by Paul R. Spitzzeri
With a deal struck between Emeline Huber Childs, owner of the large property on which a massive hotel was planned at Main and Tenth streets (this latter now Olympic Boulevard), and Orson T. Johnson, operator of the Westminster Hotel, at the beginning of 1895, the downtown Los Angeles boondoggle dating back some seven years to the Boom of Eighties, still had some signs, faint and fleeing as they were, of life.
There was no shortage of cynicism from some observers, however, about the hostelry’s prospects as expressed by the Builder and Contractor magazine, reported by the Los Angeles Times of 22 February, concerning the “much-puffed scheme.” The publication asserted that Johnson, thanks to the pittance of $25,000 paid for a property generally valued at more than ten times that amount, “will lose nothing by this purchase, but will turn over many a penny,” even if he guaranteed Mrs. Childs and hotel promoters a year to come through with a new, viable plan.
Assuming valuations of some $2,000 each for subdivided lots on the tract, it was concluded that “it is clear that Mr. Johnson has doubled his money on the lots alone, and has that famous foundation,” the only completed portion of the hotel, that “is as good today as the day it was finished” and would be a half-century later—the publication snorting that it would likely take that long to build a hotel there. It was asserted that, “Mr. Johnson will, doubtless, build business blocks on the foundation, and make the best use of it he can.”
Adding to his portfolio in that section of town, Johnson also forked over $50,000 to “the Hammel & Denker estate [for] the adjoining block, fronting on Main, Ninth and Los Angeles streets” and which contained a dozen lots, with the Times of 3 March opining that just those fronting on Main were worth the purchase price alone.
As to the hotel, there was once more word of a possible future for it as the Los Angeles Express of the 28th told readers that it was “credibly informed that plans are now being drawn” by an unnamed architect. Moreover, it was stated that Mrs. Childs disposed of her option and that “a prominent New York promoter as joined hands with some of our local people,” such that a preliminary order was made for the renderings.
In its number of 19 April, the Times remarked that some locals headed east to strike a deal, while the paper allowed that “in one way the site . . . is a good one, being centrally located, and in the line of the city’s march [southward],” but it also cautioned that it lacked a crowning location and would not be “in the midst of spacious and attractive grounds.” The paper also averred that “this is what the average Eastern tourist wants” as the hustle and bustle of a city was what visitors sought to leave behind and that,
That which is especially charming for the tourist in Southern California is the sunny sky, the flowers, the trees, the fruits and the possibility of a pleasant outdoor life during the time of year when the Eastern country is hidden under a mantle of snow.
The 4 May edition of the Express cited Builder and Contractor with the report that Edwin P. Carnicle, who worked on a previous iteration of the project “has prepared a set of preliminary sketches for another hotel” and which called for a four-story edifice of brick and tile and to cost $600,000. With this accomplished, it was added, “all there is left to do is raise the money, and go ahead with the work,” though cynicism was expressed by the remark that “it is gravely suspected that Mr. Carnicle has got the hotel already built in his back yard, and all that remains is to move the structure down on the site.” Lastly, it was stated that capitalists from Chicago and Philadelphia were interested in the project.
It was more than four months later that the the paper, in its 13 September number, commented that “the Tenth street hotel is before the public again,” though it was now claimed that “the prospects are very bright of the enterprise being taken up where it was left off in 1887 [1888] and carried through to a successful conclusion.” It was acknowledged that, in the interim, “people have taken little stock in what they hear about the eyesore” with respect to the various revivals.
As for the prior year’s effort, the failure was attributed to “business reverses” of the projectors, but Martin Morrison, one of the leading figures then, was still on board as chair of a Citizens’ Committee, and he and another member, J.F. Johnson, reported they had over $50,000 in new subscriptions due by the end of the year. Owner Johnson, meanwhile, “stands ready to turn over the papers to any one who will pay him $30,000 and interest on this amount” and had that position since late January. Funds the committee members secured was to be applied to that amount and Morrison said a company of Easterners was to soon form to get the building, “of a beautiful style of architecture and have more than 300 rooms,” less than half of those in the original plan.
Yet, once again, the new year of 1896 brought a familiar refrain as the Los Angeles Herald of 29 January observed that the project “has apparently again fallen through” and that, now that the year deadline passed since Johnson made his arrangement with Emeline Childs, “the property passes unconditionally into [his] hands,” though “what he will do with it is not known.”
An indication that there was another kink in the plans was a report in early July that a bill-posting company owner from San Francisco leased the hotel property from Johnson and was planning a fence 600 feet long and 20 feet high, an enormous amount of surface to post those notices, while the gent bragged that “the town won’t have more of these little ten-foot boards” that were the standard.
With it obvious that a hotel project was gone for good, the Los Angeles Record of 5 December informed readers of the recently launched paper that there was consideration of using the site for a National Guard armory and that architect Robert B. Young was an agent for Johnson and liked the idea because “it would be a protection to the expensive foundation and joists.” Guard representatives added they “would be pleased to get the magnificent location” and were prepared to commit to a 10-year lease.
Another proposed use for the site raised early in 1897 was for an exposition building, with the city’s powerful Merchants’ and Manufacturers’ Association considering it and a powerhouse located at Grand Avenue and 7th Street for such a purpose. In the summer, as the National Education Association contemplated having a national convention in the Angel City, the Times of 29 July suggested that the hotel tract would be well worth consideration—the Association ended up having its 1899 confab in Los Angeles. Two months later, the Express reported that a movement was afoot to explore using the location for a convention hall, suitable for hosting such events as that of the NEA.
While none of these got past the suggestion stage, Johnson began moving to develop the site after nearly five years of ownership with the Express of 13 October 1898 noting that he was constructing a single-story brick store building at the northeast corner of the property at Los Angeles and 9th streets. Early the following year, he was reported to have given an option for $160,000 to some developers and the Times of 26 January stated that the prospective use may have related to a streetcar line powerhouse or offices.
Two more considerations, though, soon arose. One reported about a month later in the Times was from a letter writer who thought that, because of the fact that “the foundation . . . is one of the best ever built in the city and equal of any in the State,” the property would be ideal for a new high school. A few weeks later, another reader offered the suggestion that the current post office could be traded with Johnson.
The next use, however, was of an entirely different kind, though somewhat in the realm of leisure as the hotel. This was an era of a bicycle craze and, on the last day of November, the Express informed readers that,
The bicycle races at the new saucer track will commence at 8 o’clock this evening, and will doubtless bring out a large crowd. The track is situated on the old Tenth-street hotel site . . . and has seating capacity for 5,000 people. The track is 660 feet in circumference, requiring eight laps to complete a mile.
When copper king William Andrews Clark and his brother, J. Ross, embarked on a major railroad project, the San Pedro, Los Angeles and Salt Lake, it was stated in the Record of 12 December 1900 that, among the considerations for a depot site was the hotel tract, though the station ended up being built in the “Flats” area of Boyle Heights on the east side of the Los Angeles River.
Johnson, then, continued his gradual development of the property as the third major boom in the city’s history took place, including constructing a business building at the corner of Main and 9th, comprising the northwest section of the tract, that was three stories with stores at the first level. When the Times of 4 December 1901 reported on this edifice, it added that “an obstacle that will in time probably have to be removed is the foundation” for the hotel at the southern portion and which was nearly 15 years old.
About a month-and-a-half later, architect John Parkinson, a favorite of Johnson, prepared plans for a single-story building at the Main and Tenth corner. In October 1903, it was reported by the Times that Parkinson had a plan ready for a two-story business building that may have been a replacement for the single-level one, with part of the structure to be built on the old foundation.
Three days later, the Express informed readers that Johnson had Parkinson draw plans for five buildings on the property, a trio of two-story structures along Tenth and two on Main, involving a building cost of $15,000. In early 1904, Parkinson completed drawings for a three-story business edifice on Main, this to cost $50,000, while on 9th Street, between Main and Los Angeles streets, a row of stores was readied for construction.
Finally, in December 1906, the Times remarked that,
The old Tenth-street hotel foundations in the rear of the Tourist [automobile] factory have been removed, and most of the excavating done for the big addition to the Tourist factory. With this added room the Auto Vehicle Company expect to quadruple their output next year.
With this development and, as the last physical vestiges of the hotel were dismantled, the mammoth hostelry that engendered so much hope for Hammel, Denker and many others over close to a decade receded from public view and memory. The failed boomtown of Morocco disappeared even earlier, but the Rancho Rodeo de las Aguas property continued to be owned by the two men until their deaths in 1890 and 1892, respectively.
Notably, one use for the ranch in the aftermath of the townsite project was planting part of the land to sugar beets, this becoming something of a fad during the last two decades of the 19th century, with such regional locales as Chino, Los Alamitos, Paramount and Oxnard being heavily devoted to the crop. Corn was a major crop there until the mid-90s and then followed by beans. Shortly before his death, Hammel sold two large tracts to James B. Lankershim, best known for his ownership and sale of much the massive Rancho ex-Mission San Fernando and for two large commercial buildings and a hotel in downtown Los Angeles.
Hammel and Denker also auctioned off large numbers of livestock in 1890 and, after his partner’s death, Denker looked to subdivide the Rodeo de las Aguas into 10-acre tracts, though this plan went unrealized. It was nearly fourteen years after Denker died that the ranch was sold by the widows, who were, it will be recalled, were sisters, of the two men.
The Herald of 10 January 1906 reported,
The Hammel and Denker ranch, adjoining the town of Sherman [now West Hollywood] . . . comprising 3055 acres has been sold for $1,500,000 to W.C. Price, C.A. Canfield, B.E. Green and W.G. Kerckhoff, all of Los Angeles. Negotiations for this large and fruitful tract have been pending for several months . . .
The Herald is authorized to state that no part of the land will be used for the development of oil interests, but that the entire tract will be subdivided into one to five-acre lots for high-class residences. A new townsite is to be one of the features of the development plans, and as soon as details can be arranged the tract will be placed on the market.
Of the principals, who were involved in the Amalgamated and Associated oil companies, with the former actively working on prospecting in the area that became known as the Salt Lake Oil Field, were Charles A. Canfield, partner of Edward L. Doheny in opening the Los Angeles Oil Field in the early 1890s; William G. Kerckhoff, an early investor in the Main and Tenth Street Hotel project, and Burton E. Green, who would soon lead the effort to develop the town site that became Beverly Hills, which pursued an upscale approach with “high-class residences” that marked the promotion of the failed Morocco project.
Henry Hammel and Andrew H. Denker were among a group of migrants to mid-19th century Los Angeles whose origins were modest, but who over the course of several decades rose to be successful business figures, ranchers and farmers, as well as prominent citizens, but whose ambitions during the Boom of the Eighties were thwarted by over-reach. The Workman and Temple family had broadly similar experiences in other boom periods, specifically in the 1870s and 1920s, which makes this post relevant to the Homestead’s interpretation, beyond the connection with William Workman’s brief ownership of part of Rancho Rodeo de las Aguas during the 1860s.
The highlighted photo here, which was the reason for this post to be undertaken, is a 1920s snapshot of a lonely auto on Denker Road (now Avenue), named for Andrew but located in what was described as the South Bay town of Torrance, a bit far afield from Denker’s centers of activity in Los Angeles and Beverly Hills.
Today, the most southerly section of the thoroughfare, from Del Amo Blvd. on the north to 228th Street, is technically part of the infamous shoestring section of Los Angeles connecting the Port of Los Angeles area with the majority of the metropolis to the north, but has a Torrance zip code. In any case, the photo has proven to provide us a route to understanding more of the history of its namesake!
Both Hammel and Denker were highly ambitious figures in the nineteenth-century business world. They enjoyed early success through the operation of two major hotels and agricultural ventures on their ranch, yet later suffered notable setbacks in the Morocco development and the Tenth Street Hotel project. In the end, both died too early to see fortunes change and economy recovery with the turn of the century.
Although these failures can be attributed to ambitions that exceeded their practical reach, their careers and life trajectories still bring to mind an old Chinese saying: “To perish before one’s lofty ambitions are fulfilled – such a fate always leaves heroes with nothing but tears.” (壯志未酬身先死，長使英雄淚滿襟)