The URL can be used to link to this page

MRTF 1996CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MIJ~UTES 1. At 4: 15 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Binkley, Toensfeldt Worn, Eddy, Ligg~:tt, Hopkins Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. Committee discussed survey and changed page 11 to include Toensfeldt on the original McClellan Ranch Committee (1974). 6. Committee agreed to allow 4-H members to exercise sheep and goats on the nature trail. Animals must be on a leash. Confirmed that larger livestock may not be exercised beyond the 4-H area. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7. Barbara Banfield moved and Randall Binkley seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the September 26, 1996 meeting. Motion approved. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 7. None. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the next scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on February 27, 1997. CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of September 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4: 10 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Binkley, Ralph Eddy, Liggett, Bob Hopkins arrived at 4:20pm Toensfeldt, Johnson, Worn Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. Committee praised the final document and asked if the historical overview was copyrighted, Director will follow up. Regarding McClellan house upgrades, the committee asked if the roof slate tiles could be salvaged and re-used on another structure for historical referi~nce. Staff will investigate. 6. Pat Petersen, a volunteer with the Audubon Socie1y made a presentation regarding her native plant restoration project at McClellan Ranch Park. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 7. None. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on November 21, 1996. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS May 2], 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Discussion regarding formation of Friends of McClellan Ranch Park. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. Approval of minutes of April 25, 1996 minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 7. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled me1!ting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on June 27, 1996. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS February 22, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. Report on establishing by-laws for the McClellan Ranch Task Force. NEW BUSINESS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. Approval of January 25, 1996 minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 7. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on March 28, 1996. CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of April 25, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4: 10 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL 2. Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Randall Binkley, Howard Johnson, Ethel Worn, Bob Hopkins, Charles Liggett Lonnie Toensfeldt, Ralph Eddy Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. The Task Force reviewed the Public Works proposed operating budget for fiscal year '96-'97, at McClellan Ranch Park. The Task Force asked questions about specific line items. No action was necessary. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 6. None. ADJOURNMENT 7. Adjournment at 4:55 p.m. to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Park Task Force on May 23, 1996. CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of June 27, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES I. At 4:07 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Randall Binkley, Lonnie Toensfeldt, Ralph Eddy Bob Hopkins, Charles Liggett, Ethel Worn, Howard Johnson Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. Director reported that the Simms house lease agreement was renewed for three more years. Additionally, once the original improvement loan has been paid off, Council authorized that rental proceeds under the new lease be used for maintenance and the installation of outdoor wet labs, log benches, concrete lab tables and other equipment for invironmental education. Funds could become available in Spring of '97. 6. The final report regarding McClellan Ranch historic structures assessment has not been received from the consultant; item continued. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 7. None. ADJOURNMENT 8. Committee agreed to recess until the September meeting on September 26, 1996. •. , Cupertino CALL TO ORDER I. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of June 27, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGEl\DA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Report on the Simms house lease. 6. Review final report regarding McClellan Ranch historic structures assessment. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 7. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on July 25, 1996. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS April 2S, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review budget request for 1996-97 budget. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 6. ADJOURNMENT 7. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on May 23, 1996. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS March 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park . Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. Report on establishing by-laws for the McClellan Ranch Task Force. NEW BUSINESS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. Approval of January 25, 1996 minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 7. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on April 25, 1996. CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of January 25, 199/ ~; McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. Unfinished BUSINESS 4. Review and discuss historical consultant's Site Specific Survey NEW BUSINESS 5. Review Capital improvements program for McClellan Ranch Park for next budget cycle. 6. Discuss establishing by-laws for the McClellan Ranch Task Force. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7. Approval ofNovember 30, 1995 minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURNMENT 9. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled mei:::ting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on February 22, 1996. CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of January 25, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4:00 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS Lonnie Toensfeldi:, Randall Binkley, Ralph Eddy, Howard Johnson Ethel Worn, Bob Hopkins, Charles Liggett Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 4. Task Force discussed the historical site specific survey. Chair Toensfeldt submitted a list of comments and questions for the consultant. Other members suggested talking with Mr. Diamico regarding the milk barn, consider reference to local Indians, and investigate registry as a historically significant site. NEW BUSINESS 5. Director reviewed Capital Improvements Program strategy for '96-'97 fiscal year. Several building maintenance items may b e moved to operating budget. 6. Task Force discussed need to prepare bylaws -no decision was reached. Director to review impacts with City Clerk. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7. Ethel Worn moved and Ralph Eddy seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the November 30, 1995 meeting. Motion approved unanimously. Randall Binkley and Howard Johnson abstained. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 8. None. ADJOURNMENT 9. Barbara Banfield moved and Ralph Eddy seconded the motion to adjourn to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on Thursday, February 22, 1996, 4:00 p.m., McClellan Ranch Park. •. , Cupertino CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGE.ND A ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review site specific historical survey. 6. Discuss park policy regarding 4-H animals. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7. Approval of minutes of September 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Task Force meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURNMENT 9. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on January 27, 1997. CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review site specific historical survey. 6. Discuss park policy regarding 4-H animals. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7. Approval of minutes of September 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Task Force meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURNMENT 9. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on January 27, 1997. •. , Cupertino CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review site specific historical survey. 6. Discuss park policy regarding 4-H animals. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7. Approval of minutes of September 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Task Force meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURNMENT 9. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on January 27, 1997. CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 J>.m. AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review site specific historical survey. 6. Discuss park policy regarding 4-H animals. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 7. Approval of minutes of September 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Task Force meeting. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURNMENT 9. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on January 27, 1997. •. , Cupertino CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of September· 26, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room . 4:00 J>.m. AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. NEW BUSINESS 5. Review Final Historical Assessment reports. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 6. ADJOURNMENT 7. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on November 21, 1996. McClellan Ranlch Task Force ROS'fER Parks and Recreation Commissioner BOB HOPKINS 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 255-9679 (home) (415) 857-6072 (work) Director of Parks and Recreation STEVE DOWLING 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3110 (work) Department Naturalist BARBARA BANFIELD 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3120 (work) Cupertino Junior High School RANDALL BINKLEY 1650 S. Bernardo Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087 245-0303 (work) Audubon Society HOWARD JOHNSON 22560 Alcalde Road Cupertino, CA 95014 255-2422 (home) Rolling Hills 4-H LONNIE TOENSFELDT 21640 Fitzgerald Drive Cupertino, CA 95014 257-4745 (home) Community Gardeners RALPH EDDY 10200 Stonydale Cupertino, CA 95014 739-5337 (home) Cupertino Historical Society -Director ETHEL WORN 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 973-1495 (work) CHARLES LIGGETT 22415 Palm A venue Cupertino, CA 95014 446-9190 (home) 756-5868 (work) CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of June 27, 1996 McClellarL Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4:07 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Randall Binkley, Lonnie Toensfeldt, Ralph Eddy Bob Hopkins, Charles Liggett, Ethel W om, Howard Johnson Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. Director reported that the Simms house lease agr1;)ement was renewed for three more years. Additionally, once the original improvement loan has been paid off, Council authorized that rental proceeds under the new lease be used for maintenance and the installation of outdoor wet labs, log benches, concrete lab tables and other equipment for invironmental edu::ation. Funds could become available in Spring of '97. 6. The final report regarding McClellan Ranch historic structures assessment has not been received from the consultant; item continued. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 7. None. ADJOURNMENT · 8. committee agreed to recess until the September meeting on September 26, 1996. McClellan Ra11ch Task Force ROSTER Parks and Recreation Commissioner BOB HOPKINS 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 255-9679 (home) (415) 857-6072 (work) Director of Parks and Recreation STEVE DOWLING 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3110 (work) Department Naturalist BARBARA BANFIELD 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3120 (work) Cupertino Junior High School RANDALL BINKLEY 1650 S. Bernardo Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087 245-0303 (work) Audubon Society HOW ARD JOHNSON 22560 Alcalde Road Cupertino, CA 95014 255-2422 (home) Rolling Hills 4-H LONNIE TOENSFELDT 21640 Fitzgerald Drive Cupertino, CA 95014 257-4745 (home) Community Gardeners RALPH EDDY 10200 Stonydale Cupertino, CA 95014 739-5337 (home) Cupertino Historical Society -Director ETHEL WORN 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 973-1495 (work) CHARLES LIGGETT 22415 Palm A venue Cupertino, CA 95014 446-9190 (home) 756-5868 (work) City of Cupertmo ® Memorandum To: McClellan Ranch Task Force From: Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation ~ Subject: March meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Instead of meeting on the fourth Thursday in March, we are asking task force members if they can meet on the third Thursday, March 21, 4:00 p.m., McClellan Ranch Park. If this date does not work for you, please contact my office at 777-3110 by Friday, March 8, 1996. Thank you for considering this change. SGD:lml Printed on Rocycted Paper City of Cupertmo Memorandum To: McClellan Ranch Task Force From: Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation <;S:':> Subject: March meeting Date: February 27, 1996 Instead of meeting on the fourth Thursday in March, we are asking task force members if they can meet on the third Thursday, March 21, 4:00 p.m., McClellan Ranch Park. If this date does not work for you, please contact my office at 777-3110 by Friday, March 8, 1996. Thank you for considering this change. SGD:lml Printed on Recycled Paper CITY OF CUPERTINO McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS February 22, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park Conference Room 4:00 p.m. AGENDA 3. Members of the audience regarding matters not on the agenda. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. Report on establishing by-laws for the McClellan Ranch Task Force. NEW BUSINESS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. Approval of January 25, 1996 minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 7. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on March 28, 1996. CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of January 25, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4:00 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS Lonnie Toensfeldt, Randall Binkley, Ralph Eddy, Howard Johnson Ethel Worn, Bob Hopkins, Charles Liggett Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 4. Task Force discussed the historical site specific survey. Chair Toensfeldt submitted a list of comments and questions for the consultant. Other members ~.uggested talking with Mr. Diamico regarding the milk barn, consider reference to local Indians, and investigate registry as a historically significant site. NEW BUSINESS 5. Director reviewed Capital Improvements Program strategy for '96-'97 fiscal year. Several building maintenance items may b e moved to operating budget. 6. Task Force discussed need to prepare bylaws -no decision was reached. Director to review impacts with City Clerk. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7. Ethel Worn moved and Ralph Eddy seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the November 30, 1995 meeting. Motion approved unanimously. Randall Binkley and Howard Johnson abstained. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 8. None. ADJOURNMENT 9. Barbara Banfield moved and Ralph Eddy seconded the motion to adjourn to the regularly scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on Thursday, February 22, 1996, 4:00 p.m., McClellan Ranch Park. (DRJ\.Ff) McCLELLAN RANCH PARK NEEDS ASSESS1\1ENT PROJECT McCLELLAN JRANCH PARK SITE SPECIFIC SURVEY FOR MR. STEPHEN DOWLING DIRECTOR OF PARKS-RECREATION CITY OF CUPERTINO CITY HALL 10300 TORRE A VENUE CUPERTINO, CA 95014 BY ARCHIVES AND ARCHITECTURE GLORY ANNE LAFFEY, HISTORICAL CONSULTANT 353 SURBER DRIVE SAN JOSE, CA 95123 (408) 227-21557 PREPARED BY GLORY ANNE LAFFEY APRILS, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Historical Background ........................................................................................................ 1 Elisha Stephens ....................................................................................................... 1 Williain T. McClellan ............................................................................................. 3 Joseph McClellan .................................................................................................... 5 Twentieth Century Ownership ................................................................................ 7 McClellan Ranch Park .......................................................................................... 10 Building Chronologies ...................................................................................................... 12 Ranch House ......................................................................................................... 12 Milk House ............................................................................................................ 13 Tank House ........................................................................................................... 13 Barn ....................................................................................................................... 13 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 14 Appendix. Historic Resource Inventory Fmms ............................................................... 19 Figures 1. Project ~ti on Map ................................................................................................... iii 2. Elisha Stephens 1864 .................................................................................................... 2 3. Property Ownership ...................................................................................................... 4 4. McClellan Fainily ......................................................................................................... 6 5. McClellan Ranch Park Line of Title ............................................ ~ ................................ 8 · ii Figure 1. Project Location ; ; ; CUPERTINO, CALIF. SFJ4 Palo Alto 15' Quadrangle N3715-W12200/7.5 1961 Photorevised 1980 INTRODUCTION The goal of this submittal is to provide a detailed narrative on the history of the McClel- lan Ranch Park property. This information, combined with the results of the physical ex- amination of the building by Mineweaser & Associates, will provide a chronology of the construction and alterations of the buildings under study. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The McClellan Ranch Park property is located on the east bank of Stevens Creek on the north side of McClellan Road. On March 25, 1776, Juan Bautista de Anza's second ex- pedition camped for the night at a spot near this area, perhaps in the vicinity of Monta Vista High School. Father Font recorded that the stream nearby had been named Arroyo de San Jose Cupertino. After Mission Santa Clara was established in January 1777, this area became part of the mission's grazing lands. After the mission was secularized in the 1830s, much of the surrounding area was incor- porated into private land grants. The subject area, however, was not included in a rancho grant, and after California was ceded to the United States, it became part of the public lands available for homesteading by American citizens. Elisha Stephens The first American settler in this area was Captain Elisha Stephens. According to nu- merous historical accounts, the subject area was part of property settled and occupied by Stephens. The following discussion presents the results of research that attempted to ver- ify this fact with historical records. Stephens settled on the western bank of Cupertino Creek (later named Stevens Creek) on land that was part of the San Antonio Rancho. Stephens land was located across the creek from the subject parcel and was probably settled in the late 1840s. Stephens came to California in 1844 as the leader of the Stephens-Murphy-Townsend Party, which was the first overland party to bring wagons ove:r the Sierra Nevada. The remote, unsettled westside area of the county appealed to the old trapper. San Antonio Rancho had been granted to Don Prado Mesa in 1840. Upon Mesa's death in 1845, Pedro Mesa took over the care of his brother's orphaned children and the main- tenance of the rancho. To pay mounting debts, the Mesas sold the southern half of the ranch (about 3500 acres) to William and Henry Dana. The Dana's title to the property was not confirmed by the U.S. Land Commission until 1857. Although the Danas did not have clear title to the property, they sold numerous interests to the land that were legit- imized as soon as the patent was confirmed. Jeremiah Clark, a San Francisco business- man, was given title to 580 acres in 1857. In 1859, Clark gave Elisha Stephens title to 155 acres that Stephens had settled many years earlier (Deed M: 175; T:354). Although historical accounts indicate that Stephens settled on Cupertino Creek in 1849 or 1850, the earliest documentation of his presence dates to 1852. In 1852-1853 Stephens was assessed for improvements only, indicating he was occupying land for which he did not have title (Delinquent Tax Lists 1852-53). A map surveyed in 1857 shows Stephens' house and cultivated fields on the west bank of Stevens Creek. His house would have been located in the vicinity of Vallecito Road in the Monta Vista Park development (Healy 1863). According to recollections by Phoebe McClellan, who grew up on the old Stephens ranch, Elisha Stephens also owned the property known as Blackberry Farm on the west bank of the creek, which he sold to George McCauley in 1864. Although no 1 Figure 2. i I / / I // ,/ Captain Elisha Stephens 1864 Courtesy, Cupertino Historical! Society 2 verifying documentation could be found regarding Stephens' activities on the east bank, in 1862 Stephens was assessed for improvements on an 160 acre parcel bounded on the south by McClellan (1862 County Tax List). This may refer to the quarter-section he is believed to have owned on the east side of the creek, but for which he actually never gained clear title. This parcel was patented to McCauley in 1867 (Patent A: 177). Mc- Cauley's parcel included the Blackberry Fann parcel but did not include the subject par- cel. Apparently during the early 1860s, Stephens traveled back and forth between Santa Clara and Kem counties. Considered one of the first American settlers in Kem County, in 1861 Stephens settled on 40 acres near present-day Bakersfield where he raised poultry and bees. Thomas Baker relates that when his family first arrived in the Kem County in 1863, their only neighbor was Elisha Stephens. "He came to our house in a two-horse wagon bringing two hogs, six hens, and a rooster. He said, 'I have brought you a start in life.'" Baker's father was the founder of Bakersfield (Baker 1985). After William Mc- Clellan purchased Stephens' property on the west bank of Stevens Creek, Phoebe McClel- lan recalled that: "as a child I remember what pleasure we young folks experienced of an evening listening to the anecdotes regarding his [Stephens] frontier life. He was eccentric in his manner but very hospitable and his house was always open to anyone who chanced that way." Phoebe also related that the only known photograph of Stephens was taken in 1864 at the request of her older sister, "a favorite of the old gentleman." Taken with his hunting knife half drawn, the photograph was meant "to represent, as he expressed it, his life, as he had always to make his path and c:ut his way through the unexplored country" (Friedrich 1957). Historical accounts state that Stephens moved to Kem County because the Santa Clara Valley was becoming "too dum civilized." In summary, no records or early historical narratives were discovered that linked Stephens to the subject property. On the other hand, no evidence was found that linked any other settler to the property prior to 1868. Based on available records, the earliest known individual that could be associated with this property was William T. McClellan. William T. McClellan William Taylor McClellan brought his family to San Jose in 1849. William T. and Eve- line Dickey McClellan left St. Joseph, Missouri in 1849, together with their five children joining a large wagon train heading west. Ranging in age from eight years down to six months, the children were Lavinia, William Wallace, Ann Eliza (Annie), Mary Jane, and Phoebe Evelyn. Three-year-old Mary Jane died on the trail. Born in 1811, McClellan was a native of ea.st Tennessee who had moved to Missouri. He was related (probably a nephew) to Joseph Reddington Walker, the noted trailblazer, mountain man, trapper, and Indian fighter. One of the most skillful and famous of the overland guides, Walker first came to California in 1833, spending several months in the southern Santa Clara Valley. Undoubtedly, Walker told his family about the wonders of California and beginning in 1842, many of the Walker-McClellan clan began migrating west to Oregon and California. Another of \Valker's nephews, David Franklin McClellan lived several years in the Gilroy area before finally settling near Walnut Creek (Bancroft 1886a). Initially settling in San Jose, William T. McClellan worked as a teamster hauling lumber between San Jose and Santa Cruz Mountain lumber mills (Tax Lists 1850; State Census 1852). Historian Munro-Fraser reports that McClellan settled in the Mountain View area in 1851 (1881:259). In 1853, McClellan filed a pre-emption claim for 160 acres "for the purpose of cultivation and improvement" (Notice of Claim 1853). This parcel was 3 Figure 3. Property Ownership, circa 1857-1881 \ \ ' r ' \ :r.CL.AR.l< 1'D ~. S1~'PH~~~ 1:55.51LL ) ' f.. <Jf £ 1'1-l ~s 'lo W :f. ~ e:C LE: u..i; ..! \ 15.5, 5'1~ \ \ \ \ \ LL S. -to Q. \J\c.O~L.SU~.'-/ \ \ \ \ \ 'Of.i:UA 1'o -S. C.L/ro.ttK\ 5BD.b5a,. \ \ \... J.e lA 1Z.~:fo I. Ull<.'R 6fiotJJ lloD~ IE /If ...... ........ 80a,, \ 4 acquired by S. B. Emerson when the McClellans moved to Cupertino. Although Munro- Frasier's informant reported that McClellan probably died about 1861, it was about this time that the family moved to Cupertino (1881:260). By this time, five more children had been born: Theodore Columbus (Lum), James, Joseph, Frank, and Grace. For the sum of $2600, William McClellan acquired interest in 155 acres on the west bank of Stevens Creek from Elisha Stephens in 1862 (County Tax Roll 1862). This transaction was not formalized until December 22, 1864 (Deed T:354-356). No documentation was located that indicated when William McClellan acquired the subject property, which was part of Parcel IV of the northwest quarter of Section 22. The deed for the sale of Parcel III, on the southern boundary of Parcel IV, indicates that McClellan had possession of the subject parcel by 1868. According to family tradition, the McClellans occupied Stephens' cabin on the west bank of Stevens Creek for several years before constructing a new house on the subject parcel. Before Lincoln School was established in 1865, McClellan family informants related that William formed a subscription school locate:d on his property on the east bank of Stevens Creek (Friedrich 1957). In 1878, William McClellan and many of his neighbors petitioned the County Board of Supervisors to have the old wagon road through his ranch declared a county road. The survey for this road shows McClellan's house on the north side of the proposed road on the east bank of the creek (Coombe 1878). [t appears to be in the same location where the McClellan Ranch Park ranch house is located today. When this road was realigned in 1881, a subsequent survey located McClellan's house in the same location (Herrmann 1881). In the last years of his life, William McClellan suffered from severe rheumatism. His sig- nature on the 1878 road petition was strong; however, by 1881 he was unable to hold a pen to sign his name, and his mark was witnessed by his son, Joseph. Surveyor A. T. Herrmann noted in 1883 that "Mr. McClellan's hands being swelled out of shape by Rheumatism, he was unable to sign his name and had to make his mark" (Road File 283). Friedrich recorded that McClellan "was so badly afflicted with rheumatism that he had to be lifted into and out of his buggy. To attend services at the Cupertino Union Church, he sat in his buggy at an open window of the church" (Friedrich 1957). The Cupertino Union Church was started as a mission of the United Presbyterian Church of San Jose in 1884. When the church was incorporated in 1888, Joseph McClellan was one of the founding members. In 1893 and 1894, William's son, Theodore Columbus McClellan, was serving as the minister of this church (Friedrich 1957). Probably because of his deteriorating health, in 1881 William deeded the 40 acre home ranch to his unmarried son, Joseph McClellan. This property included 15 acres (with the ranch house) on the north side of McClellart Road and 27 acres on the south side of Mc- Clellan Road (Deed 59:580). The 15 acre parcel is now McClellan Ranch Park. William T. McClellan died on February 4, 1888 and was buried at the Old Cumberland Presbyte- rian Church Cemetery in Mountain View (Sharman 1978). Eveline McClellan died in 1896 (Evening News 18_96). Joseph McClellan Little biographical information was discove:red about Joseph McClellan. He was born in 1856 and registered to vote in 1881. He was 5 feet IO inches in height and had blue eyes and brown hair. Listings in the city directoJries for Santa Clara County (1884-1896) noted 5 Figure 4. McCLELLAN FAMILY William Taylor McClellan b. September 14, 1810 F.ast Tennessee m. March 14, 1839 Buron Co., Missouri d. February 2, 1888 Cupertino, CA Buried at Old Cumberland Presbyterian Church Cemetary, Mountain View, CA Eveline Dickey b. 1821 m. March 14, 1839 d. May 31, 1896 Children 1. Lavinia b. 1841 m. 1858 2. William Wallace b. November 10, 1841 d. 1923 3. Ann Eliza (Annie) b. 1845 m. August 18, 1864 d. January 11, 1868 4. Mary Jane b. 1846/47 d. 1849 5. Phoebe Evelyn b. December 2, 1848 m. 1870 d. October 15, 1938 6. Theodore Columbus (Lum) Kentucky Buron Co., Missouri Cupertino, CA Missouri Joseph Barton Missouri Hanford, CA Missouri John Mott Mississippi On trip west St. Joseph, Missouri Joseph Fred Payne San Jose, CA b. 1852 CA m. August 21, 1895 Josie Ruhl buried in Saratoga, CA 7. James (Jim) b. February 26, 1854 8. Joseph B. (Joe) b. February 24, 1856 d. March 1923 9. Frank b. February 10, 1858 10. Grace b. October 31, 1862 d. 1931 CA CA Fresno, CA CA CA 6 Source: Harold Gass that he was a farmer, orchardist, vineyardist, imd nurseryman. His was the only west val- ley nursery listed in the classified section of the 1892 city directory. In 1885, the Santa Clara Valley Agricultural and Viticultural Newspaper conducted an agricultural survey that included the Cupertino district (Sullivan 1982:62-64). Joseph McClellan's ranch was described as follows: 40 acres; on the south side of the road are 22 acres of Muscat and Tokay grapes, 200 prunes and 250 apricots; on the north side 4 acres pears, 3 of apricots, 1 of apples and peaches, 1 ac:re of nursery, and 1 acre garden and pasture. As described above, the subject area in 1885 included 8 acres of orchard, a one-acre nurs- ery, a one-acre garden, and five acres that were uncultivated or pasture. This parcel also contained the ranch house and probably barns. and other outbuildings. In 1887 and 1889 Joseph McClellan sold portions of the property on the south side of :tvicClellan Road to M. C. Boden and James McComb. In 1895, McClellan and his moth- er, who had apparently retained a legal interest in the property, sold the remaining 26 acres to Edward J. L. Woodland (Deed 183: 184). At this point all the McClellans disappeared from local records. In 1874, James McClel- lan, then 20 years old, moved to the Hanford area in the San Joaquin Valley where he pi- oneered in establishing vineyards. He later served as a county supervisor, state assem- blyman, and justice of the peace. James was later joined by his brother, Frank, who also served as a Kings County Supervisor in 1893 in addition to establishing a vineyard near Hanford. In the mid-1890s, William Wallace and Joseph sold their property in Santa Clara County and joined their brothers in Hartford. Perley Payne remembers his great- uncles Joe and Frank McClellan visiting his father's Campbell ranch when he was a child (Payne 1995). Joseph McClellan died in Fresno in 1923 (Gass 1995). Twentieth-Century Ownership Edward Woodland purchased the McClellan iranch in 1895. He was listed as an orchard- ist in the Westside district from 1897 through 1901. In 1898 Edward and Jemina Wood- land divided the parcel, selling 10.5 acres south of McClellan Road to James McComb and the 15.25 acres (subject area) north of the: road to John Marley (Deeds 205:594, 210:72). At the time of the sale, the property carried a lien against a mortgage of $2500. John Marley was also listed as an orchardist in the 1901-1902 city directory. In June 1901, John and Charlotte Marley sold the property to Walter E. Wilson (Deed 243:236). The deed for this sale indicated the 1901 fruit crop was not included in the transaction. Also listed as an orchardist, Wilson resided in Cupertino from 1902 through 1909. In April 1910, Walter and Ennis Wilson sold the property to Fred F. Connor, a resident of Berkeley, California (Official Record 358:58). The Connors owned th~ property until 1930; however, they were only listed as residents of Cupertino with a rural route box on McClellan Road from 1917 through 1923 (City Di- rectories). By 1927, Fred and Norma Connor were again living in Berkeley. In March of that year, Connor listed the subject property for sale with the James A. Clayton Company. The property was then described as 15.25 acres on the north side of McLelland [sic] Road on the east bank of Stevens Creek with "prunes, apricots, walnuts family orchard. Five 7 Figure 5. McClellan Ranch Park Line of Title Date #acres Grant or Grantee Record# 1864? ? William T. McClellan ? 5/10/1881 15 + 26 William T. and Eveline E. McClellan Joseph McClellan 59:580-581 8/6/1895 26.46 Joseph and Eveline E. McClellan Edward J. L. Woodland 183: 184-187 5/12/1898 15.25 Edward J. L. and Jemima Woodland John Marley 210:72-75 6/26/1901 15.25 John and Charlotte Marley Walter Edward Wilson 243:236-237 Ll /? c. / 1 Q 1" 1C:'>C: Waltei Edwaid and Ennis Vv'Hson Fred F. Connor :.158:58-59 Tl L.V/ I JI V I J.LJ 6/16/1930 15.25 Fred F. and Norma W. Connor Ralph M. and Juanita Caro 523:449-450 6/16/1930 15.25 Ralph M. and Juanita Caro Ethel and A. Florence Clayton 617: 1 67-169 5/24/1932 15.25 Ethel and A. Florence Clayton Anna A. Vierra 616:201-202 1/25/1943 15.25 Anna A. Vierra H. X. Baxter 1127:156 4/11/1951 15.25 H. X. and Dorothy P. Baxter Clifford J. and Florence L. Simms 2189:453 7/22/1955 15.25 Clifford J. and Florence L. Simms Hirosuke and Ruby C. Inouye 3232:86 c. 1963 Hirosuke and Ruby C. Inouye John H. Langman ? 9/14/1972 15.37 John H. and Jane E. Langman City of Cupertino 25:551 room house and bath, barns, tractor, implements, trays and boxes. House well, irrigation well." The asking price was $20,000 (Clayton 1927). The property was sold to Ralph and Juanita Caro, who in 1930 obtained a mortgage from Ethel and A. Florence Clayton for $8500. Probably suffering from financial reverses as a result of the Depression, the Caros defaulted on this loan and the Claytons foreclosed. The property was sold at auction in May 1932, at which the Claytons were the highest bidders, purchasing the property for $9715.54 (Official Record 617: 167). Within a week, Ethel and Florence Clayton sold the property to Miss Anna A. Vierra. From 1930 to 1951 Anna Vierra was listed in the city directories as a clerk. In 1934, Miss Vierra with A. L., Anthony, Edward, Frank and Joseph Vierra were all listed at the same rural route box in Cupertino. It is likely that the Vierra family occupied the Mc- Clellan ranch. A. L Vierra was a laborer, Anthony was a farmer, and Edward and Frank were listed as orchardists. In 1943, Anna Vierra sold the subject parcel to H. X. and Dor- othy Baxter (Deed 1127: 156). Baxter also acquired the property on the west side of the creek between the creek and McClellan Road, Alma Way, Vallecito Road and Riviera Road (Official Record 2189:453). It is likely that the Baxters constructed the house at 22241 McClellan Road that is currently known as the Simms House. Although Baxter was listed as an orchardist in city directories from 1945 through 1951, by 1947 he operated the valley's only artificial breeding station for dairy cows (City Di- rectories; Hurd 1947). Peter Lert, a visitor to the property in the late 1940s, recalls that the Baxters operated the Twin Farms dairy at the subject area. At that time, the orchards on the property were gone and the property was utilized as pasture for dairy cattle (Lert 1995). Promotional literature for the farms included the following information: TwINFARMS SPECIAUZlNG IN ARTIHCIALINSEMINATION SER.VICE FOR DAIRY CATILE This is the first Artificial Insemination Center in Santa Clara and the four adjacent counties. Twin Farms spared no expense in purchasing their out- standing pure-bred bulls. The introduction of these bulls will do much to improve the breeds and make possible for the development of large fami- lies of superior animals with the area. Probably no recent development in the entire agricultural field has created more interest than has artificial ins1emination. Expanding from a modest beginning in New Jersey and New York in 1938, breeding dairy cows by artificial insemination has increased to the point where probably over a quarter of a million cows were bred in 1946. This type of breeding possesses a number of distinct advantages over natu- ral breeding: Sires capable of transmitting desirable characteristics of pro- duction and type can be fully utilized on many, many cows. Artificial in- semination prevents the exposure or a healthy bull to disease and prevents the transfer from cow to cow to those organisms that sometimes cause sterility. The danger, bother and expense of keeping a bull in eliminated. More accurate breeding records are assured. The level of yearly milk pro- duction can be easily obtained. The feed and labor expended on a dairy bull can be spent on an extra cow, which if profitable, will pay for all or a large part of the yearly cost of breeding the herd artificially. 9 The Twin Farms Artificial Insemination Center is making services avail- able to commercial dairy herds, pure-bred and family cows. Fees: Commercial Dairies .. $10.CX) per cow, including 2 inseminations Family cows. . . . . . . . 13.50 per cow, including 2 inseminations Pure-bred cows ...... 25.CXI per cow, including 2 inseminations TWIN FARMS 700 McClellan Road Cupertino, California Ranch Manager: E. F. Silva For Information and Service, Phone: H. W. Baxter D. P. Baxter Dr. J. W. Hylton Los Altos 2057 The Baxters maintained two bulls that were used in the insemination program: Matapa Sandy's Improver was a Guernsey bull and Calmeda Los Robles Var Vic Bessie was a Holstein bull. Early artificial breeding programs proved that under natural means one bull could serve 38 cows, whereas through artificial insemination one bull could serve 644 cows. Artifi- cial insemination is now the accepted practice for breeding high quality dairy herds. By 1980 more than half of all dairy cows in the United States were bred by artificial insemi- nation, and an average bull could be annually mated with more than 3000 cows (The World Book Encyclopedia 1981). The Baxters sold both parcels to Clifford and Florence Simms in 1951. Simms sold the subject parcel on the east side of the creek to Hirosuke and Ruby Inouye in 1955 (Official Record 3232:86). Inouye was a businessman from Redwood City. Originally operating a large wholesale flower nursery, he was also co-owner of a San Francisco restaurant and a Mountain View mortuary. Part hobby and part investment, Inouye developed the prop- erty as a horse ranch. Horse stalls were constructed in the large barn, and the small milk- ing shed was used as a tack room. One home was owned by Inouye's daughter. Boarding up to twenty horses, the ranch manager occupied the ranch house. Among these horses were racing thoroughbreds that were boarded for short periods before being transported to meets at local race tracks. Inouye sold the property to John Langman about 1963 or 1964 (Inouye 1995). The record of transfer of the property could not be located. By 1970, Langman was the presi- dent of DeAnz.a Interiors in Cupertino, residing at 22221 McClellan A venue. Then known locally as the "Horse Ranch," in 1972 Langman sold the property to the City of Cupertino for a city park (Official Record 25:551). McClellan Ranch Park The creation of the McClellan Ranch as a city park and nature preserve was the dream of Nancy Hertert. Hertert moved to the Cupertino area in 1946 when the area was still an 10 agricultural community. Much impressed by the beauty of the Stevens Creek area, she recognized the importance of preserving natural areas in the rapidly developing commu- nity. By the late 1960s, remaining open space was at a premium. In 1969, Hertert orga- nized other like-minded citizens who petitioned city officials to consider acquisition of the property for a city park. In 1970, the City of Cupertino passed a bond issue to finance the acquisition of property for park use and development. The project area was identified as being one of the key parcels that was to be acquired by the City ir the bond passed. The parcel was purchased jointly by the City, the federal government (HUD), and the Santa Clara Valley Water District for $540,000 in 1972 with the intention of leaving the property in a relatively natural condition. In 1974, a local businessman asked the city to lease the property for a golf driving range. The proponents of this plan faced off with the numerous organizations who wanted the property kept as natural open space. The na.turalists carried the day. Uses approved in- cluded a community garden and use by the Cupertino 4-H Club. A part-time naturalist was hired and the Parks and Recreation Department offered summertime nature camps for local children. Over the years a number of nature programs have been offered to the community. In April 1974 the Horse Ranch Committee was formed with Mary Gonzales serving as president. Other members of the committee: included Nancy Hertert, Ralph Townsend, Judy Tembrock, George Gabriel, and Larry Chedester. After meeting for several months to consider a wide variety of issues, the committee recommended a number of possible uses that were compatible with the natural open space concept The recommended uses included a nature trail, nature day camp, a nature museum, and continued use for a com- munity garden and by the 4-H club. Popularly known as the Horse Ranch, the park was officially renamed McClellan Ranch Park at its dedication in 1975. On January 6, 1976, the Cupertino City Council adopted an ordinance designating Mc- Clellan Ranch Park as a nature and rural preserve. According to the ordinance, uses "were limited to those which would maintain and protect the ecology of the area, con- serve the natural features and scenic values., expand community awareness and under- standing of natural history and the environment, and provide enjoyment of the resources present consistent with their preservation" (Ordinance 710). In accordance with the ordinance, the Parks and Recreation Department refined the guide- lines for park use and maintenance. The guidelines stated that all buildings within the park should be preserved and used for activities appropriate to the park; and that no addi- tional buildings should be placed in the park unless unique to the concept of the park. The relocation of the Charlie Baer blacksmith shop and the Parrish water tower to the park had been approved prior to the 1977 adoption of the park use guidelines. In 1977 Homer Francis McClellan bequeathed $5000 to the City for a memorial to his family. The City used the bequest to acquire a sundial as an educational and working memorial. Designed by John S. Lorr, a Cupertino teacher, the sundial was dedicated in March 1979. The Department of Parks and Recreation used the ranch house at McClellan Park as its office from 1974 until the Quinlin Community Center was available for occupation in 1990. In 1990, the 3.1 acres on the west side of the creek were purchased by the city, ex- panding the park to 18.7 acres. The parcel includes the Simms house, which was leased 11 in 1991 to Innovative Housing, a non-profit housing assistance agency that provides low- cost housing. About this time an advisory committee was formed to develop a master plan for future park use. In 1993, a grant proposal was submitted to the Santa Clara County Heritage Commission for funds to conduct a historic s1ructures assessment to aid in future plan- ning for the park. The grant was approved and consultants were hired in 1994 to carry out the current study. BUILDING CHRONOLOGIES This study has focused on the chronology and history of four buildings located at Mc- Clellan Ranch Park. These buildings are the :ranch house, milk house, tank house, and a large barn. The following discussion synthesizes the archival findings and the observa- tions made by Mineweaser & Associates during their physical ex~ination of the build- ings. The Ranch House Archival documentation regarding the construction date of the ranch house was not dis- covered. We know that by 1878, the McClellan family was occupying a ranch house in this area that was probably constructed in the 1860s. Unfortunately, no one now living remembers the original house and no written descriptions exist that describe the McClel- lan house. Typically, a rural farmhouse cons1ructed during this period would have had a rectangular or L-shaped floor plan with a raised foundation and basement. The footprint on the 1878 and 1881 maps suggest that the house had a square or rectangular floor plan. However, the symbol used by the surveyors for a residence is basically the same on all their maps. Therefore, it may have been a generic house footprint, and did not represent reality in any way. In 1927, the house was described as "five rooms and bath." Does this description refer to the original McClellan house, a house built subsequent to McClellan ownership, or to the house now located on the property? Although a five-room house would appear to be rather small to accommodate a family with ten children, it may have had large rooms that were shared by several children of the same sex. Also, not all the children were living at home at the same time. When the youngest was born in 1862, Lavinia born in 1841, had already been married for four years, and twenty-year-old Wallace had already acquired property of his own. Nineteenth century residences often had bath rooms; however, they were reserved just for bathing. Toilet facilities were located in an outdoor privy or out- house. By the early 20th century, houses typically included a single bathroom with toilet. Indoor toilet facilities were added to older homes as soon as owners could afford to re- model. Generally, until after World War II, multiple bathrooms were a luxury found only in large homes owned by the wealthy . Clearly, the current house was not constructed in the 19th century. Peter Lert recalls that the present house was located on the ranch in 1946. The house has at least six rooms and 2 bathrooms. Stylistically, the house reflects the Minimal Traditional style that devel- oped during the 1930s. _With the economic Depression of the 1930s came this compro- mise style which reflects the form of traditional eclectic styles popular during the 1920s, but lacks their decorative detailing. Becoming popular during the 1930s, this was the dominant style in the post-war 1940s and early 1950s. The interior features of the sunken living room, fireplace tiling, faux painted graining of exposed beams and woodwork are typical of the Spanish Eclectic popular between 1915 and 1940 (McAlester and McAles- ter 1986). The combination of the Minimal Traditional style and the interior Spanish Ee- 12 lectic details suggest a 1930s construction date. Although open to speculation, it is con- cluded that the house was probably construc1:ed during the ownership of Anna Vierra or early in Baxter's tenure. Alterations to the residence have been discussed in detail by Mineweaser. The addition on the west wing was built about 1974 when the city took over ownership and occupancy. Handicap access and remodeling of bathroom and ramping was done in 1984. Other el- ements suggest that house was remodeled in the 1950s or 1960s. Milk House No archival materials or informants were located that revealed the origin or early history of this building. Upon careful examination of the building, Mineweaser concludes that it was constructed in the early part of the century. According to Peter Lert, it was located at this location by 1947, then utilized by H. X. Baxter as part of the dairy operation. Al- though few informants were located that had detailed knowledge of the Baxter's dairy, we do know it was a small experimental operation that operated for about eight years. Tank House The tank house now located adjacent to the milk house was moved to this location and "reassembled" about 1977 from the Enoch Parrish property on Stevens Creek Blvd. (Cu- pertino Courier 1979). The tank house was constructed some time after Parrish and his wife Mennie came to Cupertino about 1883 from Kentucky (Butler 1975). Involved in several occupations, Enoch Parrish was a butcher, farmer, and carpenter. He designed and constructed many of the farmhouses in Cupertino including the buildings on his own ranch. The Parrish's house was constructed about 1895 in the Folk Victorian style. The city acquired the tank house when it purchased the Parrish property in 1966 for Memorial Park. The Parrish House served a.s the offices of the Department of Parks and Recreation until they moved to McClellan Ranch Park in 1975. Shortly thereafter, the house suffered a fire and only the spindlework gingerbread was salvaged for use in a gazebo when the housed was demolished in 1980 . Barn Physical evidence suggests that the barn was constructed in the early decades of the twen- tieth century. It very probably dates to eith(:r the ownership of Walter Wilson (1901- 1909) or that of Fred Connor (1910-1930). Several barns were listed in the property in- ventory reported by Clayton in 1927. After 1955, the horse stalls and other improvements were made by Hirosuke Inouye when he utilized the ranch for boarding horses. The building was painted and a new roof was added after 1975 while the city was occupying the property. 13 BIBLIOGRAPHY Bancroft, H. H. 1886a The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft: History of California. Vol. IV: 1840-1845. San Francisco: The History Company, Publishers. 1886b The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft: History of California. Vol. V: 1846-1848. San Francisco: The History Company, Publishers. 1890 The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft: History of California Vol. VII: 1860-1880. San Francisco: The History Company, Publishers. Baker, Thomas 1985 History of Early-Day Bakersfield. In Kern County Recollections, N. P. Scanlan, editor. Bakersfield: Kem County Library. Baxter, H. X. [1947] Twin Farms promotional flyer. (Collection of Genivieve Hylton) Brown, J. L. 1941 The Story of Kings County California. Berkeley: Lederer, Street & Zues Company, Inc. (Reprint: Forson Books, 1986) Butler, Phyllis 1975 The Val"ley of Santa Clara, Historic Buildings, 1792-1920. San Jose: The Junior League of San Jose, Inc. California History Center n.d. Cupertino Clipping Files. Clayton, James A. 1927 Orchard Properties. Ledger 4, entry 5824. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. Cupertino Courier 1979 History book lists city links to past. November 13, 1979. Cupertino Historical Museum n.d. McClellan Ranch clipping and files. n.d. William Taylor McClellan. Family History Binder, Vol. 1. Daily Herald [San Jose] 1888 Obituary for W. T. McClellan. 2 February 1888, 3:8 .. Evening News [San Jose] 1896 Obituary for Mrs. E. McClellan. 1 June 1896, 4:5. Friedrich, Karl A. 1957 Historical Cupertino Records with a history of Cupertino and a history of the Cupertino Union Church. Copied and compiled by Karl A. Friedrich. Holographic manuscript on file at California History Center, DeAnza College. 14 Guinn, J. 1904 History of the State of California and Biographical Record of the Coast Counties, California. Chicago: The Chapman Publishing Company. Hurd, Carroll K. 1947 First dairy calf born here in new breeding program. San Jose Mercury- News, November 1947. (Collection of Genivieve Hylton) Lyons, Mary Lou 1995 Elisha Stephens of the Stephens-Murphy-Townsend Party of 1844. Herrmann, A. T. 1881 Field notes for survey for W. T. McClellan. Herrmann Field Book 42, pp. 74and 76. Loomis, Patricia 1974 Signposts: McClellan, De Anza left their mark on Cupertino. San Jose News, March 22. Munro-Fraser, J.P. 1881 History of Santa Clara County, California. San Francisco: Alley, Bowen & Co., Publishers. Quackenbush, Margery n.d. County Chronicles. Local Hi1story Studies Volume 9. Cupertino: Cali- fornia History Center. Rose, Jim 1994 Elisha Stephens Deserves a Mountain Monument. California Historian. Vol. 40, 4:6-8. Scanlan, N. P. (editor) 1985 Kern County Pioneer Recollections. Bakersfield: Kern County Library. Sharman, Linda [compiler] 1978 Burials at the Mountain View Pioneer Cemetery, Los Altos. On file at the Cupertino Historical Museum. Sullivan, Charles L. 1982 Like Modern Edens: Winegrowing in Santa Clara Valley and Santa Cruz Mountains 1798-1981. Local History Studies, Vol. 28. Cupertino: Cali- fornia History Center. World Book Encyclopedia 1981 Dairying. Volume 5. Chicago: World Book-Childcraft International, Inc. Public Records City of Cupertino 1976 Ordinance 710. An ordinance of the City of Cupertino amending Chapter 13.04 of the Cupertino municipal code to provide for nature and/or rural preserve. 15 County of Santa Clara 1850 Tax Roll. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1852 Delinquent List for 1852. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1853 Notice of Claim: Wm. T. Mc:Clellan. On file at San Jose Historical Mu- seum. 1853 Duplicate Delinquent Tax Roll for 1853 for Santa Clara County. On file at San Jose Historical Museum 1862 Tax Roll. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1884-City Directories, including Santa Clara County. 1951 1872 Tax Roll, Vol. A-L. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1878 Road File 283. General file for McClellan Road. On file in the office of the Board of Supervisors. 1867-Great Register of Voters. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1894 1898 Poll Tax. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. 1899 Poll Tax. On file at San Jose Historical Museum. County of Santa Clara. Recorder's Office A: 122 Patent: U.S. to Thomas Carr. 1 January 1868. A:177 Patent: U.S. to George McCauley. M: 175 Deed: William A. and Henry F. Dana to Jeremiah Clark. · n.d. T:354 Indenture: Jeremiah Clark to Elisha Stephens. 8 February 1859. T:355 Indenture: Elisha Stephens to W. T. McClellan. 22 December 1864. 12:207 Indenture: Wallace McClellcm to T. F. Garrigus. 24 November 1868. 12:209 Indenture: W. T. McClellan to T. F. Garrigus. 24November1868. 59:.580 Indenture: W. T. McClellan to J. McClellan. 10 May 1881. 105:25 Indenture: Joseph McClellan to M. C. Boden. 11October1887. 183: 184 Indenture: Joseph McClellan to Edward J. L. Woodland. 6 August 1895. 205:594 Deed: Edward J. L. Woodland to James H. McComb. 10 March 1898. 210:72 Indenture: Edward J. L. Woodland to John Marley. 12 May 1898. 16 243: 236 Indenture: John Marley to W. E. Wilson. 26 June 1901. 358:58 Indenture: Walter E. Wilson to Fred F. Connor. 26 April 1910. 523:449 Indenture: Fred F. Connor to Ralph M. Caro. 16 June 1930. 616:201 Indenture: Ethel Clayton to Anna A. Vierra. 24 May 1932. 617: 167 Deed: James A. Clayton & Co. to Ethel and A. Florence Clayton. 16 May 1932. 1127: 156 Deed: Anna A. Vierra to H. X:. Baxter. 25 January 1943. 1129: 103 Deed: John Picchetti et al. to H. X. Baxter. 25 January 1943. 2189:453 Deed: H. X. Baxter to Clifford J. Simms. 7 April 1951. 3232:86 Deed: Clifford J. Simms et ux. to Hirosuke Inouye et ux. 22 July 1955. 3907:35 Boundary Line Agreement: Clifford J. Simms and Hirosuke Inouye. 7 October 1957. 4776:64 Statement of Partnership. 22 April 1960. 0025:551 Grant Deed: John H. Langman to City of Cupertino. 18 September 1972. State of Cali,fornia 1852 Population Census for the State of California. Maps Anonymous c1900 San Antonio Rancho. Map 1979-1032A, on file at the San Jose Historical Museum. Brainard, Henry A. 1885 Cupertino. Santa Clara Valley Map No. 6. On file at the San Jose Histor- ical Museum. Coombe, John 1878 Map of a Road petitioned for by W. T. McClellan et als. Surveyed by or- der of the Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County October 27 and 30, 1878. Burnt Map M:46, on file in the Office of the County Surveyor. Healy, E. F. 1863 Plat of the Rancho San Antonio finally confirmed to Encarnacion Mesa, et al. as located by the U. S. Surveyor General, February 1863. Map 275ND:204, on file at the Brn1croft Library, University of California, Berkeley. 17 Herrmann, A. T. 1881 Map of a tract of land sold by W. T. McClellan and Guthrie to John T. Doyle in the San Antonio Rancho. Surveyed February 15 and 21, 1881 by Herrmann Brothers. Hemnann Map 467c, on file in the Office of the County Surveyor. Herrmann Brothers 1895 Map of the McClellan Tract. Surveyed August 6-8, 1895 for Charles D. Blaney. Herrmann Map 490, on file in the Office of the County Surveyor. Smith, J. G. 1917a Map of Monta Vista Park. Recorded Map P: 19, on file at the County of Santa Clara. 1917b Map of Colony Vista Tract, Monta Vista. Recorded Map P:21, on file at the County of Santa Clara. Thompson and West 1876 Map No. 4. Historical Atlas Map of Santa Clara County, California. San Francisco: Thompson and West Personal Communications Gass, Harold 1995 Payne/McClellan family historian. Telephone communication with G.A. Laffey, 30 March 1995. Hylton, Genevieve 1995 Widow of Dr. Jack Hylton, veterinarian for H. X. Baxter. Telephone and personal communication with G. A. Laffey, 4 and 5 April 1995. Inouye, Dan 1995 Son of Hirosuke Inouye. Telephone communication with G.A. Laffey, 3 April 1995. Lert, Peter 1995 County Director of UC-Santa Clara County Cooperative Extension Ser- vice. Telephone communication with G. A. Laffey, 30 March 1995. Lyon, Mary Lou 1995 Local historian. Personal communication with G. A. Laffey, 7 February 1995. Payne, Perley, Jr. 1995 Great-grandson of William T. McClellan. Fann Advisor with UC-Santa Clara County Cooperative Extension Service. Telephone communication with G. A· Laffey, 30 March 1995. 18 Appendix Historic Resource Inventory Forms 19 * State of California -The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Office of Historic Preservation Historic Resources Inventory Identification and Location Ser. No. National Register Status Survey Ref. No. 1 --- Local designation------------- 1. Historic name _N_o_ne ____________________________ _ *2. Common name or current name _M_c_C_l_e,l_la_n_Ra_n_c_h_H_o_us_e ______________ _ *3. Number & street 22221 McClellan Road Cross-corridor City ___ C_u._pe_rt_i_n_o __ Vicinity only ------Zip 9501 4 County Santa Clara 4. UTM Zone----A ____ _ B _____ c ______ D _____ _ 5. QuadmapNo. ----Parcel No. NIA Other ------------ Description If district, number of 6. Property Category District documented resources 4 *7. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the property, including condition, boundaries, related features, surroundings, and (if appropriate) architectural style. This farmstead consists of 1 5 acres. Buildings include a house, milking house, tank house, barn and several outbuildings. The property is bounded by Stevens Creek, McClellan Road, and a high bluff. The one story house reflects the Minimal Traditional style that developed during the 1930s. The interior features of the sunken living room, fireplace tiling, faux painted graining of expos1ed beams and woodwork are typical of the Spanish Eclectic popular between 1915 and 1940. The combination c1f the Minimal Traditional style and the interior Spanish Eclectic details suggest a 1930s construction date. The addition on the west wing was built about 1974 when the city took over ownership and occupancy. Handicap ai::cess and remodeling of bathroom and ramping was done in 1 984. Other elements suggest that house was remodeled in the 1950s or 1 960s . • ~ ' . -8 . Planning agency Dept of Parks & Rec. 9. Owner Address Cit~ of Cu~rtino 10300 Torre Ave. Cu~ertino 1 CA 95014 10. Type of Ownership Municieal 11. Present Use Public 12. Zoning Open Space 13. Threats None Section 106 (36 CFR 800). Historical Information *14. Construction date(s) 1935A Original location yes Date moved 15. Alterations & date 16. Architect Unknown Builder Unknown 17. Historic attributes (with number from list) 33--ranch house Significance and Evaluation 1 8. Context for evaluation: Theme _____ A_,g._r_ic_u_lt_u_r_e __ _ Area Cupertino Period __ __.1 ..... B .... 6....,8._-.... 1 .... 9..._Z .... 2 ___ Property Type Ranch Context developed? yes * 1 9. Briefly discuss the property's importance within the context. Use historical and architectural analysis as appropriate. Compare with similar properties. This property had been acquired and settled by William T. McClellan by 1 868 and was sold by Joseph McClellan in 1895. All of the buildings appear to date to the 1900 to 1930s. The Minimal Traditional architectural features and interior decorative elements suggest the house was probably constructed in the 1 930s during the ownership of Anna Vierra (1932-42). Subsequent owners have remodelud the interior and the city extended the west wing in 1974. Land use has included orchards, a nursery, dairy and cattle breeding farm, and a horse ranch. The Oty of Cupertino purchased the property in 1972, creating McClellan Ranch Park in 1975 and protecting the property as a nature and rural preserve. Since that time the house has served as the offices of the Department of Parks and Recreation, the park naturalist, and the Audubon Society. In 1991 the house was named the Cupertino Environmental Center. This complex of buildings is the last rural farmstead to survive in the Qty of Cupertino. 2 0. Sources: Visual Survey 3/22/95: Meiger, Mineweaser & .A.ssoc., Description of Construction Modifications and Chronology 1995; G.A. Laffey, McClellan Ranch Park Site Specific Survey, 1995. 21 . Applicable National Register criteria 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Other recognition -------- St ate Landmark No. (if applicable) ___ _ Evaluator Glory Anne Laffey Date of evaluation 4I1 I 9 5 Survey type Project Related Survey nameMcClellan Ranch Park Assessment Year Form Prepared _1_9_9_5 ___ _ By (name) Glory Anne Laffey Organization Archives & Architecture: Address 353 Surber Drive City & Zip San Jose 95123 Phone ( 408) 227-2657 21 =' creek t... ,.,..···'"" ... " \ .. / \ ... : c,· t N :1 41 ~ ..... Cl) ' 0 i State of California -The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Office of Historic Preservation Historic Resources Inventory Survey Ref. No. 2 --- Identification and Location Ser. No. National Register Status Local designation------------- 1 . Historic name None ------------------------------- * 2. Common name or current name _M_c_C_le_ll_an_R_a_n_ch_m_i_lk_h_o_u_s_e ____________ _ *3. Number & street 22221 McClellan Road Cross-corridor City ___ C_u_..p_e_rt_in_o ___ Vicinity only _____ _ Zip 95014 County Santa Clara 4. UTM Zone----A ______ B _____ c ______ D _____ _ 5. QuadmapNo. -----Parcel No. NIA Other _________ _ Description If district, number of 6. Property Category District documented resources 4 *7. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the property, including condition, boundaries, related features, surroundings, and (if appropriate) architectural style. Constructed in the early decades of the 20th century, this building has a gabled roof and channel-rustic drop siding. The roof has a continual ridge vent. Formed concrete half walls are surmounted by unsashed openings. The roof and concrete slab floor extend to the restroom addition to form a breezeway. A concrete trough and stalls are located in the interior. The restroom addition was added in the 1970s. A tankhouse was reconstructed and added to the east end of the building. ... ,' >,·"·~ ;i-, • .,.. .... ,. * ~·:"'' . iilliiii~~~~· All items must be completed for historical resourc1~s survey information. 22 8. Planning agency Dept of Parks & Rec. 9. Owner Address Cit}! of Cu~rtino 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino. CA 95014 10. Type of Ownership Munici12al 11. Present Use Public 12. Zoning Open Space 13. Threats None Section 106 (36 CFR 800). Historical Information *14. Construction date(s) 1900-30A Orig.inal location unknown Datemoved ------------ 15. Alterations & date Restroom added 1974 .;._.....;...""""""';..;...;.;..;..;..;.;.--...~~----------------------- 16. Architect unknown Builder unknown _____ ..,.;..;,.;..-.;...;;~----------------'~---~------ 17. Hist~ric attributes (with number from list) ,..3_,,3 .... -_.-m.....,..,ilk.......,h:..;.;o;:;..;u=s_,e...._ __________ _ Significance and Evaluation 1 8. Context for evaluation: Theme _____ A .... g_ri_cu_l_tu_r_e __ _ Area Cupertino Period __ __.1 .... a .... G .... a .... -.... 1 _9.._z_2 ___ Property Type Ranch Context developed? yes * 1 9. Briefly discuss the property's importance within the context. Use historical and architectural analysis as appropriate. Compare with similar properties. No archival materials or informants were located that revealed the origin or early history of this building. Upon careful examination of the building, Minewuaser concludes that it was constructed in the early part of the century. The building was utilized by H. X. E:axter as part of the dairy operation from 1943 to 1951. Known as Twin Farms, Baxter's dairy was was the first artifical breeding station that served Santa Clara County and adjacent counties. Baxter kept two prize bulls that were used in the first artifical insemination program that began in 1947. 2 0. Sources: Visual Survey 3/22/95; Meiger, Mineweaser & Assoc., Description of Construction Modifications and Chronology 1995; C. Hurd, First dairy calf born here in new breeding program, San Jose Mercury-News (November 1947 clipping from collection of G. Hylton). 21. Applicable National Register criteria 22. Other recognition-------- State Landmark No. (if applicable) __ _ 23. Evaluator Glory Anne Laffey Date of evaluation 4I1 I 9 5 24. Survey type Project Related 25. Survey nameMcClellan Ranch Park Assi~ssment 26. Year Form Prepared_l_9_9_5 ___ _ By (name) Glory Anne Laffey Organization Archives & Architecture Address 353 Surber Drive City & Zip San Jose 95123 Phone ( 408) 227-2657 23 t N / Creek <... .. ,.... . .. / .. " ) .. / \ .... : (:,· ~I 41: ..., . Cl) \ . .. t, \ •, I I 0 State of California -The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PAIRKS AND RECREATION Office of Hist1oric Preservation Historic Resources Inventory Survey Ref. No. 3 --- Identification and Location Ser. No. National Register Status Local designation------------- 1 . Historic name None ------------------------------~ *2. Common name or current name _P_ar_r_is_h __ T_a_n_k_H_o_u_s_e _______________ _ *3. Number & street 22221 McClellan Road Cross-corridor City ___ C_u ..... p_e_rt_._m_o ___ Vicinity only -------Zip 95014 County Santa Clara 4. UTM Zone----A ______ B _____ c ______ D _____ _ 5. QuadmapNo. ----Parcel No. NIA Other _________ ~ Description If district, number of 6. Property Category District documented resources 4 *7. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the property, including condition, boundaries, related features, surroundings, and (if appropriate) architectural style. Originally constructed in the 1 880s by Enoch Parrish, this two-story tank house has a hipped roof, with vertical and sloped sides. There is a wooden water tank surrciunded by a simple railing. The building is sheathed with channel-rustic or drop siding with corner boards. The tank house was relocated to this site and "reasstmbled" about 1977 from the Enoch Parrish property on Stevens Creek Blvd. Much of the building is constructed of modern materials. Original materials may include the water tank and the siding. Send a copy of thii * Complete theSE All items must be 8. Planning agency Dept of Parks & Rec. 9. Owner Address Cit~ of Cu~rtino 10300 Torre Ave. Cu12ertino 1 CA 95014 10. Type of Ownership MuniciQal 11. Present Use Public 12. Zoning Open Space 13. Threats None ration, CA 94287-0001 ~ projects under Section 106 (36 CFR 800). information. Historical Information *14. Construction date(s)1885/1977A Original location Stevens Creek Blvd. Datemoved 1977A 15. Alterations & date 1 6. Architect relocated and recoinstructed about 1977 Enoch Parrish Builder Enoch Parrish -------------------------------17. Historic attributes (with number from list) _3_3_--__ t .... a .... n .... k __ h __ o....,u ..... s .... e.__ __________ _ Significance and Evaluation 1 8. Context for evaluation: Theme _____ A_.g._r_ic_u_l_tu_r_e __ _ Area Cupertino Period-_ __.1 .... 8...,6...,8._-...... 1 _9J..z ... 2 ___ Property Type Ranch Context developed? yes * 1 9. Briefly discuss the property's importance within the context. Use historical and architectural analysis as appropriate. Compare with similar properties. The tank house was originally constructed some tim~i after Parrish and his wife Mennie came to Cupertino about 1883 from Kentucky. Involved in several occupations, Enoch Parrish was a butcher, farmer, and carpenter. He designed and constructed many of the farmhouses in Cupertino including the buildings on his own ranch. Located on the north side of Stevens Creek Blvd., the Parrish's house was constructed about 1895 in the Folk Victorian style. The city acquired the tank house when it purchased the Parrish property in 1 966 for Memorial Park. After the Parrish house burned, the tank house was moved to McOellan Ranch Park where it was reconstructed. 20. Sources: Visual Survey 3/22/95: Meiger, Mineweaser & Assoc., Description of Construction Modifications and Chronology 1995; P. F. Butler, The Valley of Santa Clara, 1975. 21 . Applicable National Register criteria 22. 23. 24. 25. Other recognition-------- State Landmark No. (if applicable) __ _ Evaluator Glory Anne Laffey Date of evaluation 4I1 I 9 5 Survey type Project Related Survey nameMcClellan Ranch Park Assessment 2 6. Year Form Prepared _1_9_9_5 ___ _ By (name) Glory Anne Laffey Organization Archives & Architecture Address 353 Surber Drive City & Zip San Jose 95123 Phone ( 408) 227-2657 25 t N / Creek l... _.,... ............ " \ _ .. /" ... "-: c: ,· ~I 41: ....... Cl) ' . .. \ \ \ ·. i State of California -TI1e Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Office of Historic Preservation Historic ResolJlrces Inventory Identification and Location Ser. No. National Register Status Survey Ref. No. 4 --- Local designation------------- 1. Historic name _None ______________________________ _ *2. Common name or current name _M_c_C_le_l_la __ n_R_a_n_c_h_b_ar_n _______________ _ *3. Number & street 22221 McClellan Road Cross-corridor City ___ C_u __ p_e_rt_in_o ___ Vicinity only -------Zip 95014 County Santa Clara 4. UTM Zone----A _____ _ 5. QuadmapNo. ----Parcel No. Description 6. Property Category District B _____ c ______ D _____ _ NIA Other _________ _ If district, number of documented resources 4 *7. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the property, including condition, boundaries, related features, surroundings, and (if appropriate) architectural style. The barn is a simple, two story, 40 by 60 foot rectan!;,ile. It consists of a heavy timber fram sitting on a continuous perimeter footing. The entire building fram is faced with wood 1 x1 2 vertical board siding and recently replaced vertical battens forming the outer skin. The roof is a classic "Dutch gambrel" roof having two pitches. The gable ends hava typical triangular, projec:ting overhang covering the second story doors to the hay loft. There is no sash or glass in the window openings. The rolling doors at each end of the first floor have been rebuilt with plywood and articulated cross bracing. 8. Planning agency Dept of Parks & Rec. I 9. Owner Address Cit~ of Cu~rtino 10300 Torre Ave. CuQertino1 CA 9S014 10. Type of Ownership Munici12al 11. Present Use ...-:· --... Public i!l' 12. Zoning Open Space 13. Threats None St 01 * Complete these items for historic preservation ci:>mpliance projects under Section 106 (36 CFR 800). All items must be completed for historical resources survey information. 26 Historical Information *14. Construction date(s) 1900-20 Original location ___ y.._e_s ___ Datemoved ____ _ 15. Alterations & date .;..;H..;.o.;..;rs;,.;;e-'st;;.;;,;;;a.;.;.;lls;.o.,_1.;..;9;..;5;...5,;.._ _________________ _ 16. Architect unknown Builder unknown -----------------~----------- 17. Historic attributes (with number from list) ... 3 ... 3 ... -_---.b ... a .... rn _______________________ _ Significance and Evaluation 18. Context for evaluation: Theme _____ A_g_ri_cu_l_tu_r_e __ _ Area Cupertino Period __ __.1 ... a .... s .... a_-.... 1 .... 9_,7._.2 ___ Property Type Ranch Context developed? yes *1 9. Briefly discuss the property's importance within the context. Use historical and architectural analysis as appropriate. Compare with similar properties. Physical evidence suggests that the barn was constructed in the early decades of the twentieth century. It very probably dates to either the ownership of Walter Wilson (1901-1909) or that of Fred Connor (1910-1930). Severa barns were listed in the property inventory reported by aayton In 1927. After 1955, the horse stalls and other improvements were made by Hirosuke Inouye when he utilized the ranch for boarding horses. The building was painted and a new roof was added after 1975 while the city was occupying the property. 20. Sources: Visual Survey 3/22/95: Meiger, Mineweaser & Assoc., Description of Construction Modifications and Chronology 1995; D. Inouye, personal communication, 1995. 21. Applicable National Register criteria 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Other recognition---------- State Landmark No. (if applicable) __ _ Evaluator Glory Anne Laffey Date of evaluation 4/1 /95 Survey type Project Related Survey nameMcClellan Ranch Park AssE!ssment Year Form Prepared _1_9_9_5 ___ _ By (name) Glory Anne Laffey Organization Archives & Architectur,e Address 353 Surber Drive City & Zip San Jose 95123 Phone ( 408) 227-2657 27 t N creek ... ,... ... / (, \ •, ' i " ) : . <.... \ \ ... : City of C11pertitio City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3202 (408) 777-3110 Fax: (408) 777-3366 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT Memorandum To: McClellan Ranch Park Task Force From: Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Subject: Site Specific Survey Date: January 9, 1996 Prior to the meeting of January 25, please review the attached draft from our historical survey consultant, Glory Anne Laffey. Please bring to the task force meeting any changes or corrections to the report. See you on the 25th. SGD:lml Printed on Rscycled Paper Dr:aft Architects Report McClellan Jlanch Park Needs Assessment Project May 5, 1995 for Mr. Steph•m Dowling Director of Parks and Recreation CITY OF CUPERTINO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino., CA 95014 by Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Architecture/Construction Consulting 1154 Park Avenue San Jose, CA 95126 Project no. 9525 Copyright 1995 This report constitutes original copyrighted material produced as an instrument of service representing professional opinions and work by the Architect for this project, Mieger, Mtneweaser & Associates. The Architect is solely responsible for its contents and as such, this report is the sole property of the Architect. It shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed without written permission of the Architect. TABLE OF CONTENTS Topic Page PART I -DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION MODIFICATIONS First Floor Second Floor Conclusion TANK HOUSE Conclusion MILK HOUSE Conclusion RANCH HOUSE Changes to the House Miscellaneous Basement Electrical System Mechanical System Siding Hardware Floor Plan Layout Comments CONCLUSION PART II -CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY TANK HOUSE MILK HOUSE RANCH HOUSE PART III -FLOOR PLANS DESCRIPTION OF FLOOR PLANS BARN -FIRST FLOOR PLAN BARN -SECOND FLOOR PLAN TANK HOUSE/MILK HOUSE FLOOR PLAN RANCH HOUSE FLOOR PLAN RANCH HOUSE BASEMENT PLAN 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 10 10 . 10 10 10 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 PART IV -RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POTENTIAL USES OF THE BUILDINGS 21 TANK HOUSE MILK HOUSE RANCH HOUSE 22 PART V -SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CODES BAR.t'i TANK HOUSE & MILK HOUSE 23 RANCH HOUSE 24 PART VI -WORK PROGRAM of REPAIRS and IMPROVEMENTS REPAIR and RESTORATION WORK 27 27 TANK HOUSE 28 MILK HOUSE 28 RANCH HOUSE 29 IMPROVEMENT WORK 30 PART VII -CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES for REPAIRS and IMPROVEMENTS REPAIR and RESTORATION WORK 31 IMPROVEMENT WORK DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 1 PART I -DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION MODIFICATIONS Recent field investigations were made by our office of four buildings at the McClellan Ranch believed to be historic. These buildings are the Barn, Tank House, Milk House and The Ranch House. The purpose of these investigations was to establish the general current condition of the buildings, and to determine if possible, the modifo;ations or alterations that may have been made to each one during their lifetime. Lastly, based on this field investigation and subsequent analysis, we have listed the approximate date we believe each building was built and the dates of these changes or alterations. This report is the summary of the results of our field work and analysis, and it is intended that this information Wlll be put together with the historical research being done by Archives and Architecture. Our report may be modified due to subsequent information uncovered in such historical research or by information given to us by the City regarding their stewardship of the buildings. THEREFORE, ALL OF THE INFORMATION IN THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS IS SUBJECT TO SUBSEQUENT VERIFICATION IN THE FIELD BY OUR OFFICE, AND BY INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY OTHERS OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. BARN The Barn is a simple. two story, 40' x 60' rectangle!. It consists of a heavy timber frame sitting on a continuous perimeter footing. The entire building frame is faced with wood lx12 vertical board siding and recently replaced wood vertical battens forming the outer skin. The roof is a classic "Dutch gambrel" roof having two pitches. The gable ends have a typical triangular, projecting overhang covering the second story doors to the hay loft. The rafter tails overhang the walls approximately 12" on the long North and South sides. The asphalt roof shingles are new within the last ten years, probably at the time the City took over the property in 1984. The vertical edge of the rafter tails has been incorrectly faced with a new 2x4, probably at the time the roof work was done. The building may have received its new paint at the same time. It is red with white trim on the doors and windows and roof edge. There is no sash nor glass in the window openings. The rolling doors at each end of the First Floor have been rebuilt with plywood and articulated x bracing. They may or may not match the original design. The Second Floor doors were only recreated at the West end. This is a hinged style, again done with plywood and is somewhat less successful in its historic accuracy. There are no matching doors at the East end of the Second floor, this area has simply been covered with chicken wire. The building does not have any gutters or downspouts. The surface soil was saturated with moisture at the time of our first visit. It is high in clay content, and there is no positive slope away from the foundation to promote proper drainage. The building has settled at the West end such that the door requires a great effort to slide on its track. The lack of drainage may have contributed to the settling. Sandbags were placed at this opening to prevent the recent winter floods from entering as the ground around the door is lower than the surrounding grade. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page2 Although there are other horse and cattle barns in Santa Clara County of this style, shape and layout, this type of barn is much more common in the Mid-West, Middle Atlantic region and in the North Eastern United States. This is because these barns were more likely to have been built by European immigrants, who used similar barns in that worked well in their native climates. rather than those from Mediterranean countries where the climate dictated a different arrangement for the barn. First Floor The first floor has a dirt floor. In its most recent remodeling, the barn appears to have been used for horses only. The areas where the animals have rubbed and worn the wood is higher than it would be for cattle and there is no hay trough at each stall as there would usually be for cattle. However, the interior partitions on the first floor have been changed several times. The inner surface at the lower portion of the stalls is covered with a variety of horizontal wood siding types, probably replaced several times as the constant rubbing of the animals wore it out. One of the two beams supporting the third points of the second floor framing has been changed from wood to steel. Perhaps the old one became infested with termites. This steel beam is spliced at about one third of the distance in from the West end. These beams support 2 x 10 floor framing at 12" to 18" on center for the second floor with diagonal cross bracing at the third points. New full depth blocking was added under the second floor "pony wall" at the time of the structural work on the second floor. Except for the interior of the Tack Room and areas of recent repair, the entire first floor surfaces have been "white-washed." Each stall has a square window-like opening to allow ventilation and view. Each one is about 2' square and approximately 4' above grade. They are trimmed on the outside with a 1 x 4 painted white. The stalls are generally formed by 2x6, T &G wood boards placed horizontally. The construction of the stalls is most consistent on the North side, the side where the beam was replaced. The partition wall forming the inner face of these stalls is set north of the line of the steel beam line by a couple inches. probably because it was easier to reduce the size of the stalls slightly rather than tie this wall to the steel material. The separating partitions between the stalls are shorter --a little more than half-height. On the South side the stalls are built-out to the beam and faced with vertical board and battens in most places. This siding system runs over the face of the beam at the Tack Room and the two adjacent stalls. Three of the four stalls on this side have large, round dowels placed at about 4" on center starting at 4' high and ending at 8'. They form a secure jail-like opening into the stall. Above this height the two stalls on the East end are open. The separating partitions between the two stalls at the East end are short as on the opposite side of the Barn. The partitions separating the remaining two and the Tack Room are full height. It appears as.ifthe most elaborate section --the Tack Room and two adjacent stalls may be original; the two remaining to the East the next most recent and all of the ones on the North side are quite recent. The elaborate detail of the first two was modified when changes were made on the Southeast corner and was abandoned for the Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 3 simpler 2x4 vent grilles when the North side partitions were rebuilt. Obviously it was cheaper to make these simplifications, but it is unclear what the driving reason was for them. There is a concrete slab forming the floor of the Southeast stall. It may be newer than the concrete perimeter footing. The inside surface of this foundation is battered in shape toward the inside, meaning it tapers towards the top. This style was used as recently as the l 940's on some local buildings. The interior of the Tack Room located at the Southwest, front comer is not "white-washed" as the rest of the First Floor is. We believe this was the Tack Room, but it has been highly modified. It appears that for a brief time it was intended to be a living quarters for a ranch hand. Plumbing was installed and a separate door to the outside was cut in. The door and the plumbing fixtures have been removed. The rough plumbing for the fixtures, or at least holes where the pipes used to be, and the rough door framing are still there. The door opening to the outside has been covered with plywood with battens on the outside. The interior door is an older panel style. The Northwest comer has been damaged, apparently by something hitting the outside. The frame is pushed in and the 1xl2s are split. The siding and battens at the Northeast comer have also been damaged, but in this case not enough to move the framing. Many of the battens are broken and a large amount of the siding is rotted and split at the bottom, particularly along the South or weather side. Second Floor The second floor is entirely unpainted. The exposed roof framing was strengthened, possibly at the time the new ply\vood and roofing was added. This strengthening consists of 4x4 framing members set at a diagonal from the floor, projecting up and out from the original bottom plate of the "pony wall" that supported the change in pitch of the Dutch Gambrel roof to a 4x placed at the mid-span to increase the support of the overspanned roof rafters. Also at the original pony wall vertical studs were removed at some locations. However, the overall total of these studs was increased to reduce the span of the top plate: of the pony wall and provide proper support for the roof rafters. The nails exposed where studs were removed on the pony wall are round modem nails. The rafters were overspanned by today's standards, but typical of the way roofs were framed locally up until the 1950s. These new braces are attached with very modem metal clips which .ire consistent with roof work done in the '80s. When the new roofing was added within the last ten years, new plywood sheathing was placed over the existing "skip sheathing." Some of the skip sheathing and some framing members show evidence of a moderate amount of water damage that occurred prior to the re-roofing. T1ere is some fungus growth on these members. The East end door is missing on the second floor. Chicken wire has been placed over about half of the opening in an attempt to keep the birds out. However, both ends of the building are open at the peak and owls or other birds are entering and leaving large piles of fecal matter and other Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 4 debris. The acid content of this material is attacking the wood during times of high ambient moisture and is accelerating the deterioration of the wood. Loading hay into this second story or "hay loft" was done by the use of a pulley running on the wrought iron track \vhich is suspended the full length of the ridge beam, from the cantilevered exterior overhangs all the way through the building. It was placed there so that a pulley could lift bales of hay from a wagon pulled up to either end of the building and bring them up to the second floor. Its use is severely restricted now by the collar ties added during the recent framing additions. There are holes in the eave edges of the floor over each stall for dropping the hay and straw down to the stall below. CONCLUSION We did not find any square nails in any of the siding or interior partitions. We were reluctant to pull any nails for sampling of their size, but from visual examination of wear, it does not appear that the siding is original. Also round nails were exposed in the top plate of the pony wall where they would have been driven from above before the original skip sheathing was added. Lumber framing sizes were found to be inconsistent -which is not uncommon for a farm building. Much of the interior partitions of the first floor have been rebuilt, and other than the increasing cost of lumber, it is not clear why the details of the construction of these partitions changed with each remodel. We believe the same basic floor plan arrangement was maintained from the beginning. A steel beam was added to replace an existing wooden one at some unknown date --perhaps in the 1950s. The second story is in unusually good condition, indicating the barn had been fairly well maintained. The other age indicators such as the arrangement of the Tack Room, the specific construction details of the rolling and swinging doors, etc. are lost. Thus we estimate that the Barn was built sometime in the early part of this century. Perhaps as late as the 1920s. Barns were generally the first building built on a farm, thus this correlates with information reported elsewhere in this document on the age of the Ranch House. TANK HOUSE From our investigations we found this building to have been completely rebuilt in the 1970s or early '80s. This replica building was not built to actually operate. There is no water piping inside. There may be some nearby that is capped. After our investigations we were told that it was brought to the Ranch in 1974 from another site and was completely re-built. Our examination showed that only the siding, some of the trims and probably the steel hoops and wood cooperage of the water tank itself are actually old. They may or may not be from this building originally. The width of the lower half of the horizontal siding differs from the horizontal siding on the upper, slanted portion of siding. This siding is known as "drop siding," a profile that was popular in the 1850s to 1890s. This siding is not used anywhere else on the property except for the attached Milk House. Usually the siding on the Tank House matched the ranch house. There is no interior wall surfacing, which is typical of this type of building. There Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 5 is a recently constructed concrete slab with a perimeter stem wall projecting up about 6". The new sole plate has been bolted into this. The North side has one, four-light, wood window, approximately 2' square set about 3'6" above the slab. There is a second square, single-light window located above the entry door at about 8'+ above the slab. The door is a modem, flush style inappropriate for the building. The sash of the windows is wood, but the molding shapes are not correct as they are modem replacements. The windows, doors and siding comers are trimmed in 1 x 4s painted white. Like the Barn, the main roof above the tank has been re-roofed with plywood and asphalt composition shingles. A portion of this new roofing has blown off at the center edge of the North side, exposing the plywood underneath. The bottom of the water tank has been repeated soaked and dried by standing water trapped outside it's base. As a result, the bottom portion of the wood water tank is checked and probably rotted. The secondary roofing, on the plywood that the tm1k sits on, has completely deteriorated and no longer exists. As a result the rainwater is pouring into the structure below the Tank, causing extensive damage to the framing. This has created a rich environment for termites which have apparently attacked all of the framing from the sole plate to the top of the tower. Using a Delmhorst Moisture Meter, we recorded moistun: readings as high as 50% in framing members near the top. Often modem framing lumber arrives at the job site pre-infected and an increase in moisture content of such wood can cause rapid decay and deterioration. This can occur with a moisture content increase of just 1 -2% over the usual stabilization point of 10 -15%. However, no lumber can survive for long with constant wetting drying cycles where the moisture content goes up as high as was recorded here. Premanufactured metal "hold downs" have been placed in the framing at the juncture between the tilted upper walls and the lower walls, but the:y have been improperly installed. They have been shimmed. which is not proper and the bolt holes are too close together. When stressed, such as during an earthquake, they will likely bre:ak out of the wood members without much force. The wall sheathing was added at the time the framing was built. It appears that there was some attempt to place nails in a pattern that would allow the plywood to be used as a shear panel --which would indicate it was done within the la.st twenty years. However, many of the nails miss the studs and can be seen on the inside. These "shiners" are not gripping anything. Coupled with the improperly installed hold downs, and the deteriorated condition of the sheathing and framing the building will not be able to transfer the shear forces generated by even a moderate earthquake. Architectural detail work --such as the decorative v-groove, vertical siding over the diagonal braces at the tops of the 4x posts at the tank level --has clearly been rebuilt with modem sized lumber. It is probably safe to assume that this is an attempt to copy the original shape although not the original sizes. It is likely that the balustrade at the tank level was originally done with a shaped top rail and balusters of 1 x or turned wood shapes. It has been rebuilt entirely with 2 x 4s, but it is badly deteriorated. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 6 Comparing these details with other Tank Houses in the area may help date this building's original construction. Because the frame was completely rebuilt and the concrete slab added, there is no corroborating evidence such as square nails, balloon framing and the like, of the original construction date. Our best guess of the construction date of the original, based on our experience, the dropped siding, and a few other details, is circa 1880. It could be that the building was not well maintained, because it was not as important after the 1920s. Investigation by others into the history of the local water supply might be a clue to this. If in its original location, the building did cease to be maintained about this time, it may have deteriorated quickly. These vernacular buildings were often poorly detailed such that without constant maintenance of the roof at the base of the tank, water was allowed to enter into the building below. If maintenance ceased about 1920, after 50+ years of neglect, it would indeed be in need of rebuilding by the time it was moved about 1974. CONCLUSION Based on comparison of other local tank houses, our best guess of the date of original construction is circa 1880s. However, when the building was re-built at this new location in 1974, the historically important architectural detail features were compromised by using modem sized lumber. The authenticity of the building is thus lost. The new structural frame, lower roof and plywood sheathing, and much of the architectural detailing of this re-built building has weathered and deteriorated from water intrusion to the point that the frame is in danger of collapsing and is no longer safe. The rest of the exposed lumber needs to be carefully painted as it is badly weather checked. MILK HOUSE Like the adjacent Tank House, this building may also have been relocated to this site from a different farm. The Milk House shares the East end wall with the recently relocated Tank House. The floor slab and roof construction of the Milk House extend to the West to form a breezeway and the floor and roof of the recently constructed public Rest Room. The drop siding matches the Milk House. Thus, we theorize that the Tank House, Milk House and the Rest Room Building were all built or re-built at the same time. The City records may indicate if the Milk House was originally here or if it was moved from another farm. Its small size --6 stalls -- indicates that there were not many cows on either this farm, or the one the Milk House came from; or it may indicate that it was decided to build a truncated version when relocating it to McClellan Ranch. It is attached to the West side of the Tank House, which if actually operating would provide a convenient source of water for the milking operation. The three foot wide feeding trough on the North half is made of concrete and is curved, sloping bottom sloping to a drain at one end so it can be cleaned out with a hose. The 4' high wooden fence at the North edge of the trough originally had 6 places where a 2x4, pinned at the bottom Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 7 could be slid over at the top and locked position around the cow's neck to hold the animal for milking. This fence has been modified, so not all six stall are immediately evident. There is a continuous trough in the floor of the North half, where the animals stood, which allows for the entire area to be hosed down and washed out. The concrete walls of the lower half show the fonn board marks as opposed to modem plywood forms and hence look older. Although this could be the technique used during any rebuilding, unless the building were in use every day as a milk house, the concrete walls and floor show evidence of wear, we believe, that is equal to a building at least fifty years old. Conversely, the raised, concrete, feeding trough located in the center of the floor is not very worn and could have been rebuilt about the time of the Tank House move. Above the concrete wainscot, there are almost continuous large openings, without sash, such that air can flow freely throughout the building. As with the Tank House, the sliding doors, door and window openings and building comers are all trimmed in 1 x material painted white. There were originally three rolling wood doors, but only the track remains at the East wall door. The wood bollard used to protect it from damage when the cows came up the ramp. The rolling doors are simple, tongue and groove construction. The horizontal red siding, occurring only from the top of the concrete walls to the top plate, matches the Tank House. There is a small metal pan forming a sink that is suspended from the framing above the concrete wall in the Northwest comer. This building has been re-roofed with new asphalt shingles and plywood sheathing on top of the original skip sheathing such that it matches the Barn and Tank House. However, the roof of this building has a continuous ridge vent that was clearly part of the original design. There is a roof leak at the connection to the Tank House, probably caused by improper flashing into the wall of the Tank House. The underside of the rafters have been covered with black plastic nailed all along the rake on the Northwest side. The grading allows water to run from a large area of ground South of both the Tank House and Milk House directly toward the South edge of the buildings. It runs into the South door and since the bottom edge of the door stands in water, it has rotted causing the door to come apart. CONCLUSION The evidence is inconclusive, but we estimate that the Milk House was originally built sometime between 1900 and 1930 and then rebuilt in the 1970s when the Tank House was relocated to this site. It is unusual in that it is such a small size. If the concrete work. siding and roof framing of the adjacent Rest Room facility are original to the Milk House, than it is possible that the Milk House was where the cows were milked and the connected building was where the milk was kept cool and prepared for use or shipping. If this was once the case, than we would have expected to find the Tank House built on the West side of this processing room, not the East side where it stands today. More research is necessary to clarify this. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 8 RANCH HOUSE This is a wood framed house with plaster walls and wood clapboard siding. We estimate that it dates from the early '20s to the late '50s. The original windows were wood. Aluminum windows have been added in two places. The original interior portions show evidence of a mild Spanish Eclectic style with exposed beams in the Living Room and all interior wood work originally containing a hand painted "faux graining" pattern with additional decorative gold leaf stenciling .. Built-in wood gutters are still evident at the bow window at the Breakfast Room and at the Porte Cochere. If the bow window and the roof of the Porte Cochere were later additions, than the wood gutters may have been a special requirement of the owner at that time. It is more likely that with built-in wood gutters they are part of the original design of the house. Metal gutters such as the "Ogee" shape on the rest of the house, became immediately popular after W.W.II, up to that time they were used only on some houses. The rectangular downspout style occurring here has been used locally since the 1950s. Changes to the House The house has been altered in two major ways. First there is an addition of about ten feet by sixteen feet to the West end with a simple, aluminum sliding window. By our examination we dated this addition as occurring in the '60s or '70s. There is one exterior door and it is wide enough for disabled access. In later discussions with the City we were told this addition was done when the it became a public building. Providing for access by the disabled was the second major way the building was altered. In 1984, when the City took over operation of the ranch. the doorway to the kitchen was widened and the interior doors at four locations were replaced with wider ones. all to accommodate access for the disabled. These doors are new solid core, flush wood doors with more modern wood casings, rather than the original single panel doors with a slightly older style casing. The doors marked (E) on the attached floor plan are existing. We assume that it was at this time that accessible bathroom (marked Bath 1) and the ramp down to the Conference/Living Room was installed. The ramp probably sits over a single step corresponding to the one to the side Hallway. We would estimate from the style and sizes of the Kitchen cabinets as well as the kitchen layout that this room dates from the '20s to the '50s. The Breakfast Room might have been open more to the Kitchen originally. A new upper cabinet was added over the freestanding stove, covering what was a gravity ceiling vent typical of the time. The trim on this cabinet at the ceiling line does not quite match the rest. Paint scrapings might yield more information. In the Kitchen, the existing exhaust duct for the recent fan/hood over the kitchen range travels up through the new wall cabinet and exhausts directly into the attic. There is no duct carrying this to the outside. Given the location of the brick flue right next to this wall, it is likely that originally the Kitchen stove vented into this brick chimney. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 9 As part of the original Spanish Eclectic style, the Living Room floor was lower by one step than the rest of the floors in the house. The other attributes of this style evident here are the shape and tiling of the fireplace, and the faux painted g:raining of the exposed beams and wood windows. This same faux graining was originally on all of the wood work throughout the house. Unfortunately it has been painted over. It can still be seen on the interior of the closet in the main entry hall. It is distinctive in that each flat ::>anel of the doors was decorated with a gold stripe set in about one inch from the panel edge. This gold striping is also used to decorate the false beams of the Living Room ceiling. Each Bedroom/Office contains an original closet as evidence by the door type and trim. Each closet also has a ceiling vent opening to the attic. This was common well into the early half of this century, but the vent is rectilinear in shape and made of sheet metal, which would place it well into the '20s or later. It is common in houses from the turn of the century onward, to place bathrooms between adjacent bedrooms. It is likely that the new accessible Bath, in between these two bedrooms, is a remodel of the original Bathroom in this location. In the Crawl area we found some places where the subfloor had been pierced by the original plumbing. The pattern seemed to indicate that a tub once stood where the lavatory is now. Other holes were inconclusive in determining original plumbing locations. However, the only remaining place for the original water closet would be in the alcove where the new one is. Perhaps a pedestal lavatory was on the East wall behind the adjacent Closet, immediately across from the water closet. The shower, tile work and layout of the second Bathroom appear to date from the late '40s through the early '50s. The toilet and lavatory have been replaced. This entire area including the Rear Entry Hall and entry door. the Janitor's closet and the projecting wing wall at the North end of this Entry Hall lead one to believe that this ar1~a has been remodeled. (see comments below on floor plan.) The Office/Sun Porch which currently houses Friends of Steven's Creek Trail was glassed in and the inside walls were covered with knotty pine paneling. The aluminum window on the East side and probably the wood casement windows on the North and South sides are replacements for the original windows. The application of tongue and groove, vertical board, knotty pine paneling was a popular remodel to do in the late '40s and throughout the '50s. Its popularity died out in the '60s. The scalloped trim board at the top of 1:he wall would seem to date it at the earlier part of the trend. (See also the comments below on the baseboard registers such as the one in this room.) The sliding aluminum window is a brand that was popular in the '70s. Thus, the evidence so far shows that the porch was enclosed with wood windows and paneled in the late '40s, then in the '70s. or in 1984, the original windows were replaced. Further research is needed here. The roof framing of the overhanging drive-through or Porte Cochere is exposed in the attic. It does not seem to be newer than its surrounding house framing. (See our opening comments about the built-in wood gutters at this location.) The ceiling of this overhang is exposed to the Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 10 exterior and is covered with smooth surface, tongue and groove boards with a v-groove pattern at the edge. These boards are cupping from internal moisture problems. As with other buildings on this site, plywood has been placed over the original skip sheathing of the roof framing. However, both this building and the adjacent Nature Museum --which appears to have been the garage to the Ranch House, are roofed with a shingle that appears to be made of asbestos. This was placed on top of plywood which is over the old skip sheathing. These shingles have deteriorated due to moss growing on their surface and other environmental problems. Miscellaneous Electrical system -The original wiring is knob and tube. Later additions are done with Romex. Most recent wiring additions, done since the City took over, have been completed with surface mounted conduit, which avoids the problem of patching the plaster walls. All the lighting fixtures have been changed to surface mounted fluorescent, office-type fixtures. Mechanical system -The furnace is quite new. We understand it was replaced when the City took over the property and built the addition within the last ten years. Some ducting was reworked at that time. Some ducting in the crawl space has exterior insulation, which appears to contain asbestos and should be tested. The only other clues as to the age of the system is the baseboard registers and the thermostat. The registers are large square units of stamped steel. We estimate their date between 1920 and 1950. Although the 1937 the catalog information we checked displayed much more modem devices, it can be assumed the older style was still available. The thermostat is a more modem design than appears in the 1937 catalog, and we know of a duplicate of this exact thermostat being installed new in 1952 in another project, so we would date it between 1940 and 1950. As a result we would date the original heating system between 1920 and 1950. Sidin~ The siding is a solid wood, wide clapboard or bevel type. The paint is starting to fail, its surface is chalking and cracking. We believe this is the original siding as it goes down behind the concrete porch and it fits the 1920 to 1950s time period. However, the siding on the addition matches the original. so perhaps some areas of the siding were repaired or changed. The siding in the entire area above the Basement door is water-streaked. This could be from condensation forming under the Porte Cochere roof or possibly is evidence of internal leakage starting at the roof and carrying down to the Basement (see discussion below.) The siding on the sides of the Porte Cochere roof is stressed and cracking. This is possibly due to the joists being overspanned and/or the columns supporting the gable end tipping outward. Hardware All of the door handles in the building have been changed within the last ten to fifteen years. All doors except the basement doors have a lever handle to allow access. This particular style has only been readily available in the last fifteen years or less. The exceptions are the Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 11 interior and exterior basement doors. While not lever style handles, they appear to have been replaced about the same time. All of the handles have a commercial type brushed chrome finish which does not match the original . Except for the Sun Porch, the only exposed window hardware is a double-hung window lock, mounted at the center of each window with a metal lift handle mounted at the bottom. These are a non-descript style that have been available, virtually unchanged, for fifty years. At the Sun Porch there are two casement windows on the comers and two aluminum sliding windows on the East wall. The casement window hardware is typical of casement hardware available for the last thirty years. The horizontal aluminum sliding window here and at the enlarged office were done at the time of the addition -mid 1980s. Basement The main room of the basement has full height concrete walls. The Furnace Room has concrete walls up about 4 112 feet. From there up a gypsum board on wood stud partition, constructed fairly recently, separates this room for the Crawl area. A plaster wall with wood lath over wood studs separates the Furnace Room from the rest of the Basement. The wood piers in the crawl areas that support the wood floor girders are not nailed. This was common up through the 1950s. The wood form board patterns show on the conc:rete surface indicating that these walls were constructed before the common use of plywood to build forms. The North east comer area of about l 0 square feet around the exterior door had standing water of about 1/8" deep. The floor tile throughout this area is lifting and breaking up, and the bottom portion of the North wall is deteriorating due to moisture coming through it. The flush door to the exterior is swollen and binding. Floor plan layout comments Some of the single panel doors have a casing shape that is slightly more modem than the original. This would indicate that some remodeling took place even before the accessibility changes were made. The shape of the Rear Entry Hall with its indented outside entry, and its wing wall near the attic access panel projecting into the room, does not fit the way the rest of the house is laid out, nor the style of the original house. Perhaps this entire area, with Sun Porch and Bath was the Master Bedroom originally. Some destructive testing may yield the answer. The concrete of the front porch might be an addition, but we think it was more likely part of the original design even though the wood siding goes down behind it. This improper construction detail was still being used in the late '50s but is no longer allowed. There is a gap at the base of the wall where it goes down behind the concrete allowing water sitting on the porch, which doesn't have a strong slope away from the building, to keep the wood siding wet. There is no access to this from the basement, but a comer of it can be seen in the Crawl space. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 12 The porch at the entry to the addition on the West end was installed by the City at the time of the addition in order to accommodate the access for the disabled to the building by virtue of the gently slope sidewalk heading West. The aluminum roof over this porch is clearly a recent addition. CONCLUSION The original heating system, door hardware, bathroom fixtures, light fixtures and other age indicators have been replaced, so it is extremely difficult to accurately date this building. From the evidence given above. we conclude that this house was built as early as the later part of the 1920s and as late as the early 1950s. It is not possible to narrow this thirty year time span because of the many small and large changes that have taken place at many different times. Although the Conference/Living Room is a nice example of the Spanish Mediterranean style, and the exterior shape and siding evoke a good example of an early "California Ranch Style", the house has been so altered that there is no longer a coherent presentation of any historically important style or attributes. Destructive testing, which we are not authorized to do, will be necessary to find further evidence to confirm the conclusions herein. This would include paint scrapings, opening holes in walls, and removing sections of some surfacing materials inside and outside. Some of the duct work in the crawl space will need to be removed to gain entry to the back portions of the house crawl space. Also. further corroborating or substantiating evidence may be gained from the historical review being prepared by Archives & Architecture. The next page contains an approximate chronology of the four buildings. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 13 PART II -CONSTRUCTION CHRONOLOGY It will be evident by reading the previous discussion of our field investigations of these four buildings why we are unable to be very accurate in the dates shown below. The buildings have either been highly altered or in one or two cases moved onto the site and completely rebuilt. Both has resulted in covering or removing the architectural details and features that most clearly date a building. Thus the dates given below are our estimates. Further research and destructive testing may yield different or more accurate dates. BARN 1900 to 1920 -Original construction c. 1930 to 1950 -Possible modification to two an[mal stalls at Southeast comer c.1950 -Steel beam on North side added and animal stalls modified c.1950 to present -Animal stalls North side continually modified c.1950 to present -Tack Room modified mid 1970s to mid 1980s - Old roofing removed, new plywood roof sheathing and roofing added Structural supports in second floor added/modified to support roof Possibly painted at this time Probably plywood doors at both ends built at this time. TANK HOUSE 1880s to 1900 -originally built at some other location mid 1970s to mid 1980s - moved here and rebuilt using entirely new concrete floor, new wood framing, plywood sheathing under siding, and portions of siding from more than one structure Possibly painted at this time. New asphalt shingles with plywood underlayment at level over tank probably added at this time MILK HOUSE 1880s to 1920s? -Originally built (at some other location?) Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report 1900 to 1920s? -Concrete floor and concrete lower half of wall mid 1970s to mid 1980s - new roofing possibly new paint and new stalls at trough perhaps adjacent building on West side converted to Rest Room at this time RANCH HOUSE 1920s to 1940s -Original portion with partial basement and wood gutters built Sun porch paneled in Knotty pine mid 1950 to mid 1970s -Kitchen cabinet/stove changed by owner Transite roof shingles over plywood added? mid 1970s to mid 1980s - Page 14 Interior changed by City including door/hardware and Bath 1 to accommodate disabled access New furnace system and miscellaneous other changes Exterior porch for disabled access and addition all at West end NOTE: These conclusions are based on evidence uncovered and physical examination as of this writing. Future evidence and new historical research may lead to these conclusions being rendered invalid. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 15 PART III -FLOOR PLANS The following pages contain floor plans that document the existing arrangement of the interiors of each buildings and note locations of various features and problem areas. They were drawn from field information gathered by the Architect throughout the first three months of 1995. They are intended to be used a guide only, their accuracy is not guaranteed due to the limited nature of the field investigation. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 16 BARN -FIRST FLOOR PLAN -I ,~ / / l I H:::ff::E:::L --~ / 0!'2..~+ ~ ~ d Aff!'.OA. 'Z4 30 ~ J i -::"'I 4-0 '!:. .! ~r f'A tt-fij'..,.J P<>H...-:Jt:====:==:====:==:==;m !( I _/ f . ------r~iv.01iJ4 F'rto•t..t"" -;; Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 ·H DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 17 BARN -SECONll FLOOR PLAN ,- K.f ) ·j ~tit, ;'.:t '---' I I t%'1 @ VZ1 I 01 'l.~4" 8 ~t. A p~o'1-. "214-:;o 41 [ r f "'(f, r\itrl~ ~:>Orie( Hll'I' 'b ~"f Al.L.$ ~EL..:Ml Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates ~ ,,, I " /..-, __ _ I __.. ................. -~~x- J Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 18 TANK HOUSE/MILK HOUSE FLOOR PLAN v I --....... / \ , ( \ ' "fANi::. l . ' ~ (_f'.e,o./6-) ' J -... "" '-...._ ...-/ . "'!.z· ,• .~~1 -i L '' \ I l I I I I - .... n ! I \.-\ i ~ 4 Ji i ·~ . .., l~i I -: ~ ~ ·.: ... ' ~ "' I 0 .,j ~ :: I \~ ! I ~ I i i • ~ I "'I , I I ') I .... () "' {> i ~ < I:... ':.!.. I' I ; .2. \ ! -I' I.___ I. I 'I :::I. I, '::' : i ;; ~ •r ~ i -! !! ~· l I ! ~ l.oGl<.£'1 I ! II <iA1~ -1---- ...,, Ne vJ r<.~~ K'.ooM t;A.C. IL •1-r Li~ 11~ ,_ ~rS"tJ~N Of ~ t'1 e. ltoor ~ r''''L.oo ie-~. ~ Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates I ~N~ ~louse: ~!'l~t:. Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 19 RANCH HOUSE FLOOR PLAN ol 0 v ---- ·. --.... DN "' I ! I -------------------·----------·-------------·-----< ,, +-· .... ' a\ ""' L t i I I _?\ CLO ~~~,.. VIN Lr /1 < ... 11.ru-..H 1i '-' r- ~ -------- ,---- r;,,-n.~ 1 i_l.0 "" ~~ ........................ ~ s-rol(.""c..t;:.-' e,1<.e-1<1"~ i --,----, ,:•, - -,_:t_---; --------------- ~. • z.r.. -:!: ----------------·-------------¥ . YH • ~ ..... I - ,, -ii' -.... i :i ~ ! .. t I ~-· f:'uaio~ -er~·~"--* 10-t >! -+--+ , i +I Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 20 RANCH HOUSE BASEMENT PLAN ~ ~-l 01 A m i'?<1 . i.~1"" s f(Ct>'f-. '7?0 ~ ('' 1 T. ' I ,A.c<:-E'>~ 1-10U: 2 I ' ! ~ fl..t.61"e;ll. fA~'f11ioN ·-!~ ' i3>1X~El"taJJ ; 1up ,,-fo~ ... ' i'e I 1: "' I I ---T--------,,--tr-------"" ' ' :.. '3EA'1 ,I C.'(P. ~o I :j 01-1 sf~os I "f.I.& fl.O•IC. WA"TCYl. A P,,1>'/C _.-)I ,fw~J ~ -~I ~fo""'''"-.:;'(e~""' c.LA Joi~ DAM4C.l. _r-· I --.u11111£1t c,r-·tp' CONC. W"I.'-I I WOQO ~fAI .... I (/V') I r I . __::. I .... ~ Cf'V\t W l-':>f,.,..CE: Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 21 PART IV -RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POTENTIAL USES OF THE BUILDINGS To begin the process of deciding on the use(s) of the four historic buildings on site, we offer the following possibilities. All of the listed uses for these historic buildings are feasible, although some are more desirable than others. Based on our preliminary review of the code with regard to occupancy type, almost all uses require some construction cost, over and above repair costs. Some require such a great expense, that they may not be acceptable. All of the buildings on site require repair work to be done as soon as possible --some of it is minor. some major. This repair work is independent of the eventual use of the buildings and is a addressed in a separate section. Revenue generation by the various Ranch uses i5. certainly a legitimate concern to be reviewed by the City, but it has not been considered in creating this list. There may be other uses, or concerns generated by the review committee in addition to those listed here. We have tried to keep our list and our subsequent code review general in natur1~ in order that other specific, proposed uses could be compared by the committee to conclude the feasibility. We will be happy to review the impact of any uses or ideas that can not be detennined by comparing to those listed here and the subsequent code and other sections of this text. BARN 1. Livestock Barn working farm animals farm and animal exhibits husbandry research: for example "back-breeding" cows to historic type(s) housing of wagons and equipment used in operating McClellan Ranch either as a demonstration farm or an actual operating farm ; Public uses such as square dancing (would require leveling and packing of dirt floor or concrete floor with wood overlay. Also, structural beam/column location changes may be required to accommodate minimum 12' x 12' clear areas.) demonstration meetings connectc!d with farming second floor could be set up as meeting/lecture room with outside stair Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates (note: no access would be available for the disabled. but but this is acceptable under the SHBC) Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 22 TANK HOUSE 1. Demonstration or exhibit as part of a demonstration farm 2. Ticket booth for access to farm events (would need fencing to control traffic flow or when rebuilt, relocate to different part of grounds) 3. Storage for: traffic control materials for public events teaching equipment for demonstrations or farm exhibits MILK HOUSE 1. Demonstration or exhibit as part of a demonstration farm 2. The North half of the building could be used as a ticket booth or other traffic control point for access to the rest of the Ranch. RANCH HOUSE 1. Single family living use for a caretaker, which would allow removal of the mobile home currently on site. 2. Demonstration house of 1920s farm life, which would be more modern than other farm exhibits in the area. 3. Continue existing use as meeting place and offices 4. Offices only. no public meetings 5. Other public uses such as small group lectures and teaching adults and/or children in classroom settings, could be connected with agricultural research facility use of entire park Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 23 PART V -SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CODES In preparation for making final recommendations of potential uses for the four historic buildings at McClellan Ranch Park, we performed a preliminary review of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) for each building. This issue will need to be revisited after the final selection of uses is made so the recommendations for the Work Program can be adjusted properly. Since 1989, State of California law has said that for historical buildings, the governing code shall be the State Historical Building Code (SHBC) which is a performance code, not a perscriptive code like the UBC. As the governing code, this oft missunderstood document takes precedence over all other codes. However, it is normally only used for those buildngs officially documented on an "historic resources.inventory" maintained by a city or other government entity. Therefore, for we chose to use the UBC for the major portion of this review because in our research into the buildings we discovered that: 1) The Ranch House may not be old enough to qualify as "historic" --a property of some historical importance that is 50 years or older; 2) The Tank House was rebuilt in the 1970s; 3) The Milk House, while older, is so use-specific it would have to be highly modified, and would thus loose its historical significance Should the SHBC eventually govern, it will not change the Repair and Restoration Work items nor will it materially change the alterations required to change the uses of the buildings. Elsewhere we have listed Repair and Restoration ~ items that should be done no matter what use is eventually decided for these buildings. Nme that in all scenarios for the Tank House, we are recommending completely rebuilding the structure. Special detailed requirements of the applicable codes must be reviewed again, after the use of each building has been designated. General parameters of the use are given here. These interpretations are subject to change based on final use determination, review of overlapping code requirements, etc. BARN. TANK HOUSE & MILK HOU~' Operating as "Livestock Barns, or Milking Barns'' these buildings would fall under the rules of Occupancy Type: "Group M, Division 3" given in the UBC. 1. ., .) . Existing Buildings are Type V (five) N (no hour) construction and they do not exceed the area limitations. Occupancy separation requirements between different uses do not apply as all adjacent uses are the same with the exception of the Public Rest Room, which is separated by a breezeway. The required distance between buildings is acceptable as all are the same use . Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 24 4. Exit doors for this use only can be as narrow as 30" wide and only one exit is required for each building including the Barn as all are under the 15.000 sf limit. 5. All other exiting requirements for levels, widths, etc. are to be as contained in UBC Chapter 33, or as modified by the SHBC. Therefore, as existing doors on the Barn and Milk House roll open, they must be kept open during use. 6. Disabled access issues were not reviewed specifically because: a) their complexity is dependent upon the use; b) the most complicated acceptable use would still be easily addressed within the improvement and repair construction work as all floor levels except the second floor of the barn are very close to the ground. 7. Uses other than as "livestock buildings" trigger more stringent exiting and disabled access requirements. 8. Other code deficiencies are addressed as a part of the repair work listed elsewhere. RANCH HOUSE If operated as a single family residence the building would fall under the UBC rules for Occupancy Type: "Group R, Division 3,"(known as "R3" Occupancy). As an educational occupancy it would be classified as Occupancy Type: "Group E, Division 2,"(E2), and if the current office occupancy continues, it will be classified as an Occupancy Type: "Group B, Division 2,"(B2), with the Conference Room or other Assembly Room being subject to the rules for "Group A, Division 3." 1. Existing Buildings are Type V (five) N (no hour) construction and they do not exceed the area limitations. ,.., Occupancy separation requirements between different uses do not apply unless the house is subdivided into more than one of the above Occupancy Types, for example, part offices and part educational uses. For a building of this size the exception is an "assembly room" which is treated differently under the occupancy rules, but allowed to co-exist within any one occupancy, without triggering occupancy separations. 3. The current Conference Room, if treated as an assembly room is limited to 28 occupants. 4. Some minor changes such as addition of smoke detectors will be required in all occupancy types. 5. Use as a single family residence would require only minor, low cost changes. 6. Educational or classroom use is limited to 50 children maximum for the entire building. 7. As an office or B2 Occupancy Type For building occupant loads over 30, fire rated doors and frames are needed at door locations opening into the Hallways, as well as the addition of a gypsum board "cap" or "lid" in the attic to achieve a true fire-rated corridor. If the building occupant load exceeds 50 people, the corridor widths are insufficient, which would be a major construction change. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 25 If the building occupant load exce:eds 50 people, the exit doors must be changed to corridor widths to swing out. This would have the greatest impact on the rear Entry Hall as it would require completely rebuilding the steps, etc. Exit doors will be required to have a standard sign placed over them saying "This door to remain unlocked during business hours". 8. For B2, E and A Occupancy Types, the Rear Entry Hall exit door must be widened to 32" minimum. Also an exterior landing must be added, which is a major cost item. 9. For all Occupancy Types, risers on the exterior Rear Entry Hall stairs are too high, and on all stairs, the handrails must be extended beyond the top and bottom of the stair run by 12". l 0. The gate in the fence between the Nature Museum and the House must be operable at all times from within the courtyard. 11. Basement use is limited to Storage due to, among other things, the width, and rise/run of the basement stair as well as not meeting the minimum 6'-8" headroom rule. 12. Emergency exit lighting is needed for all occupancies except residence. 13. If occupancy of the total building exceeds 50 people, illuminated exit signage is needed unless the Building Official accepts otherwise. 14. The underside of the interior Basement stairs requires a gypsum board wrap to meet fire resistance requirements. 15. Draft stops in the attic are not required in any of the occupancy types as the building is under 3,000 sf total. 16. The existing building has been modified in the recent past to accommodate access by the disabled. Therefore, although the building is not 100% compliant with the current access requirements of code, but is reasonable and should be reviewed by the Building Official. Unless there are major changes to the Rear Entry Hall door, as delineated above, it is not accessible and therefore requires an "area of evacuation assistance of at least 30" x 48" to be created and approved by the Building Official. 17.. Other code deficiencies are addressed as a part of the repair work listed elsewhere. It is important for all readers of this report to remember that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal law not a building code. As such, it is quite different from the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or any other code. as it is not administered by the City Building Official. It is only interpreted in the courts. ADA compliance must be part of an overall, on-going program by the property owner, in this case the City of Cupertino. to continuously and incrementally work toward full compliance throughout all facilities owned by the City. In addition, building codes, as complicated, extensive, written directives are subject to interpretation by each enforcing body or user of the code. Further clouding the issue of disabled access then. are the conflicting requirements of the State of California's version of the UBC's access requirements. known as "California Access Code -Title 24" which is interpreted and Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 26 enforced by local building officials. Title 24 conflicts with the ADA in some specifics. As the Architect, we cannot presume to know how the enforcing official will interpret Title 24. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides that alterations to a facility must be made in such a manner that, to the maximum extent feasible, the altered portions of the facility are readily accessible to and by individuals with disabilities. It is not within the Architect's Scope of Work for this project to survey the path of travel throughout this facility to this Project. nor deal with other ADA requirements within the Project area. The City of Cupertino acknowledges that the requirements of ADA will be subject to various and possibly contradictory interpretations. The Architect, therefore has used its best professional efforts to interpret applicable ADA requirements and other federal, state and local, laws, rules, codes, ordinances and regulations as they apply to this Project. The Architect however, cannot and does not warrant nor guarantee that this project will comply with all interpretations of the ADA requirements and/or the requirements of other federal, state and local laws, rules codes, ordinances and regulations as they apply to this Project. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 27 PART VI -WORK PROGRAM of REPAIRS and IMPROVEMENTS After investigating the· current condition of each of the four historic buildings at McClellan Ranch, and factoring in the proposed changes necessary to accommodate the proposed uses of the buildings, the following items of work will need to be done to repair and improve the buildings. REPAIR and RESTORATION WORK This work is required in order to stabilize or slow deterioration of the buildings or repair existing damage. It focuses on protecting the building and its contents. The list is prioritized for each building with the first items being most urgent. The notation listed in bold typeface indicates the urgency of the item, although be aware that 2.ll items that deal with deteriorated wood are urgent. For example. replacing the Tank House door with one that is historically correct, will also get rid of a current source of current infection and help stop the spread of the microorganisms eating away at the building. BARN 1. Repair/Replace missing screening all the way to the roof ridge to keep out birds. Seal all other openings where birds or animals may enter. Install temporary doors over East end to keep rain out of the structure. Urgent 2. Re-grade surrounding ground surface to provide positive drainage away from the entire perimeter foundation and the entries. This may include drain pipes and dry sumps. Urgent 3. Repair structural frame at Northwest comer. Urgent 4. Repair/r:eplace boards and battens wherever damaged or rotted, particularly on the South side. Important 5. Rebuild rolling and swinging doors at main entries of first and second floor. This should be done only after the re-grading operatmn, and should correct the style problems, and incorporate a working pulley and rail system at the top as discussed in the text. Important 6. Repair partition walls broken or missing. Dependent on use 7. White wash/repaint entire first floor interior. Dependent on use Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report 8. Replace 2x4 wood facia with historically correct material. Important 9. Repaint entire exterior. Important 10. Consider adding a concrete floor if appropriate to the use. TANK HOUSE 1. Replace missing roofing at level immediately below tank. (This item may be incorporated into item 2.) Extremely urgent Page 28 2. Disassemble the entire Tank House and rebuild the frame using entirely new lumber. Reinstall the existing historic finish materials when completed and replace the rotted trims with new. historically correct items. (Item 1 may be incorporated into this work.) Extremely urgent 3. Re-grade South side with a swale to carry water away from the foundation. 4. Repair missing and damaged roofing at upper level above tank. Urgent 5. Replace the deteriorated door with historically correct type and style. Important 6. If not done under previous work, rebuild the deteriorated railings and other trims at tank level with material that is historically correct. Important 7. Repaint the entire exterior of the building. Important 8. Install cover over tank, to keep small animals out and halt the deterioration of the tank from within. Important MILK HOUSE 1. Repair roof leak and replace damaged wood at Southeast corner. Urgent Re-grade South side with a swale to carry water away from the foundation. Urgent " .) . Repair/replace rotted wood at various locations. Very important 4. Rebuild rotted rolling door on South side with new lumber. Very important Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 29 5. Rebuild fence stalls to be historically correct as described in text. Dependent on use 6. Repaint entire interior and exterior. RANCH HOUSE 1. Find and fix leak at Northeast comer of Basement. Investigate from the roof down. May require exca\'ation, French drain and sump at bottom of Basement wall, replacement of gutter and damaged siding. May require a rain cover or roof over the exterior entry to the Basement to keep rain out permanently. lU rgent 2. Clean, repair and replace gutters and downspouts as needed and repair/replace rotted rafter tails. Very Important 3. Investigate source of problem, then repair siding and soffit at the Porte Cochere. At the same time. repair the leaning columns supporting this roof. Important 4. Investigate the foundation crack located on the Northeast face of the Sun Porch, as discussed in the text, by accessing the back of the crawl space. This requires removing various ducts and pipes. Repair foundation if crack extends all the way through. Important 5. Replace roofing with plywood, felt and new asphalt shingles as described in the text. Replace and improve all associated metal flashings. Important 6. Remove wood from behind the upper pmtion of the concrete front porch. At the same time install metal flashings to stop future water intrusion into this area. Important 7. Repaint entire exterior of the building. Important to the longevity of the building 8. Vent the Kitchen stove exhaust fan to tht:: exterior, not just to the attic as it is now. Important to the longevity of the building 9. Add insulation to the attic after first verifying that all "knob and tube" type wiring has been abandoned. Important to reducing operating costs 10. Replace single pane aluminum windows with new, double pane, wood windows that not only match the building better, but provide better insulation. Important to reducing operating costs Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 30 IMPROVEMENT WORK The list of improvement work to be done to the four historical buildings in the Park is dependent on the uses selected by the Committee. Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report PART III -CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES for Repairs and Improvements Page 31 Construction costs are broken into two parts: 1) Repair, restoration and stabilization: and 2) Improvements. The lists from the previous sections were used. There is some overlap. REPAIR and RESTORATION WORK Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 DRAFT McClellan Ranch Report Page 32 IMPROVEMENT WORK File: Mclanrep Mieger, Mineweaser & Associates Copyright May 5, 1995 (DIU~Ff) McCLELLAN RANCH PARK NEEDS ASSESS~~NT PROJECT HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA R>R MR. STEPHEN DOWLING DIRECTOR OF PARKS-RECREATION CITY OF CUPERTINO CITY HAU.. 10300 TORRE A VENUE CUPERTINO, CA 95014 BY ARCHWES AND ARCHITECTURE GLORY ANNE LAFFEY, HISTORICAL CONSULT ANT 353 SURBER DRIVE SAN JOSE, CA 95123 (~) 227-2657 PREPARED BY GLORY ANNELAFFEY JANUARY 27, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS Historical Context ............................................................................................................... 1 The Prehistoric Period ......................................................................................................... 1 The Spanish Period (1777-1822) ........................................................................................ 1 The Mexican Period (1822-1846) ....................................................................................... 2 Rancho San Antonio ............................................................................................... 3 Rancho Quito .......................................................................................................... 3 The Early American Period (1846-1869) ............................................................................ 4 l..and Use ................................................................................................................. 4 Stockraising ............................................................................................................. 5 Grain and Hay Production ....................................................................................... 5 Horticulture and Viticulture .................................................................................... 7 Villages and Urban Growth ................................................................................................. 8 Literature Cited and Consulted .......................................................................................... 14 Maps Map 1. Cupertino Area, 1876 (Thompson & West) .......................................................... 6 Map 2. Cupertino and Surrounding Area, 1899 (U.S.G.S) ................................................ 9 Map 3. Cupertino and Surrounding Area, 1940 (U.S.G.S) .............................................. 12 HISTORICAL CONTEXT The Prehistoric Period The first inhabitants of the oak and chaparral covered hills on the western side of the Santa Clara Valley were the members of the Ohlone or Costanoan Native American language group. Although the Ohlones shared cultural and linguistic similarities, the tribe consisted of eight distinct politically autonomous linguistic groups. The Santa Clara Valley along the banks of the Guadalupe Rive:r and Coyote Creek was occupied by the Tamyen or Tamien group made up of four or more triblets with their own territories within the valley. The natives congregated in rancherias or concentrations of small villages that were related to each other by kinship ties (Levy 1978). These early people established their settlements near a dependable water source and other easily available subsistence needs. Inhabitants in the northern portion of the valley were able to exploit both the river and estuary environments in addition to nearby grasslands and oak woodlands for fish, game, and vegetable materials. Temporary camps were also established in scattered locations in order to collect seasonal foodstuffs or materials that were not locally available. While on his expedition north to San Francisco, Colonel Don Juan Bautista de Anza and his party camped near a dried up stream bed on March 25, 1776. That day being dedicated to St. Joseph of Copertino, Italy, de Anza named the site Arroyo San Jose de Cupertino in the Saint's honor. Years later, this creek was renamed as Stevens Creek. The arrival of the first Spanish exploration parties marked the beginning of the end of the Clllone lifestyle in the Santa Clara Valley. Spain began colonizing California as a response to the threat to its northern borderland by the Russian settlement at Fort Ross and English and American explorations and commercial expansion. California ports were also necessary to provide provisions for Spain's fleet of Manila galleons in the Pacific. The Spanish Period (1777-1822) The process of Spanish settlement of the Santa Clara Valley began in 1769 with the initial exploration by Sergeant Jose Ortega of the Portola Expedition. Subsequent Spanish ex- plorers noted the desirable settlement conditions of the Santa Clara Valley, including rich bottom lands, numerous Indian settlements, available timber, and a constant source of fresh water. In 1777, Jose Joaquin Moraga and Fray Tomas de la Pefia established Mission Santa Clara on the west bank of the Guadalupe River. Within a year the El Pueblo de San Jose de Guadalupe was located on the Guadalupe's east bank. The Guadalupe River became the boundary between the lands controlled by the mission and the pueblo. The Spanish colonization strategy utilized thr,ee institutions-military, civil, and religious. The military government, represented by the presidios at San Francisco and Monterey, protected the Spanish frontier against other Europeans and the colonists against Indian attacks. The Catholic Church established missions to convert and civilize the aboriginal population. The missions were the dominant colonizing influence in California during the Spanish period. Each mission's sphere of influence radiated from its center, with buildings for worship, housing, and industries, outwards to surrounding grain fields and livestock grazing lands. In November 1777, Lt. Moraga set out from San Francisco with fourteen settlers and their families, totaling sixteen people. The pueblo at San Jose was the first civil settlement es- t tablished by the Spanish in California. The p1lleblo's primary function was to supplement the crops grown by the missions to support the garrisons at Monterey and San Francisco. Representing the Spanish government, Moraga laid out the town, allocating house lots and cultivation plots (suertes) to each settler. The common lands (ejido) surrounding the pueblo were used primarily for grazing the livestock of the pueblo inhabitants. The early pueblo colonists planted crops of com, beans, wheat, hemp and flax, and set out small vineyards and orchards. A portion of the crops were taxed for the support of the soldiers at the presidios and to provision ships in the harbors. Surplus crops were traded in Monterey for manufactured goods shipped from Spain and Mexico. Rudimentary industrial activities included grist milling, making wine and brandy, hemp processing, and soap making. As the cattle herds increased, the hide and tallow trade became an important element in California's economy. The Mexican Period (1822-1846) When the civil wars erupted in Mexico in 1810, California found itself cut off from Mexico, the source of supplies and primary market for surplus crops. During this period, illegal trading took place with the foreign ships that surreptitiously visited California ports. Seamen off these ships became the va111guard of American and Anglo-European settlers in California By the 1820s, the lagging economy of the area began to increase due to the changing ad- ministrative policies of the new Mexican gov•::mment Two of these policies had im- portant local ramifications. The first was the legalization of trade with foreign ships in the ports of San Francisco and Monterey. Thi:: traders exchanged tea, coffee, spices, clothing, leather goods, etc., for tallow and hides. Under the stimulus of this commerce, the settlements around the bay became lively trade centers. The second change in policy to have far-reaching effects in California was the secularization of the missions and the establishment of large, private land grants (Broek 1932:40-46). With the change of governmental control from Spain to Mexico in 1822 and the secularization of the missions, came changing land utilization and ownership patterns. In 1824, Mexico passed a law for the settlement of vacant lands in an effort to stimulate further colonization. Any citizen, whether foreign or native, could select a tract of unoccupied land so long as it was a specific distance away from the lands held by missions, pueblos, and Indians. The grantee petitioned the governor for a specific tract, which after investigation and if there were no objections, was granted. Thirty-eight land grants were issued between 1833 and 1845 in the Santa Clara Valley, with parts of two rancho grants located within Cupertino's current city limits. When a citizen was granted rancho land, he was required to occupy the property and to build a dwelling within a certain period. Many of the ranchos granted in the Santa Clara Valley had received provisional grants from the a/cal.de several years before the official petition to the Governor. E.ach rancho had a hacienda which was in many cases a self-supporting village, composed of the main rancho residence, laborers' housing, corrals, grist mill (tahona), tannery, etc., surrounded by vineyards and cultivated fields. Overseeing the immense acreage and herds of cattle, the California ranchero and his va- queros spent many hours on horseback, the favored form of transportation. Cattle, al- lowed to range freely, were rounded up twice a year during a rodeo-in the spring to brand the calves and again during the late summer for slaughter. The rodeo was often an occasion for socializing with the neighboring rancho families. With fiesta and fandango; the rodeo festivities often lasted a week or more. 2 In the early years of the province, the slaughte:r, or matanza, was solely for domestic needs. Cattle supplied beef to be eaten fresh or dried for future use; hides for shoes, lariats and outerwear; fat for cooking; and tallow for candles and soapmaking. During the period of Mexican rule the matanza became more systematic and extensive. Hides were carefully stripped from the carcasses and the lard and tallow was rendered. The lard was retained for domes tic use and the tallow was saved for export. In trade the tallow brought six cents per pound, with 75 to 100 pounds obtained from each carcass. Hides brought from $1.00 to $2.50 a piece, becoming known as "California banknotes." The malodorous killing fields could be detected for miles and were presided over by the vultures, coyotes, and other scavengers feeding on the unwanted flesh (Daniels 1976). Rancho San Antonio Originally part of the pasture lands of Mission Santa Clara, Rancho San Antonio was granted to Juan Prado Mesa by Governor Alvarado in 1839. Consisting of one square league (4438 acres), the ranclw was located in the foothills bordered on the north by San Antonio or Adobe Creek, on the west by the Sierra Madre, and on the east by San Jose de Cupertino Creek, also called Stevens Creek (Fava 1976; Arbuckle 1968). Juan Prado Mesa was a soldier at the presidio in San Francisco in 1828 and spent some time as a guard at Mission Santa Clara in the 1early 1830s. Building his "fort-like" hacienda on a knoll above Adobe Creek, he had installed his family at the San Antonio Rancho as early as 1836 while he continued his military and civic duties at the mission and in San Francisco. Commandant of the presidio of San Francisco in 1841, Juan Prado was described by a visiting Englishman as a "very fierce, paunchy little man" who besides having been engaged in many skirmishes against the Indians, also had several narrow escapes with his life in private brawls. He retired from military duty in 1844, just a year before his death in 1845. Predeceased by his wife, he left his young family burdened with debts, forcing his heirs to subdivide the rancho (Fava 1976; Bancroft 1886). Rancho Quito This 13,310 acre rancho was originally the mission's dairy rancho. It may have been named for Tito, a mission neophyte responsible for the dairy herd. The rancho was granted to Jose Zenon Fernandez and his son··in-law Jose Noriega in 1841. Both Noriega and Fernandez came to California with the H:ijar-Padres Colony in 1834. Consisting of many well-educated and professional men, this party of 250 settlers made up the highest class of immigrants to come to California prior to American take-over. Although the colonizing venture failed, members of the pa1ty became prominent in local and departmental politics and government throughout California Fernandez, born in 1799, was San Jose's first professional school teacher. Although he taught for only a short period, he held several civic offices in San Jose and Monterey during the late 1830s and early 1840s. Settling in San Jose in 1835, Noriega also became immediately involved in local government and was granted ranclws in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. He served with John Burton on the ayuntamiento (council) of the pueblo. In 1847, Noriega's arrest was ordered by Judge Burton for "abuse of the court and for swearing and stamping on the floor" (Arbuckle 1985). It is not clear whether outbursts of temper were typical for Noriega, or represented his frustration at serving with the uneducated and irascible Burton. 3 Not long before Fernandez's death in 1844, th1~ grantees transferred the ranclw to Ignacio Alviso. Alviso was also the grantee of Rancho Rincon de los Esteros in the north part of the county, and was the namesake for the town of Alviso. The Fernandez and Alviso haciendas were located in the Campbell and Saratoga areas of the rancho. The Early American Period (1846-1869) With the relaxation of immigration regulations by the Mexican government in 1828, more foreigners began to settle in California, freque:ntly marrying the daughters of local land owners. Of the approximately 700 people who lived in the pueblo in 1835, forty were foreigners, mostly Americans and Englishmen. The first overland migration arrived in California in 1841, and by 1845 the new American settlers had increased the population of the pueblo to 900. The American presence in San Jose was rapidly changing the character of the pueblo from a Mexican village to a bustling American town. The presence of the growing American. population prepared the way for relatively easy occupation of California by American forces in 1846. By the time of America's military conquest, the Anglo-American's commercial conquest was well-established. The Mexican population of California observed the influx of Euro- pean and American settlers with a sense of helplessness. The Mexican governor, Pio Pico, articulately expressed his concern for California's future in 1846: We find ourselves threatened by hordc~s of Yankee immigrants who have al- ready begun to flock into our country, and whose progress we cannot arrest. Already have the wagons of that perfidious people scaled the almost in- accessible summits of the Sierra Nevada, crossed the entire continent and penetrated the fruitful valley of the Sacramento. What that astonishing peo- ple will next undertake, I cannot say; but in whatever enterprise they embark they will sure to be successful. Already these adventurous voyagers, spread- ing themselves far and wide over a country which seems to suit their tastes, are cultivating farms, establishing vineyards, erecting mills, sawing up lumber, and doing a thousand other things which seem natural to them (Hall 1871:143). In May 1846, the United States declared war on Mexico and shortly thereafter the Americans raised the flag in Monterey and San Jose. In 1848, the United States acquired the Mexican province of California in the Trc:aty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Closely following the annexation of California by the United States, the discovery of gold in the Sierra foothills precipitated a sudden influx of population to the state. This event served to accelerate California statehood, achieved i:n 1850, with San Jose serving as the first State capital._ Land Use In the last 140 years, land utilization in the Santa Clara Valley has progressed through four phases: stock grazing, grain cultivation, horticulture, and modem residential, commercial, and industrial development. Ea1;;h of these economic eras can be chronicled in the Cupertino area. 4 Stockraising At the time of the Gold Rush, beef was the only commodity that could be supplied in large quantities by the Californians. It was ni~cessary to import other foodstuffs plus ad- ditional supplies of beef and mutton. Until the drought of 1864, stockraising continued to be the primary economic activity. At first th<: Mexican open range methods were follow- ed since grazing lands were ample. As small1er farms began to spread throughout the Valley, pasturage was reduced and stockraising was concentrated in the foothill ranges. More intensive stock farming began in the 1860s with the cattle moved from the foothill pastures to valley feed yards until ready for marketing (Broek 1932). On a smaller scale, sheep raising, paralleled the cattle industry. Large flocks were imported during the Gold Rush which thrived in the mild California climate and on the cheap range in the low foothills around the valley. Sheep populations peaked during the 1870s, the number declining thereafter as farm lands extended, and markets for local wool and mutton decreased (Broek 1932). The dairy industry developed in those areas that had well-watered pastures, concentrated in the lowlands along the Bay and near Gilroy. Transportation of fresh milk was a problem in the early years and in the outlying districts most of the milk was used for but- ter and cheese production. Almost every farm in the Valley kept a couple of milk cows, self sufficiency being the goal (Broek 1932). Settlement and land use patterns in the Cupertino area during the early American period is not well documented. Biographies of settlc~rs living in the Fremont Township (of which Cupertino was part) indicated that many of the those men who settled in the area in the early 1850s began as cattle ranchers. Following the general trend in the valley, all these gentlemen abandoned cattle ranching for farming in the late 1850s and early 1860s. Grain and Hay Production The staple agricultural product after the Gold Rush of 1848 became wheat. A ready market was assured and the crop was easily handled. The easy cultivation and high fertility of the soil of the Santa Clara Valley facilitated wheat production with little capital investment. By 1854, Santa Clara County was producing 30 percent of California's total wheat crop. In 1868, one observer noted, in summer the valley was an almost unbroken wheatfield. Other grain crops, primarily barley and oats, followed wheat in productivity. Production of wheat foll off during the 1880s and 1890s; however, the production of barley for malting purposes continued to rise until 1900 when it fell rapidly (Broek 1932; Detlefs 1985). When the cattle industry shifted to more intensive methods, hay production became a necessity. The planting of forage crops and the establishment of feeding sheds led to bet- ter utilization of the range. Hay production developed during the 1880s and 1890s and only began to drop with the increased appearance of the automobile after 1900. Most of the hay and forage crops were used by the daiiry industry (Broek 1932). Hay production is still a major land use in the study area today. The earliest large-scale farming in the Cupertino area centered around the production of grains and hay. In 1861, John Snyder purchased 1160 acres on Permanente Creek. To the surprise of many, his first grain crop on 500 acres yielded profit equal to half the purchase price of the property (Friedrich 1949). As more families moved to the area, products that could earn high yields on less ai::reage became necessary. 5 Map 1. Cupertino Area, 1876 11 u ,,~I .r I , ,. p" r .. \!) s If, J: mt..r'SOn,. U.9.10fl.< s. ll. , n1 t' i ... r:on,. ~~ .. 6 Thompson & West Historical Alias, 1876 Map No. Four Horticulture and Viticulture The remnants of the Mission orchards and the small orchards of the San Jose residents were the only source of fresh fruit in the early days of the Gold Rush. This scarcity was recognized as a potential source of profit by early settlers in the Valley who imported seedlings and nursery stock from the East Coast and Europe. The earliest commercial or- chards were planted in San Jose in the early 1850s and their success prompted others to experiment with horticulture. Initially it was believed that abundant water was necessary for the successful production of fruit and the €:arly orchards were concentrated near rivers and creeks and in the northern Santa Clara Valley where there was abundant artesian water for irrigation. In 1868 the first shipment of dried fruit to the East Coast brought high prices. With the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869, a large eastern market was opened for local fruit. The first commercial canning ope:ration succeeded in 1871. All the factors were in place for the horticultural industry to boom, and indeed, orchards increased rapidly during the 1870s and 1880s throughout the county. As experimentation in outlying areas proved that orchards could succeed with less water than originally thought, the combination of the ready market, high prices, and rapidly developing support industries, the switch to horticulture became less risky and highly profitable. This transfer to horticulture also saw changing land ownership patterns. As profits from wheat production began to decline due to the opening of new competing wheat regions, farmers realized their lands were better suited for more valuable crops and greater profits could be made by subdividing larger tracts and selling plots for small family orchards. A twenty acre orchard was able to produce enough fruit to support a family and bring a nice profit. Between 1849 and 1852 viticulturists in the county planted their vineyards using cuttings from the vines in the Mission Santa Clara vineyard. During these years, the area attracted up to 1500 French settlers who realized the potential of the valley for a wine district. Many of these Frenchmen, Pierre Sansevain, Charles LeFranc, Etienne Thee, Antoine Delmas, and the Pellier brothers, to name a few, set out vineyards in the valley and foothills during the 1850s. By the end of the 1880s, Santa Clara County had 15,000 acres of vines producing 2,500,000 gallons of wine a year (Arbuckle 1985: 176). Viticulture in the Cupertino area commenced as early as 1849 when Elisha Stephens, Cupertino's first American settler, planted vines acquired from the Mission on the banks of Cupertino Creek. Although spelled differcmtly, Stephens was the namesake of Stevens Creek and Stevens Creek Boulevard. A native of South Carolina, Stephens grew up in Georgia where he learned the trade of bllacksmithing. He worked as a trapper in the Northwest fur trade where he learned the skills of the mountain man. Stephens was the leader of the Stephens-Townsend-Murphy pairty, which in 1844 was the first overland wagon train to enter California over the Truckee River route through the Sierra Nevadas. Settling on the banks of Stevens Creek in 1848, he also planted blackberries near the creek bottom, thus deriving the name "Blackberry Farm" for the property. By 1864, the area had become too crowded for the reclusive Stephens. He sold his remaining property and moved south to the Kem River, where he died in 1887 (California History Center [CHC] 1975; Arbuckle 1985). A Spaniard named Novato, living in the f oothms near Permanente Creek, planted cuttings from the Stephens vineyard. Because the land was covered with chaparral and the soil was largely considered to be infertile, further efforts to establish vineyards did not take place until the 1870s. Pioneer viticulturist in the district included Samuel Williams, Norman Porter, A. C. Hollenbeck and John Snyder who all put out large vineyards in the 1870s. 7 The failure of the French and other European vineyards due to phylloxera, a root louse, contributed toward the raising prices for California wines in the late 1870s. This and the success of the pioneer vineyards, led to the wide scale development of Cupertino as a wine-growing district. Vineyardists like Jules Portal, Joseph C. Merithew and John T. Doyle, who laid out vineyards in the 1880s, helped establish the west side as a premier wine-growing area. Merithew acquired the Porter vineyard on McClellan Road on portions of the present DeAnza College campus. Credited with reviving the name of Cupertino, John T. Doyle's Las Palmas Winery was the most modem and automated winery in the area. Many small family vineyards found a ready market for their product at these larger wineries. The Jesuit priests of the College of Santa Clara planted 100 acres of vines in the early 1870s. With the construction of a winery in 1875, altar wines were produced for religious ceremonies and other wines were produced to be sold for revenue. By 1890, there were over 4000 acres of vines on the west side from Saratoga to Mountain View. There were 39 wineries and about 150 commercial wine growers. What had been grain and hay fields the decade before was now a sea of vines (Sullivan 1982) In the 1890s the dominance of the vineyards began to decline as the vines were attacked as phylloxera spread from Europe. Though the discovery of a Central American rootstock resistant to the disease eventually al.lowed for continued viticulture, other problems compounded the decline. Water supplies were a constant concern. The 1906 earthquake destroyed much of the wine prod\llction machinery and buildings. Government regulations, property taxes, and 4;ompetition also contributed. Prohibition was the final blow to many operations. Ultimately, those families that survived shifted their emphasis towards growing fruit trees. Few early settlers believed that fruit trees could grow in the Cupertino area. The soil was considered too dry to sustain a crop, and the trees would surely die prematurely (Friedrich 1949). The men who began planting fruit trec:s in the late 1870s were considered fools. When they began producing high yields, the c::arly doubters began to plant trees themselves, especially as the grape vineyards began to suffer. By 1900, fruit culture dominated the county's economy. In 1931, geographer Jan Broek reported that there were two predominant types of land use in the: Cupertino area. The flat land was devoted to orchards that averaged 26 to 46 acres in size. The low foothills were devoted to residential or mixed-use agricultural settlements. Villages and Urban Growth As the Santa Clara Valley began to develop agriculturally, the distance to San Jose, the major service center, was too great during horse-and-buggy days to allow the hard-work- ing farmer to make frequent trips. Thus a number of local service clusters scattered over the Valley beCame an inherent part of the settlement pattern of the Early American Period. These small villages supplied the primary needs of the neighborhood and served as a community center. Most of these hamlets were located on crossroads, a few of the main highways between towns, and others scattered over the Valley on secondary roads. These villages usually consisted of a general merchandise store, a post office, a · blacksmith shop, a school, a social hall, perhaps a church, and a number of surrounding residences (Broek 1932). Stevens Creek Road was the principal road be:tween San Jose and the west side of the valley. Between 1850 and 1880 it served as a road for the stock-raising and agriculture requirements of the sparsely settled area. Until 1873 it ended at FJisha Stephens ranch on 8 Map 2. Cupertino and Surrounding Area,, 1899 Palo Alto Quadrangle 189') 1:62,500 Reprinted by U.S.G.S., 1979 See Levy (1994), p.43 9 ,.l .. vi , "'( 9 :t;A l\IA ~ · l .~· :A.Tl~~. Stevens Creek. By 1876 it had been extended into the foot hills of San Antonio Rancho and connected to the road to Mountain View, now Foothill Boulevard (CHC 1975). The Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road or the Road to Mountain View as it was formerly known came into existence in the early 1870s. These two thoroughfares were the main transportation routes through the west side district. In the 1880s and early 1890s, the villages of Cupertino and West Side were separate entities. A. Pete Emig, who wrote history articles for the Cupertino Courier in the 1960s, reports that John Doyle requested the first post office on the west side in 1882 which was named Cupertino. The Cupertino post office operated from 1883 through 1893, when it was abandoned in favor of the West Side post office. On the 1890 Official Map of Santa Clara County, the Cupertino post office is siu:d on the south side of McClellan Road on the land of M. C. Boden [or Bowden] near the: current intersection of Linda Drive. The name Cupertino had been revived in the early 1880s by John Doyle who named his winery the Cupertino Wine Company. The Brainard map of ca. 1885 indicates the site of Cupertino on Stevens Creek near Doyle's Las Palmas ranch, now the Monte Vista area (CHC 1975; Levy 1994). John T. Doyle was a prominent San Francisco attorney and businessman. By 1866, he was living in Menlo Park and commuting to San Francisco. In 1880 he purchased the former Elisha Stevens/William McClellan Blackberry Farm on the west bank of Stevens Creek. Here he established one of the most s1'1ccessf ul winemaking operations on the west side. An amateur historian, Doyle knew that the creek had been named Cupertino by the de Anza expedition over 100 years eanlier (CHC 1975). He built a two-story home on McClellan Road in 1882. The village of West Side developed at the crossroads of Stevens Creek Road and Saratoga-Mountain View Road (now Highway 9 or DeAnza Blvd.). The village developed around the Horticulture & Viticulture Association Hall and a church built as a mission of the Presbyterian Church in San Jose, both built in 1884. W. T. "Billy" Baer opened the first blacksmith shop in 1888. The West Side Branch of the San Jose Home Union Store was opened in 1889 on the propc:rty of Alexander Montgomery at the southwest comer of the crossroads. As the only "store" in the nearby area, postal services were transferred here and Montgomery became the first official postmaster at the West Side post office. In 1895, the village was described in Sunshine, Fruit and Flowers: West Side is a small village among the vineyards and orchards on the west side of the valley, about eight miles f:rom San Jose. It contains a general merchandise store, a town hall, a church, a blacksmith shop, postoffice, cooper shop and telephone office. In 1900, local citizens requested that the name of the West Side post office be change to the Cupertino post office; however, the hamlc!t itself was best known as The Crossroads. The development of Monte Vista formed around the Monte Vista railroad station. Residential subdivisions developed slowly in this relatively remote location until it caught the interest of real estate promoter George Hensley in 1912. In 1915, Hensley purchased the Doyle holdings and further subdivided the area. The first school district was formed in 1865, !building Lincoln Grammar School that same year. Located on the Dale ranch, San Antonio Grammar School opened its doors in 1867. That same year Collins School opened north of the village on Young Road. In 1882, Doyle School was constructed near Stevens Creek Road. These original four districts were merged as the Cupertino Union School !District in 1917. 10 Another boost to the development of Cupertino was the completion of the railroad lines. Southern Pacific's Mayfield Cutoff, with senrice commencing in 1907, connected San Francisco and Santa Cruz with a station at Monte Vista. The lnteruban line between Cupertino and San Jose opened in 1909 (McCaleb 1981). The Cupertino depot was constructed in 1915. Early in the century horseless carriages began to appear on local roads. In 1915, Charlie Baer opened the first garage on the site of his father's blacksmith shop at the Crossroads. By 1928 most county roads had been paved and old wooden bridges were being replaced by concrete ones. In 1930 San Jose had the greatest weekday auto traffic in the state, and was the only California city to have weekday traffic exceed holiday traffic. By this time, the county averaged one automobile for every 2.92 persons. By 1922, the Cupertino community had a population of about 500. Historian Eugene Sawyer described the community ( 1922:295-96): Directly west of San Jose and Meridian is Cupertino, on the Saratoga and Mountain View road. Good roads ext.~nd in all directions. It is on the line of the electric road from Los Altos to Los Gatos and also has direct electric railway connections with San Jose, ten miles distant. In the town are located a general merchandise storie, a real estate office, a union church, Catholic church and an Odd Fc~llows hall. To the east, south and west the fruit ranches are crowded togc~ther. The soil is fertile and the principal crops are prunes and apricots. The town has a rural free delivery, a drier and fruit warehouse, and ... a packing company and drier. There is a library, an improvement club, Odd Fellows, Rebekahs, Woodmen of the World and King's Daughters lodges, and an up-to-date union grammar school, the districts represented being Uncoln, San Antonio, Collins and Doyle. Industrial development in the area reflected the~ agricultural economy and included wineries, canneries, and fruit drying and packing facilities. One of the largest of the early businesses in the community was the Cali brothers feed mill. A native of Italy, Rosario Cali came to California in 1913. After working in Daly City, Willets, and Campbell, Cali acquired 5 acres at The Crossroads in 1918. Here Rosario and his brother Joseph carried on a fruit hauling business that had expanded to include hay, alfalfa, dairy feed, wood and coal by 1928. In spite of the Depression, the Cali's continued to expand the business, constructing what became the county's largest feed mill in 1936. The tall grain elevators were a local landmark until they were replaced in the late 1980s by a high-rise office buildings. World War II, like the Gold Rush a century before, had a major effect on the changing character of the county. The San Francisco Bay area was the gateway to the Pacific theater from 1941to1945. The large naval air station at Moffett Field became a center of much activity. Thousands of military personnel were brought to the area for training and processing, exposing the valley to public view. Attracted by the increasing job market, the population of the valley experienced phenomenal growth after 1950. The post-war population boom created an urgent need for planning. The farmers and orchardists in Cupertino needed protection from heavy industry taking over their land and local representation in order to keep their taxes at a reasonable level. The population of the county was growing so fast the smaller communities had to fight to retain their identity. The Cupertino community was being 1hreatened by the annexation war being 11 Map 3. Cupertino and Surrounding Area, 1940 U.S.G.S. Map 1940 1:62,500 See Levy (1994), p. 61 12 waged by Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, and San Jose. Even Los Altos had focused a predatory eye on Cupertino. In order to forestall annexation efforts by surrounding cities, community leaders in Cupertino organized incorporation efforts in 1954. In the election of September 1955 the voters approved incor]poration and Cupertino officially became the county's thirteenth city in October 1955. The city had a population of 1,746 at the time of incorporation and encompassed about four square miles, three-quarters in agricultural use. Events at Stanford University also set the stage for significant developments in the post- war period. Frederick Terman became an engineering professor at Stanford in 1930. Under his guidance the university became a lc~der in the field of electronics. Many of the university's pre-war graduates played important roles in the post-war development of the electronics industry. William Hewlett and David Packard, two of Professor Terman 's students at Stanford, developed electronic test equipment in a Palo Alto garage in 1939. During the war this small company obtained government contracts and continued to grow during the post-war period. In 1954, the Stanford Industrial Park was established attracting the companies of Hewlett-Packard cmd the Varian brothers, also students of Terman, as well as Sylvania, Philco-Ford, General FJectric, and Lockheed's research laboratory. These companies formed the nucleus of what became known as Silicon Valley, a phenomena that spread throughout tne northern part of the county during the following decades. Along with the developments around Stanford, the business community launched an active post-war campaign to attract new non-~Lgricultural related industries to the county. By the 1960s, the county's economic base was dependent upon the electronic and defense industries. Recognizing that agricultural land use was approaching an end and that Cupertino was ideally placed to take advantage of increasing need for light industrial, commercial, and residential needs of the future, Cupertino landowners planned the orderly transition from farming to industry and commercial expansion by pooling their properties and created a centralized management of industrial park development. This effort resulted in the creation of VALLCO park. The name was derived from the initials of the principal developers: Varian Associates, and the Lester, Leonard, Craft, and Orlando families. Other prominent agricultural families followed suit. The Mariani family, one of the most successful agricultural enterprises in Cupertino and San Jose, relocated its orchards and turned its direction toward developing major urban communities. The 1970s saw the development of the personal computer industry stimulated by Apple's "user friendly" computl::rs. The most successful of the Mariani development projects was Apple Computer's headquarters opened in Cuper,tino in 1982. Now poised on the threshold of the 21st century, almost all of Cupertino's farmlands have been paved for streets, freeways or parking lots or have been covered with residences, shopping centers, and business and industrial parks. 13 LITERATURE CITED AND CONSULTED Arbuckle, C. 1968 Santa Clara Co. Ranchos. San Jose: Rosicrucian Press, Ltd. 1985 Clyde Arbuckle's History of San Jose. San Jose: Smith & McKay Printing Co. Bancroft, H. H. 1886 History of California. San Francisco: A. L. Bancroft & Company. Board of Trade of San Jose 1887 Santa Clara County, California. San Francisco: W. B. Bancroft & Company. Brainard, H. A. 1887 Cupertino. Santa Clara Valley, Map No. 6. Broek,J. 1932 The Santa Clara Valley, Califomia: A Study in Landscape Changes. Utrecht: N.V. A. Oosthoek's Uitgevers-Mij. California History Center [CHC] 1975 Cupertino Chronicle. Local History Studies, Volume 19. Cupertino: California History Center. Daniels, G. G., editor 1976 The Spanish West. The Old W€:st series. New York: Time-Life Books. Detlefs, C. 1985 Aour Milling in Santa Clara County, 1840-1898. Masters thesis presented to the Department of Social Science, San Jose State University. Fava, F. M. 1976 Los Altos Hills: the colorful sto;ry. Woodside: Gilbert Richards Publications. Friedrich, Karl August Hall, F. 1949 A Brief History of Cupertino. Compiled for the Cupertino Grange No. 739. 1871 -The History of San Jose and Surroundings. San Francisco: A. L. Bancroft &Co. Healy, E. F. 1863 Plat of the Rancho San Antonio. Map 27SND. On file at Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. 14 Hendry, G. W. andJ. N. Bowman 1940 The Spanish and Mexican Adobe and other buildings in the Nine San Fran- cisco Counties, 1776 to about 1850, Part Vil. Unpublished manuscript at .the Bancroft Library, Berkeley. Herrmann Brothers 1890 Official Map of the County of Santa Clara. Hoover, M. B., H. E. Rensch, E. G. Rensch, V./. N. Abeloe 1990 Historic Spots in California. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Revised by Douglas E. Kyle. Jacobson, Y. 1984 Passing Farms, Enduring Values: California's Santa Clara Valley. Los Altos: William Kaufman, Inc. Laffey, G. A. 1981 The Genesis of Fruit Culture i1n Santa Clara County. Paper prepared for the Department of Geography, San Jose State University. Laffey G. A. and R. Detlefs 1994 A Political History of Santa Clara County [working title]. Book written for the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors (publication in process). Levy, Richard 1978 Costanoan. In HandbookoflVorthAmericanlndians, edited by R. Heizer. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Levy, Robert J. 1994 The West Side and How We Grew: A Geographic History of Cupertino. Privately published. Loomis, Patricia 1974 McClellan, De Anza Left Theilr Mark on Cupertino. Signposts, San Jose News, March 22, 1974. McCaleb, C. S. 1981 Tracks, Tires & Wires: Public Transportation in California's Santa Clara Valley. Glendale: Interurban Press. Munro-Fraser, J.P. 1881 The History of Santa Clara County, California. Alley, Bowen and Com- -pany, San Francisco. Payne,S. M. 1987 Santa Clara County: Harvest of Change. Northridge: Windsor Publications, Inc. San Jose Mercury 1896 Santa Clara County and its R~~sources: A souvenir of the San Jose Mercury [Sunshine, Fruit and Flowers]. San Jose: Press of Smith & Eaton. 15 Sawyer. E. 1922 History of Santa Clara County, California. Los Angeles: Historic Record Company. Sullivan. C. L 1982 Like Modern Edens: Winegrowing in Santa Clara Valley and Santa Cruz Mountains 1798-1981. Cupertino: California History Center. Thompson and West 1876 Historical Alias Map of Santa Clara County, California. San Francisco. 16 McClellan Ranch Task Force ROS'TER Parks and Recreation Commissioner BOB HOPKINS 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 255-9679 (home) (415) 857-6072 (work) Director of Parks and Recreation STEVE DOWLING 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3110 (work) Department Naturalist BARBARA BANFIELD 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 777-3120 (work) Cupertino Junior High School RANDALL BINKLEY 1650 S. Bernardo Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087 245-0303 (work) Audubon Society HOW ARD JOHNSON 22560 Alcalde Road Cupertino, CA 95014 255-2422 (home) Rolling Hills 4-H LONNIE TOENSFELDT 21640 Fitzgerald Drive Cupertino, CA 95014 257-4745 (home) Community Gardeners RALPH EDDY 10200 Stonydale Cupertino, CA 95014 739-5337 (home) Cupertino Historical Society -Director ETHEL WORN 10185 N. Stelling Road Cupertino, CA 95014 973-1495 (work) CHARLES LIGGETT 22415 Palm A venue Cupertino, CA 95014 446-9190 (home) 756-5868 (work) CALL TO ORDER City of Cupertino McCLELLAN RANCH TASK FORCE Regular Meeting of November 21, 1996 McClellan Ranch Park MINUTES 1. At 4:15 p.m. meeting was called to order. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Committee members absent: Staff present: ORAL COMMUNICATION 3. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 4. None NEW BUSINESS Binkley, Toensfeldt Worn, Eddy, Liggett, Hopkins Stephen G. Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation Barbara Banfield, City Naturalist 5. Committee discussed survey and changed page 11 to include Toensfeldt on the original McClellan Ranch Committee (197 4 ). 6. Committee agreed to allow 4-H members to exercise sheep and goats on the nature trail. Animals must be on a leash. Confirmed that larger livestock may not be exercised beyond the 4-H area. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7. Barbara Banfield moved and Randall Binkley seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the September 26, 1996 meeting. Motion approved. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 7. None. ADJOURNMENT 8. Adjournment to the next scheduled meeting of McClellan Ranch Task Force on February 27, 1997.