY COMPLY WITH THE STATUTE AND FULLY PROTECT ALL PARTIES AS PROVIDED IN SAID STATUTE. Know All Men by these Presents: That JULES W. MARKEL of Santa Ana, California, (hereinafter called the Principal), as Principal, and the HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation organized under the

252 C-26 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House laws of the State of Connecticut, and duly authorized to transact a surety business in the State of California, (hereinafter called the Surety), as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto THE IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS, of IRVINE, CALIFORNIA (hereinafter called the Obligee) in the sum of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND AND NO/ Dollars ($18000,00) for the payment whereof to the Obligee the Principal and the Surety bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, the Principal and the Obligee have entered into a certain contract (hereinafter called the contract) dated December 9, 1931 for construction of an addition to packing house, composed of basement and first floor, 110 x 112 square with truckway 12 x 155 feet in accordance with plans. The following Notice of Completion is for an addition to the original packing house and also for the construction of a truckway. The contractor was Jules Markel, and the work was completed in March of NOTICE OF COMPLETION STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Notice of Completion for Addition #1 Irvine Valencia Growers being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that they now, and were upon the 8 th day of December, 1931, the owner in fee simple and under contract of that certain real property situated in the southwest portion of the County of Orange, State of California, and particularly described as follows, to-wit: 5 acres of land in Irvine Sub division Section 329 Tract #105 described as, so West 330 northerly 1650 no westerly 660 to Jeffery Road, as per map recorded in Book page of in the office of the County Recorder of said County. That as such owner of said land, affiant, about the 8 th day of December, 1931, entered into a contract with one Jules Markel, General Contractor for the erection and construction, upon the land above described, of certain building, to wit: one story and basement addition to present packing house, x with 12 x 110 truckway. That said building has been duly constructed and completed in full accordance with contract and the same was actually completed on the 30 th day of March 1932.

253 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-27 This notice is given in pursuance of the provisions of Section 1187 of the code of Civil Procudure of this State. Subsribed and Sworn to before me this 30 th day of March 1932 Ruth Robertson Notary Public in and for said County and State. SECOND ADDITION TO THE PACKING HOUSE Note: By the late 1940s, IVG Stockholders and members of the Board of Directors quickly realized that they needed to expand for a second time. Specifically, an ice plant was needed. This was an absolute necessity if IVG was to keep pace with the industry standard. The minutes of the Stockholders and Board of Directors meeting record the following: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS Jan y 31, 1939 Manager West reported that he was getting propositions from three different firms for building an ice plant so as to be ready if the members approved building an ice plant at the annual meeting of February 13, MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS Irvine, Calif. June 6, 1939 Moved by W. B. Hellis and seconded by J. H. Pankey that the group express its appreciation to the Kohlenberger Engineering Co. for their splendid cooperation during the construction of our very excellent ice plant. Motion carried. Notice of Completion for Addition #1 The following Notice of Completion is for a one-story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and misc. machinery. The addition was completed in May of 1939 by contractor Jules W. Markel. NOTICE OF COMPLETION STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Irvine Valencia Growers being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that his address is Irvine, Calif.; that he is now, and was upon the 30 th day of March, 1939, the owner in

254 C-28 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House fee simple of that certain real property situated in the city of, County of Orange, State of California, and particularly described as follows, to-wit: No. Jeffrey Road, in the City of said County and State, which premises are particularly described as follows, to-wit: Lot 239, Block 105, Irvine Subdivision as per map recorded in Book 285 page 465 of Official Records in the office of the County Recorder of said County. That as such owner of said land, affiant, about the 30 th day of March, 1939, entered into a contract with Jules W. Markel as per permit (if any) No. 2526, dated March 30, 1939, for the erection and construction, upon the land above described, of a certain building and work of improvement, to-wit: a one story reinforced concrete building to conform with present building to house Ice Tank, Ice Storage, and miscellaneous machinery. That said building has been duly constructed and the whole work of improvement has been performed and the same was actually completed on the 20 th day of May, 1939, by Jules W. Markel. The record owner in fee simple under contract of the lot at the time the construction was commenced was Irvine Valencia Growers. This notice is given in pursuance of the provisions of Section 1187 of the Code of Civil Procedure of this State. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange W. L. WEST FOR IRVINE VALENCIA GROWERS being duly sworn, deposes and says, that he (they are) the owners of the property described in the foregoing notice; that he has read the same and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge. Subscribed and Sworn to before me this 22 day of May, 1939 Ethel J. Petersen Notary Public in and for said County and State. Summary Statement Planning, Initial Construction and Early Additions to IVG Packing House A review of significant historical documents in IVG files including Letters and Correspondence, Original Articles of Incorporation, Insurance Records, Notices of Completion, and the Minutes of Stockholders and Board Members meetings reveals the following: 1.) Planning for construction of the IVG Packing House began as early as May of ) Early plans included the construction of a jointly shared facility along with the Frances Citrus Association.

255 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-29 3.) Plans for a jointly operated warehouse were abandoned by April 2, ) By June 4, 1928 contracts were awarded for construction of the packing house. 5.) An agreement was reached with the A.T. & S.F. railroad for construction of a railroad spur to the IVG facility on April 29, ) Land for the IVG facility was formally acquired from The Irvine Company on July 1, ) Planning and revisions to plans for the IVG Packing House were carried out until January ) Significant additions to the original packing house were constructed in 1931, circa 1937, and B7. Moved(?): No B9a. Architect: See Construction History B9b. Builder: See Construction History B10. Significance: STATE: CALIFORNIA REGISTER ITEMS (1-4) 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to this item. Numerous significant events are discussed in detail in sections of the Hatheway & Associates report entitled: BACKGROUND HISTORY: THE CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE/ASSOCIATION -- AN INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE; HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: ORANGE COUNTY, ORANGES, AND THE IRVINE RANCH (A Select Reading List); ORANGE COUNTY: THE CASE OF THE DISAPPEARING ORANGE (A Select Reading List);

256 C-30 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Please refer to: A Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, Including: A Phase II Evaluation and An Alternatives Analysis Outline and Mitigation Plan Outline, as prepared for The Keith Companies, Inc., by Hatheway & Associates on June 30, The most significant events that the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House and Building Complex is associated with, and/or that have made a significant contribution to the broad patters of California local history are: 1.) The development of the California citrus industry and the California Cooperative. 2.) The development of the Valencia orange industry in Orange County. Note here that the Valencia was identified at the official tree of Orange County in ) The development of The Irvine Ranch and/or The Irvine Company, and as a representative example of how the pervasive influence of the company was expressed in a version of the California Cooperative. 4.) The association of the IVG Packing House with the Citrus Strikes of , and the significance of this event in the labor history of Orange County. 5.) The association of the IVG Packing House with the decline of the orange industry in Orange County, and as a symbol of time and time past. 6.) As an example of a packing house as a social, cultural, and business entity in California. These events are of true and undoubted significance. Additional events might also be considered (the role of the railroad, etc.), but the identified events (relevant to the broad patterns of California history) are sufficient to warrant a positive determination of significance in relation to this item. 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Despite the fact that the biographical research effort was limited to some degree by the sheer number of individuals associated with the IVG Packing House, it is unlikely that additional biographical information would identify any individual of overwhelming local significance or importance in relation to the IVG Packing House. Very simply, every individual researched, and for which some information has been found has some local significance. However, it must be understood that these individuals were a part of an Association and that no single individual researched had a singular influence on the establishment, construction, growth, and/or development of either IVG as a business

257 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House C-31 or the IVG Packing House. Specifically, their individual home might be of significance (should it remain standing today), but the IVG Packing House cannot be regarded as significant in association with any one individual. This would include James Irvine himself. His signature is on the Land Conveyance document giving title of Irvine Company lands to IVG, but if every property having Irvine s signature on a document related to it were made significant then half of Orange County would be potentially significant. No significant individual may, therefore, be said to be associated with the IVG Packing House. Rather, the IVG Packing House is here regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (See Item #1). 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear eligible to the California Register in relation to this item. Today, virtually the entire site may be considered an alteration to the original Irvine Valencia Growers (IVG) building complex. Alterations to the historic IVG Packing House Building Complex include the following: 1.) 1931 Addition to Main Building/Packing House 2.) Circa 1937 Pre Cooler Addition and 1969 Pre Cooler Addition 3.) 1937 Refrigeration and Equipment Storage Building 4.) Demolition of Original Office Building (In Front of Main Building) 5.) Shed Additions (Eventual Demolition of Several) 6.) Garage and Storage Building Addition (Eventual Demolition of Same) 7.) Boiler House Construction 8.) Demolition of Several Equipment/Yard Features (Pump House, Etc.) 9.) Construction of Present Irvine Packing & Cooling Building 10.) Construction of Additional Fruit Packing Buildings 11.) Construction of Irvine Farm Management Buildings 12.) Numerous Small Additions (Platforms/Sheds/Docks) In summary, the original architectural integrity of the 1929 IVG Packing House Building Complex has been severely compromised. The Main Building/Packing House has also been altered. Many of these alterations, however, including the 1931 addition, and the 1937 Pre Cooler and Refrigeration Building additions are historic. Regardless, the primary significance of the packing house is not related to architecture. Rather, the IVG Packing House is best regarded as an event in the development history of Orange County (See Item #1). Finally, the overall architectural significance of the Historic Building Complex is minimal, as the design is similar to many Utilitarian/Industrial buildings constructed nationwide during the period extending from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Pre Cooler Building is minimally influenced by Art Deco applied decorative detail, but this influence must be regarded as being of secondary importance.

258 C-32 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 4. It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #4 at the present time. No previously identified archaeological resources are known to be associated with the project area, and no resources were identified during the survey conducted as part of the present study. Summary: California Register The IVG Packing House and Historic Building Complex does appear to qualify as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Places in relation to Item #1. Summary: Potential as District Contributor This building does not appear to qualify as eligible for listing as a contributing feature to any type of architectural and /or historic district in accordance with California Register guidelines. B11. Additional Resource Attributes: To Be Determined B13. Remarks: The previously noted Hatheway & Associates report represents an in-depth historical research effort providing a sufficient level of detail to evaluate the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House within a fully developed historical context. The level of information gathered allows for the placement of the Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House, as required by CEQA, into the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. B14. Evaluator and Date of Evaluation: Roger Hatheway, Principal Investigator, June 30, 2002.

259 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-1 Appendix D - Qualifications

260 D-2 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House ROGER G. HATHEWAY Principal Investigator and Historian Hatheway & Associates EDUCATION/SPECIAL TRAINING Departmental MA, History UCLA, 1978 BA, History Brown University, 1975 Magna Cum Laude, Clarkson A. Collins University Prize QUALIFICATIONS Mr. Hatheway has served as the principal investigator for Hatheway & Associates since Architectural/historical experience covers the entire United States from Letterkenny, Pennsylvania to southern California. Large to small-scale projects have been completed under both NEPA and CEQA guidelines. Clients include federal and military agencies, the state of California, various counties and cities throughout southern California, as well as a host of private developers. Mr. Hatheway is approved by both the State of California and San Bernardino County to conduct architectural/historical surveys. Research projects have also been completed nationwide, including the Library of Congress, and various other government repositories of information. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE MILITARY BASES NOTE: All of the below listed studies were conducted in accordance with Federal (106) guidelines. Several were directly related to base closures and/or projected base closures. All addressed architectural/historical resources. Many included detailed additional historical research, and most included sections directly addressing World War II and Post W.W.II military building type. Edwards AFB A Cultural Resource Overview and Preliminary Architectural/Historical Survey China Lake Naval Weapons Center A Cultural Resource Overview and Preliminary Architectural/Historical Survey

261 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-3 Seal Beach Naval Weapons Center A Cultural Resource Overview and National Register evaluation of buildings on base. San Clemente Island, Naval Training Center and Bombing Range A Cultural Resource Overview and Preliminary Architectural/Historical Survey Letterkenny Army Arsenal and Logistics Base (Pennsylvania) A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Nike Missile Bases (Various Locations Southern California) A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Primarily on U.S. Forest Service property. US Navy Seal Training Facility, North Island A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. North Island Naval Air Station A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Camp Roberts, San Luis Obispo A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Proposed Base Closure (now closed) Terminal Island U.S. Customs House A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. George Air Force Base A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Proposed Base Closure (now closed)

262 D-4 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Mountain Home Air Force Base A 100% Architectural/Historical Survey in accordance with National Register guidelines. Proposed Base Closure RECENTLY COMPLETED PROJECTS: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA National Register and California Register Evaluations/Mitigation Plans, Management Plans, and Surveys Architectural/Historical Survey of Portions of the Park Tract, Los Angeles G.H. Palmer Associates 2001 An Archaeological/Historical Survey of Tentative Tract 14073, Hesperia Steve Pleasant Associates 2001 Villas Arnaz HABS Format Documentation Report Palos Verdes Management Company 2001 Del Rosa Administrative Center, Cultural Resource Evaluation Report USFS 2001 Azalea Trails Girl Scout Camp, Determination of Eligibility Report, History and Archaeology USFS 2001 Cultural Resource Survey of The Alpha Beta/Ralph s Shopping Center, Palm Springs Lundin Development 2000 Underhill Cabin, Big Bear, Determination of Eligibility Report, History and Archaeology Prudential Realty 2000 Cultural Resource Management and Determination of Eligibility Report for the Marcus Kemp House Tetra Tech, Inc. 2000

263 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-5 Historic Research & Evaluation of the Holiday Bowl, Los Angeles, CA Marshall Siskin 2000 Mt. Waterman/Mt. Kratka Ski Resorts, Cultural Resource Evaluation Report Mount Waterman Acquisitions Holding, Inc Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Report and Determination of Eligibility Report of Fourteen Buildings in the Historic Downtown Section of Rialto 2000 Yorba Orange Growers Association HABS Format Documentation Report Guthrie Development 2000 Preparation of Documentation for Court Case, Derby Restaurant, Glendora Evergreen Development 2000 An Architectural/Historical Survey of Luring Pines, Running Springs Steve Pleasant Associates 1999 Cultural Research Evaluation of the Derby Restaurant, Glendora, CA Chip Sturniolo, Owner 1999 Determination of Eligibility Report, Voorhis School, San Dimas, CA Denteeh Holdings 1999 City of San Bernardino Cultural Resource Evaluation of a Proposed CinemaStar Theater Development City of San Bernardino 1999 Architectural, Historical and Archaeological Management Plan of Portions of the Mission District, Loma Linda Lewis Homes 1999

264 D-6 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House Determination of Eligibility Report, Old San Bernardino County Hospital Property Knox Mellon & Associates 1999 Determination of Eligibility Report, Tri-City Drive-In Theater, Loma Linda Pacific Theaters 1999 Cultural Resource Evaluation of Three Buildings, City of San Bernardino City Attorney 1998 Select Detailed Project Descriptions Mission School and Cole House: Cultural Resource Evaluation and Mitigation Plan. This study (completed in 1998) documented in great detail the archaeological, historical, and architectural resources of lands affected by a proposed shopping/office plaza. It was prepared for Lewis Homes, under the direction of City of Loma Linda Redevelopment and Planning Department staff. A Determination of Eligibility Report for Seventeen Buildings Within the Area of Potential Effects of the San Bernardino Entertainment Center Project. This report (completed in 1998) was prepared for the City of San Bernardino. It was completed within a very short time frame, and was designed to bring the City of San Bernardino into compliance with federal and state environmental guidelines. A Finding of Effects Report for Historical Properties Within the Area of Potential Effects of the San Bernardino Entertainment Center Project. This report (completed in 1998) was prepared for the City of San Bernardino. Again, this project was completed within a very short time frame, and was designed to bring the City of San Bernardino into compliance with federal and state environmental guidelines. The project involved detailed negotiations with both the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Tri-City Drive-In Historic and Architectural Evaluation. This study (completed in 1999) was prepared for the City of Loma Linda, as an in-house staff document. This project was circulated widely, and was ultimately reviewed and approved by the Loma Linda Historic Landmarks Commission. National Register and California Register Evaluation and Mitigation Plan for Quarters for the Insane, Located at the Site of the Original County of San Bernardino Hospital. This report (completed in 1999) was prepared at the request of the attorneys for the BNSF railroad.

265 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-7 Select Mitigation and Compliance Projects: HABS/HAER This project (completed in 2000) involved preparation of an Architectural and Historical Documentation Report for the Quarters for the Insane, located at the site of the original County of San Bernardino Hospital. It included the detailed recordation, in general accordance with Historic American Buildings Survey guidelines, of a small but unique cultural resource. The multi-volume archivally boxed document was submitted ready for museum/special collections curation, and included research, writing, the archival reproduction of important historical documents, large format archival quality photographs, and the preparation of measured drawings. This project (completed in 1999) involved preparation of an Architectural and Historical Documentation Report for the Tri-City Drive-In Theater, Loma Linda, California. It included the detailed recordation, in general accordance with Historic American Buildings Survey guidelines, of a major Drive-In Theater complex. The archivally boxed document was submitted ready for museum/special collections curation, and included research, writing, the archival reproduction of important historical documents, and large format archival quality photographs. Firms Worked for as an Archaeological Field Surveyor (Generally Arranged Chronologically): Hatheway & Associates (1979 Present): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(f) Greenwood and Associates ( ): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106 Chambers Consultants and Planners ( ): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106 Houston Transit Consultants ( ): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(f) Scientific Resource Surveys ( ): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(f) Hatheway & McKenna ( ): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106 County of San Bernardino (1997-Present): NEPA/CEQA/Section 106/4(f) PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS/ASSOCIATES Mr. Hatheway is a past member of many historical societies and professional groups. His policy is, in fact, to join every local historical society depending, in part, on the duration and size of each project as a means of obtaining pertinent (project-related) historical research. He is currently Vice President and Past-President of the Rim of the World Historical Society. He is also a member of the: Library of Congress, Phillips Lee Phillips Society Society for Commercial Archaeology National Trust for Historic Preservation Archaeological Conservancy Archaeological Institute of America

266 D-8 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House PUBLICATIONS Mr. Hatheway has published or completed over 500 reports and documents during the period extending from 1979 to the present. PRESENTATIONS Most recent: The Late Prehistory of Route 66 in the California Mojave Desert 2001 Millennium Conference, May 9, 10, 11 & 12, Barstow, CA. Conference sponsored by the BLM. Numerous presentations extending from 1979 to the present. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Summary/Overview: History/Architecture/Archaeology Hatheway & Associates (1979 Present) I have worked as a consultant to many Cultural Resource Management and/or archaeological consulting firms over the past 23+ years. In my capacity as Principal Investigator for History and Architecture, I have conducted in-depth historical research using all forms of historic maps, public records, photographs, and the written record. I have identified literally hundreds of potential historic archaeological sites as part of my historical research, and have joined with many survey crews over time in the evaluation of and on-the-ground location of these sites. Field survey experience includes the recognition, identification, evaluation of and mapping of virtually every major type of building, object, feature, linear feature, site, historic archaeological site, and the identification and mapping of many inland prehistoric archaeological sites. Greenwood and Associates ( ) A survey of Edwards Air Force Base in This involved historical research, an aerial survey, and the subsequent location of a percentage of the sites identified on the ground. In this manner I personally identified 130+ previously unknown historic archaeological sites under the direction of Greenwood and Associates Principal Investigators for archaeology. Sites included homesteads, historic trails, roadways, an historic townsite, an abandoned railway alignment, and many military associated activity areas.

267 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-9 A second large-scale survey was conducted for Greenwood and Associates at China Lake Naval Weapons Center. Again, historical research led to the identification of and evaluation of dozens of previously unknown historic sites. Many of these sites were subsequently field reviewed and mapped under the direction of the base archaeologist. Chambers Consultants and Planners ( ) As Principal Investigator for history and architecture I worked on several projects for Chambers Consultants and Planners during the early 1980s, including a survey of the entire San Clemente Island Naval Air Station facility. This involved historical research, an aerial survey, and the subsequent location of a percentage of the sites thereby identified on the ground. I personally identified 20+ previously unknown historic archaeological sites under the direction of Chambers Principal Investigators for archaeology. In addition, I relocated and remapped 10+ coastal archaeological sites that had been lost due to original surveyor mapping errors. Houston Transit Consultants ( ) Surveys conducted in Houston, Texas were conducted under the authority of the Texas State Historical Commission, and under the direction of Urban Mass Transit Association officials. Approximately 200 miles of transportation corridor were surveyed in accordance with all appropriate Section 106/4(f) guidelines. I served as the Principal Investigator for this project, and directed all cultural resource related studies (field and archival) including history, architecture, and archaeology. Scientific Resource Surveys ( ) I worked as Principal Investigator for history and architecture for SRS for 3+ years. In this capacity, I also wrote numerous proposals for various archaeological surveys. Typically, however, I would conduct in-depth historical research and provide all pertinent data to field survey crews. I frequently joined SRS crews during field surveys, including several transportation related projects conducted in both Orange and Riverside counties. Hatheway & McKenn ( ) Jeanette McKenna and I joined into partnership in She and I served as Co-Principal Investigators on a considerable number of projects in Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles counties. Although my major tasks were related to history and architecture, I frequently joined our survey crews as they conducted both large and small-scale projects while surveying for both prehistoric and historic archaeological sites.

268 D-10 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House County of San Bernardino (1997 Present) Served as the Principal Investigator for History and Architecture on the I-15 Freeway Widening Between Victorville and Barstow. I was also a member of the field survey team that included Principal Investigator for Archaeology, John Romani, and Gene Huey, a retired Caltrans archaeologist. PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES Available upon request. SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS TEACHING EXPERIENCE Mr. Hatheway taught a class entitled Practical Approaches to Historic Preservation from 1983 to 1993 at U.C.L.A. The fully accredited class introduced both undergraduate and graduate students from throughout southern California to the research skills necessary to complete both California State architectural inventory forms, and National Register applications. WEEKLY NEWSPAPER COLUMN Mr. Hatheway writes a weekly column focusing on history for The Mountain News and the Crestline Courier News, both San Bernardino Mountain newspapers, with a combined circulation of over 11,000 subscribers. MAC NUMBER Mr. Hatheway has served as a Municipal Advisory Council member for the Crest Forest Area since As a council member, Mr. Hatheway has served in an advisory capacity on planning, environmental and quality of life issues for the greater Crestline area.

269 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D-11 GAVIN H. ARCHER, RPA Project Manager and Archaeologist The Keith Companies Education 1990 M.A., Anthropology, University of Arizona 1987 B.A., Anthropology, University of Arizona Positions 2001-present Director, The Keith Companies, Cultural Resources Department, Costa Mesa, California Project Manager, SWCA Environmental Consultants, Cultural Resources Division, Tucson, Arizona Field Supervisor, Gila River Indian Community, Department of Land and Water Resources, Cultural Resources Management Program, Sacaton, Arizona Field Supervisor, Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson, Arizona Laboratory Supervisor, Bishop Museum, Applied Research Group, Public Archaeology Section, Honolulu, Hawaii Graduate Research Assistant, University of Arizona, Department of Anthropology, Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, Garbage Project, Tucson, Arizona. Selected Training 1999 Section 106 in the New Regulatory Environment: A Workshop for Consultants and Their Clients. Instructor: Dr. Lynne Sebastian 1999 NUCA competent person certificate: excavation safety, materials handling, worksite inspection, soil analysis, and protective systems to OSHA standards Selected Additional Experience 1996 Field Supervisor, Archaeological Data Recovery, Blocks 72 and 73, Historical Phoenix Town Site

270 D-12 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House 1993 Field Archaeologist, Bureau of Land Management / University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona (Presidio de Terrenate Survey) Selected Publications 1989 Inside Landfills. Proceedings of the Municipal Solid Waste Technology Conference, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. Senior authors: W. L. Rathje, W. W. Hughes. Junior authors: D. C. Wilson, E. S. Cassells Source Reduction and Landfill Myths. Proceedings of the ASTSWMO National Solid Waste Forum on Integrated Municipal Waste Management, ASTSWMO, Washington, D.C. Senior authors: W. L. Rathje, W. W. Hughes. Junior author: D. C. Wilson. Selected Technical Reports 2001 Archaeological Testing at AZ EE:1:2 and :218 (ASM), Frick s Sahuarita Site and John Brown s Homestead Site, Rancho Sahuarita, Town of Sahuarita, Arizona. SWCA Cultural Resource Report No SWCA Environmental Consultants, Tucson Documentary Research and Archaeological Investigations for the Airport Connector Road, Yavapai County, Arizona. SWCA Cultural Resource Report No SWCA Environmental Consultants, Tucson. With Contributions by A. L. Christenson, J. D. Goodman II, and D. M. Greenwald. Junior author: P. H. Stein Archaeological Investigations at El Dumpe, A Mid-Twentieth-Century Dump, and the Embankment Site, Tucson, Arizona. Technical Report No Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. Senior authors: A.C. Diehl, T.W. Jones, J.H. Thiel. Junior author: M.W. Diehl. Selected Treatment Plan 2001 A Historical Research and Archaeological Testing Plan for the Bachmann Springs Development, Cochise County, Arizona. SWCA Cultural Resource Report No SWCA Environmental Consultants, Tucson. Junior authors: L. Senior and H. Polk. Selected Posters and Papers Presented at Conferences 1998 Recent Evidence for Hohokam and Historic Pima Irrigation Systems on the Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona. Poster presented at the 63 rd annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Seattle, Washington, and at the 71 st Annual Pecos Conference, Pecos, New Mexico. Senior author: K. Woodson. Jumior authors: R.B. Neily, M. Foster, J.C. Ravesloot, M.R. Waters.

271 For The Irvine Valencia Growers Packing House D Dating Garbage: The Accuracy and Utility of Bottle Marks to Date Secondary Refuse Deposits. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas, Nevada. Senior author: M. Tani Digging in Landfills. Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Conference on Solid Waste Management and Materials Policy, New York City. Senior authors: W. L. Rathje, W. W. Hughes. Junior authors: D. C. Wilson, E. S. Cassells.