|UFDC Home||myUFDC Home | Help ||
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS DOWNLOADS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
|Table of Contents|
Front Cover 1
Front Cover 2
Back Cover 1
Back Cover 2
RESTORATION OF THE DEMESA-SANCHEZ HOUSE
ST. AUGUSTINE PRESERVATION BOARD
DECEMBER 13, 1977
FISHER & SHEPARD, ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS, INC.
456 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD NORTH
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32211
Sequence of Construction
Proposed Scope of Restoration
Additional Research Requirements
Preliminary Historical Report (without Chain of
City Directory Listings
1802 Inventory and Appraisal
1788 Rocque Map
Proposed Trench Layout for First Floor
Field Notes on Attic Framing
Interview with David Parker re: 1959 renovations
Renderings of Proposed Restoration
RESTORATION OF THE DEMESA-SANCHEZ HOUSE
ST. AUGUSTINE PRESERVATION BOARD
DECEMBER 13, 1977
This Report has been prepared for the St. Augustine Preservation Board in accor-
dance with a letter contract dated May 27, 1977 and Purchase Order 6422, dated
June 14, 1977.
This Report is essentially an architectural survey although certain documentary
and archaeological information has been incorporated. A preliminary historical
report, dated November 1977, is included as Appendix 1, and the City Directory
listings are included as Appendix 2. However, the construction sequence of the
building is quite complex, and it has not been possible for other consultants to
complete historical documentation and archaeological work prior to completion of
this architectural survey. Therefore, this report should be considered prelimi-
nary, and the construction sequences as noted below must be viewed as working
hypotheses. However, the Architect believes that the preservation and restora-
tion work recommended in this report will affect only that construction occur-
ring in the late 19th and 20th centuries, which is well documented and understood.
The earlier fabric of the building will be essentially undisturbed and restora-
tion can proceed before architectural, historical and archaeological data are
The Report consists of two parts. This written summary comprises the first part.
The second part consists of measured drawings prepared in the field by the staff
of this office. It should be noted that although previous drawings were used as
an initial basis for the measured drawings, it has been necessary to verify all
dimensions, wall thicknesses, and scheduled finishes, doors and windows. It is
anticipated that additional archaeological excavations will take place on the
first floor, and additional interior finishes may be removed by the staff of the
Board during above-grade investigation. Therefore, the condition of the building
shown on the measured drawings should be confirmed prior to the preparation of
This report would not have been possible without the many hours of consultation
and professional expertise of the following: Mr. William R. Adams, Director;
Mr. Overton G. Ganong; Mr. Michael Scardaville; Mr. Craig Thomson; Ms. Kathleen
Deagan; and Mr. John Bostwick. Finally, special thanks are due Mr. Robert
Steinbach, whose knowledge of architecture, archaeology and history has been an
inspiration and guide to all.
The following procedures were employed in the preparation of this Report.
a. Field Investigation.
The existing building was examined in the field by Mr. Shepard who was often
accompanied by Mr. Steinbach. Field measurements and measured drawings were
prepared by Mr. John P. Nelson and Mrs. Catherine D. Lee of this office with
the help of certain information prepared by Mr. Craig Thomson, of the Board's
staff. Documentary black and white photographs and color slides were prepared
by this office, and certain additional photographs in the attic were prepared
by Mr. Steinbach. Copies of the photographs and slides are not submitted as
part of this report but are on file in the office of the Board for review by
Almost all historical documentation has been provided by the Board's staff.
However, certain early photographs were copied by this office and are referenced
in this text. Copies of these photographs are in the Board's files for review
by interested parties.
The Architect met several times for extensive consultation with members of the
Board's staff and the archaeologists retained by the Board. The tentative hypo-
theses regarding early construction sequences are a result of these discussions.
d. Restoration Procedures.
The restoration procedures outlined in this survey are believed to be in accord
with current best practice in the field of historic preservation as promulgated
by the National Park Service and the National Trust for Historic Preservation.
In keeping with current philosophy, as much of the existing fabric of the build-
ing as possible will be preserved and, if not preserved "in situ", then properly
documented, removed, and stored elsewhere.
The firm of Evans & Hammond, Inc., Engineers, was retained by the Architect to
provide expertise in the field of plumbing, electrical and HVAC systems.
3. SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
The following sequence of construction parallels the sequence listed in Appendix
1, Preliminary Historical Report on the DeMesa-Sanchez (Spanish Inn) Site, pre-
pared in November 1977 by Michael Scardaville of the Board's staff. Only that
architectural evidence related to the historical report is listed below.
Please refer to the Appendix for the historical documentation.
As noted below, construction probably began with a small, perhaps one-room,
structure on the extreme western end of the property, and later additions
were made to the south and the east of this original structure. For purposes
of convenience, this report refers to the portion of the house fronting St.
George Street as the West Wing and to the portion of the house extending from
the West Wing to the east as the East Wing. Note that in the later stages of
development, the East Wing includes the Kitchen.
b. First Spanish Period (1763; Antonio de Mesa, Owner).
Puente describes the building as a "stone house" and shows that it was located
at the extreme western end of the property. No architectural evidence has been
found to confirm or deny that portions of the existing coquina walls of the
West Wing date from this period. No wooden construction materials from this
period have been identified.
c. British Period (1764 1784)
(1) 1764 1768; Owner: William Walton. The architectural comments
for deMesa apply.
(2) 1768 1771; Owner: British Crown. The architectural comments
for deMesa apply.
(3) 1771 1784; Owner: Joseph Stout. Since the deed recording the
sale of the house to Sanchez describes the house as "masonry
house with shingles", whether or not an additional story had been
added by this time awaits further investigation during restora-
tion when finishes can be removed. Again, the architectural com-
ments for deMesa apply. As noted below, it is possible that the
present overall configuration of the first floor masonry walls
of the West Wing date from Stout or before.
d. Second Spanish Period (1784 1821)
(1) 1784 1803; Owner: don Juan Sanchez. As noted above, the house
is described as "masonry house with shingles" in the deed recording the sale
of the house to Sanchez from James Stout in 1784. No mention of additional
structures or a second story is made. However, the 1788 Rocque Map and key
indicate a three-room stone house on the property with an out building (kitchen)
to the east and possibly a loggia to the south. In addition, Rocque noted that
a second floor was located above one of the first floor rooms. Thus, we may
conclude tentatively from the documentary evidence that Sanchez constructed a
free-standing kitchen to the east, two rooms and possibly a loggia to the east
connected to the original West Wing and a second floor over a portion of the
structure between 1784 and 1788.
Although it is probable that portions of the coquina walls dating from
deMesa remain in place, the sequence of construction of the early masonry
walls cannot be determined until additional archaeological work and analy-
sis have been completed. However, the construction methods and techniques
and hand-wrought nails utilized in the existing roof structure above the
West Wing are typical of the Second Spanish Period and may date from the
Sanchez occupancy of the property or even before. Two very important tenta-
tive assumptions are necessary, however, and further investigation is re-
quired before definite conclusions can be made.
The two assumptions are: first, that the Rocque Map is not quite accurate
and is slightly out of scale and, secondly, that the existing configuration
of the two westernmost rooms of the East Wing is the configuration of the
building as constructed by Sanchez between 1784 and ca. 1788. In addition,
the West Wing was either purchased from Stout in its present configuration,
or was extended to the south by Sanchez. Architectural evidence supports
these assumptions while archaeological evidence to date is inconclusive.
There is every indication that the present roof framing above the second
floor of the West Wing was all installed at the same time. The presence of
hand-wrought nails and spikes indicates that the framing was accomplished no
later than 1830, and the techniques of joinery, the hand-hewn finishes, and
the numbering of the rafters are very similar to that found in the Joaneda
House (1806) and in the early portions of the Fatio House (1796). The fact
that the rafter numbering is out of sequence may indicate the rafters were
reused. Further investigation is required when the roof covering is removed.
The greatest difficulty in comparing the present West Wing with the Rocque
Map lies in the fact that the Rocque Map indicates the West Wing did not pro-
ject as far south as it does today. Not only the attic framing but also the
framing of floor joists at the second floor indicate that Rocque may be in
error. Furthermore, an analysis of floor areas shown in the 1802 Inventory
and Appraisal indicates the floor areas of the building by that time were
essentially as they are today. It does not seem reasonable that a major re-
framing of the attic and second floor spaces would have taken place over the
entire area for a short extension to the south. Thus, architectural evidence
indicates that Sanchez added a second floor above the West Wing prior to
Rocque's survey and also either extended the West Wing to the south at that
time or had purchased a building of this configuration from Stout. Further-
more, the remains of jack rafters extending from the east rafters to the east
indicate a covered area at the second floor may have been constructed at the
same time. This area was probably a balcony, part of which may have sheltered
an exterior stair giving access to the new second floor. Rocque does not show
this area, since the south extension of the West Wing is not shown.
Rocque indicates that the East Wing consisted of two rooms with a loggia or
possibly third room located to the south. Rocque's drawing conforms well to
the existing building in the east-west dimension but is severely out of scale
in the north-south dimension. Since the Book of Mortgages indicates that a
second floor had been completed over the entire building (except the kitchen)
by 1791, the existing wood second floor framing and roof framing of the exist-
ing structure postdates Rocque and cannot support or refute the Rocque Map.
Present archaeological information does not indicate that an exterior wall
was located south of the present wall. Furthermore, there is clear archi-
tectural evidence that the south wall of each northern room contained a
window since removed. The window in the westernmost room has been blocked
by the present stair to the second floor. It seems reasonable to conclude
that this wall is shown incorrectly on Rocque.
There is clear architectural evidence that the second floor roof of the
East Wing was completed after the second floor roof of the West Wing had
been completed. The earlier West Wing roof rafters remain in place and still
support shingles. The later East Wing roof framed into and was supported by
this earlier construction. The ridge of the East Wing is located symmetri-
cally above the north and original exterior south walls of the present East
There is further architectural evidence that the present South Rooms on both
floors of the East Wing do not date from this period but are part of a later
modification, probably dating from the extension of the second floor of the
East Wing above the kitchen. The original East Wing roof framing still exhi-
bits jack rafters which framed from the rafters on the south side of the roof
and extended above a balcony or other space in the area of the present South
Room. The slope of the jack rafters indicates that an earlier colonnade or
wall may have been located approximately in line with the south wall of the
kitchen. The configuration of this area must remain inconclusive until
archaeological investigation is complete. However, one must conclude that the
present south first and second floor rooms of the East Wing are not those con-
structed by Sanchez prior to 1791.
In summary, architectural and historical documentary evidence indicate that
Sanchez remodelled the building in two stages. Between 1784 and 1788, he
probably added a one-story east wing, a separate kitchen and a second floor to
the West Wing. He may or may not have extended the masonry walls of the West
Wing to the south. Between 1788 and 1791, he added a second floor to the East
It should be noted that the material quantities listed in the 1803 Appraisal
(See Appendix 3) have been compared to the floor and wall areas of the exist-
ing structure and seem to support the above conclusions. Furthermore, the
1803 Appraisal indicates that the South Room of the East Wing was an open
loggia supported by masonry, possibly masonry arches. Masonry walls-of a
stairway are also mentioned. As noted above, the present stair is not the
stair of the Sanchez period for it blocks an exterior window of the East Wing.
At this time there is no conclusive evidence revealing the location of the
earlier stair, but a possible location has been noted above with regard to the
earlier balcony east of the West Wing.
Several architectural features in addition to roof framing may date from this
period. Of particular interest are the "tea-tray" ceilings in the second
floor rooms of the West Wing. The framing of the ceiling joists and the par-
titions indicate that these ceiling configurations were intended as part of the
original construction. Furthermore, the pair of doors and door hardware
in the eastern room on the second floor of the East Wing probably date
from this period. The doors and hardware are very similar to those found
in an opening on the second floor of the Fatio House.
(2) 1803 1832; Owner: Heirs of Juan Sanchez. The 1803 Appraisal
indicates that the kitchen was still a free-standing structure at that date
and that the second floor had not been extended above it.
The 1888 Sanborn Map clearly indicates that the kitchen had been incorpora-
ted into the main structure of the house by that date. There is no clear
architectural, historical or archaeological evidence to indicate when this
work was accomplished during the period between 1802 and 1888. The roof raf-
ters were cut with a band or vertical stroke saw and were fastened with cut
nails. Floor joists exposed to view also seem to have been cut in a similar
manner. This evidence indicates a probable date of construction between 1820
and 1860. The fact that the second floor ceiling joists are hand-hewn may be
explained if one assumes the original first floor ceiling joists of the one-
story kitchen were reused as the second floor ceiling joists. However, this
explanation must remain tentative.
Although the heirs of Sanchez retained ownership from 1803 until 1832, they
presumably left St. Augustine for Havana, Cuba before Florida became American
territory in 1821. Whether the house was vacant or rented from 1821 to 1832
is not known but, in any event, it seems improbable that the widow and two
daughters of Sanchez would have extensively remodelled the building during
the period 1803 through 1832.
e. American Period (1821 present).
From 1832 until 1885, the house changed hands several times and only two trans-
actions indicate a significant increase in value. The first, in 1837, indi-
cates that the house sold for $1800 whereas it had been purchased only twoyears
before for $1,000. However, this increase in price may be attributed to the
economic boom of the mid-1830's. A later sale in 1867 indicates the house
brought $1,150 whereas it had been purchased 16 years before for $500. Again,
however, the change in price may well be due to the changing economic times.
Apparently the building was in a state of poor repair in 1867 for a separate
agreement to repair the house is recorded with the deed.
In conclusion, the date of construction of the present stair, the first and
second floor south rooms of the east addition, and the second floor above the
kitchen cannot be determined with certainty at this time. Documentary evidence
indicates construction took place between 1803 and 1888.
Beginning ca. 1874, a number of photographs record the appearance of the build-
ing from St. George Street. The earliest photographs ca. 1874 indicate a dark
stucco scored to resemble ashlar masonry. Architectural investigation reveals
that portions of this stucco remain. The color was brick-red; the imitation
stones measured approximately 13" x 36". The west facade at the first floor
contained a central door flanked by a window on either side. Two doors
and two windows seem to be visible behind the balcony. A wooden gate to
the south of the building leads to the courtyard within. The construction
of window shutters can be discerned clearly.
The earliest Sanborn Insurance Map exhibiting this building is dated 1888.
The configuration resembles the present building with two exceptions. First,
the east wall of the kitchen is shown as the east wall of the main building,
and a straight stair is placed at the east end of the balcony south of the
kitchen. Secondly, the existing small room to the east of the south end of
the West Wing on the first and second floors is not shown. In all other res-
pects, the plan resembles the present building. The 1893 Sanborn Map is iden-
tical in plan. However, by 1899 a two-story one-room addition had been made
to the east of the kitchen, and a one-room one-story addition was located to
the east of that. The balcony south of the kitchen is shown returning around
the east end of the kitchen and abutting the new'two-story addition. The
existing single rooms east of the south end of the West Wing were also added
during this interval. The 1904 and 1910 Sanborn Maps indicate no further
changes were made. By 1924, the one-room addition to the east had been re-
moved. The 1930 Sanborn Map is identical to the 1924. The existing building
remains essentially as shown on the 1924 and 1930 maps.
Photographs taken in the 1890's record certain changes in the St. George Street
facade not indicated on the Sanborn Maps. During the 1890's a wood and glass
commercial storefront was installed on the first floor west facade. The store-
front included a central entrance door flanked by sidelights. Wooden scissors
braces were added below the balcony at this time.
Later photographs taken between ca. 1900 and 1938 indicate that the wooden
storefront was removed and replaced with two large masonry arches flanking the
central door and sidelights installed with the earlier storefront. A series
of photographs taken by Wolfe in 1938 display the same arched storefront. By
this time, however, the balcony had been removed and the scissors braces had
been relocated to support the roof overhang. A masonry gate had replaced the
wooden gate to the courtyard. The major elements of the masonry gate remain
today. By this time the existing second floor window in the south wall of the
West Wing had been added. One of the photographs clearly indicates that the
scored ashlar stucco is still visible on the north wall of the West Wing.
Courtyard photographs indicate that the crude stucco arches at the south bal-
cony had been installed by this time as had the concrete stair leading from
the balcony to the ground at the east end of the building.
A number of interior photographs taken by Wolfe in 1938 reveal that the present
interior has been changed slightly since that time. The stair hall at the first
floor was panelled with beaded siding (dating from 1870 through 1890) rather
than the existing plaster. The existing Classic Revival door trim at openings
on the second floor is clearly visible although embellishments have been added
in subsequent years. A wooden fireplace frontispiece visible in the second
floor room above the kitchen does not exist today. A photograph taken in the
South Room of the second floor West Wing, looking west toward the balcony, dis-
plays a pair of early doors located in the opening at that time. Since the
- 8 -
balcony had been removed by the time of this photograph, a crude stucco
handrail is visible crossing the opening, and the head of the opening is
shielded from the exterior by a crude stucco arch. The early doors and
stucco embellishments were removed in later renovations. A photograph taken
from St. George Street ca. 1950 indicates that the St. George facade remained
essentially as shown in the 1938 photographs taken by Wolfe.
In 1954 the building was leased to Mr. Walter B. Frazier. As shown in Appen-
dix 1, the lease permitted Mr. Frazier to repair the roof and to convert a
window on the north side of the building to a door. These changes, if accom-
plished, are not discernible today. The arched storefront openings on the
west facade first floor were removed, and the existing windows and doors
were installed in a new coquina masonry wall. This work was accomplished by
Frazier in 1955 and is documented photographically. The west balcony was pro-
bably reconstructed by Frazier and modified by Bath. In 1958 Mr. Frazier
assigned the lease to Mr. Gerald Bath, and Mr. Bath purchased the property
in 1963. Mr. Bath installed much of the interior and exterior Spanish motif
decor that is visible today. The extent of Mr. Bath's work is documented in
4. PROPOSED SCOPE OF RESTORATION
The basic fabric of the deMesa-Sanchez House remains today as constructed prior
to 1888 with the exception of the west facade, the existing metal roof, and
relatively superficial changes in decor. The existing fabric, photographs of
the period, and other documentary evidence permit restoration to this period
with a high degree of accuracy. Evidence available at this time indicates
the 1888 configuration may date from ca. 1860 or earlier, but this conclusion
must remain tentative until further research is completed. Any attempt to
restore the building to a period prior to 1888 will require an unacceptable
degree of conjecture, and will require the removal of middle or late 19th cen-
tury fabric which is of value. Furthermore, the Second Spanish Period Ameri-
can Territorial character of the building had not materially changed by 1888,
and restoration to this late date would not do violence to the ambience of the
Historic District or the Master Plan, in the opinion of the Architect.
One exception to restoration to 1888 is recommended. The two-story addition
to the east side of the West Wing, constructed 1893-1899, should be retained
and modified on the interior to house-plumbing and HVAC equipment.
Architectural and photographic evidence indicate the building was stuccoed
with a red, simulated ashlar pattern ca. 1874 and later. However, the build-
ing may have been refinished in white by 1890, and was probably finished in
white during earlier periods. Either finish would be appropriate. The re-
stored appearance of the building using alternate finishes can be seen in
The building should be restored for interpretive usage on both floors in
accordance with the directives of the Board and the Master Plan.
b. Structural Conditions and Areas of Concern.
The building is in fair structural condition. Specific areas of concern
are as follows:
(1) The south wall of the West Wing requires tying to the east and
west walls by means of straps or other mechanical devices.
(2) Second floor joists of the north interior rooms of the East
Wing are severely deteriorated at the north wall. The existing joists must
be supplemented with scabs or must be replaced entirely. Similar joists above
the kitchen and in the north room of the West Wing must be carefully examined
for deterioration when finishes are removed.
(3) Wood plates built into masonry at the north wall and supporting
roof framing are almost completely deteriorated and must be replaced.
(4) Slow deterioration is evident at exterior coquina masonry exposed
to view. All exterior coquina should be stuccoed to prevent further damage.
It should be noted that a stucco or lime plaster finish was continuously in
place from earliest construction through the 1950's.
(5) There is evidence of "rising damp" in exterior walls. Restora-
tion must address this problem.
Electrical, plumbing, and HVAC should be provided for staff, maintenance, and
preservation of the building and artifacts. Electrical outlets should be lo-
cated in existing baseboards behind exhibits or furnishings; no lighting should
be provided as part of the structure except in utility areas. Small staff rest
rooms should be provided on each floor in the 1893-99 addition.
A water-exchange, well-fed heat pump system is recommended to minimize noise,
visual distractions, and operational costs. The well should be located in
the east end of the courtyard, and the pump should be installed and sound insu-
lated in the cistern. Two air handlers should be utilized, one for each floor,
in order to insure maximum flexibility of building use. Air handlers should
be located in the 1893-99 addition, one on each floor, not only for easy acces-
sibility but also because the addition is centrally located and will minimize
duct runs and installation difficulties. First floor ducts should be installed
below grade in trenches left open by the archaeologists. Note that no ducts
should be installed in areas not investigated by archaeologists. Both supply
and return should be achieved with floor registers in locations mutually accept-
able to Staff and Consultants. A tentative location of trenches is indicated
in Appendix 5.
- 10 -
Second floor ductwork should run in the attic, and supply should be
achieved with minimum width strip diffusers without flanges. Return should
be achieved through closets and other concealed areas, except a few registers
may be necessary behind furnishings in walls.
d. Detailed Scope and Cost Estimate.
The following scope and costs assume that work will be accomplished by Staff
utilizing force account funds. Therefore, the General Contractor's profit
and Using Agency's contingencies are not included.
1. Remove all existing construction east of the original
kitchen east wall......................................... $ 500.00
2. Remove masonry fence on south property line and replace
with 190 feet of rived board fence......................... 1,700.00 "
3. Remove masonry gate and restore 1893 wood gate............. 1,000.00 -
4. Remove stucco arches and edge beam at south balcony,
rebuild edge beam and provide wooden columns at first
floor and second floor; replace deck; provide handrail,
balusters and stair........................................ 3,275.00
5. Remove two low walls and cistern in courtyard. Brick
paving to remain and to be matched as required.............. 600.00
6. Shore roof, remove existing west balcony floor, floor
framing, posts, balusters, and handrail, and restore
to 1893 configuration...................................... 2,100.00
7. Remove existing windows, doors, and frames in west
wall and restore to 1893 configuration...................... 5,600.00
8. Remove second story window in south wall and restore
9. Remove door adjacent to chimney in south wall and restore
window................................ ................... ... 900.00
10. Remove and restore 4 exterior doors on first and second
floors facing courtyard.................................... 1,200.00
11. Replace all exterior sash.................................... 8,500.00
12. Restore roof to (fire rated) wood shingle; consolidate
or replace plates.......................................... 6,600.00
13. Remove and re-stucco exterior of building (no painting
required)............................. ...................... 9,000.00
- 11 -
14. Provide scabs at existing deteriorated floor joists in
two north rooms..........................................
15. Patch, clean and stain masonry floor. Alternate: 1-1/2"
16. Clean all second floor wood floors; selectively finish
17. Replaster interior, complete, and provide new plaster
ceilings in central two first floor rooms on north
side. Do not paint plaster, except provide red stripe
base, first floor........................................
18. Rework interior openings; remove and repair mouldings
and frames (most second floor doors can remain; all
new doors required on first floor).......................
19. Paint interior and exterior trim, sash, doors, and shut-
20. Plumbing............................................ ....
22. Heating and Air Conditioning.............................
23. Fees and miscellaneous................................
Suggested Deductive Alternates:
(a) Delete replacement of masonry fence on south
property line (Item 2).......................
(b) Delete cleaning and.refinishing of second
floor flooring (Item 16)......................
(c) Delete replastering of second floor
(d) Delete removal and repair of millwork
on second floor (Item 18)....................
(e) Delete painting on second floor (Item 19)....
Total Cost Items from Previous Page $108,175.00
Suggested Deductive Alternates (Continued):
(f) Delete plumbing fixtures on second floor,
but rough-in (Item 20)........................ 400.00
(g) Delete electrical work on second floor,
but rough-in (Item 21)....................... 2,000.00
(h) Delete air conditioning of second floor,
but provide built-in ducts (Item 22).......... 3,000.00
Total Deduct $21,250.00 21,250.00
NOTE: The above figures include overhead and profit for subcontractors.
Overhead for a general contractor is included, but no profit.
5. ADDITIONAL RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS
This report establishes hypotheses based upon incomplete archaeological and
architectural evidence. Fortunately, documentary evidence is substantial, and
it is believed the hypotheses will not be proven severely inaccurate. Neverthe-
less, a much clearer picture of the sequence of construction can be drawn when
the following have been accomplished:
a. When investigation is completed, all archaeological data should be
combined in a single archaeological report. If possible, transparent overlays
displaying architectural features of each phase of construction should be pre-
pared for comparison with the architectural drawings and historic documents.
Archaeological data may enable correct hypotheses to be determined from data
which is presently conflicting and incomplete. Possible alternate hypotheses
include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Stout sold a one-story house to Sanchez:
(a) Identical in overall dimensions to the present West Wing
except the north-south dimension was considerably less.
(b) Identical in overall dimensions to the present West Wing.
(c) With a one-story East Wing as in (3) below.
(2) Stout sold a two-story house to Sanchez:
(a) Identical in overall dimensions to the present West Wing,
with a balcony on the east side.
(b) Identical in overall dimensions to the present West Wing,
except the north-south dimension was considerably less, with a balcony on the
(c) Identical to (2)(b) above, but without a balcony.
(3) Stout sold Sanchez a two-story house with a one-story East
(a) Identical to the 1788 Rocque Map and key.
(b) Similar to the 1788 Rocque Map and key, but Rocque is out-
(c) But the East Wing consisted of one large room, later expanded
to the east by Sanchez.
(4) After buying the house from Stout, before Rocque recorded the
(a) Added a one-story south extension to (1)(a) above.
(b) Added a second floor to (1)(a) above.
(c) Accomplished (4)(a) and (4)(b) at the same time.
(d) Added a second floor to (l)(b) above.
(e) Added a one-story East Wing and separate kitchen to (1)(a)
above exactly as shown by Rocque.
M (f) Added a one-story East Wing and separate kitchen to (1)(b)
(g) Added a one-story East Wing and separate kitchen to (2)(a),
(2)(b) or (2)(c) above.
(h) Enlarged a one-room East Wing built by Stout.
(i) Constructed a one-room, one-story East Wing, which he sub-
(j) Did nothing prior to Rocque, because Rocque records (perhaps
out-of-scale) work accomplished by Stout and purchased by Sanchez.
(5) After Rocque recorded the site but before 1791, Sanchez:
(a) Added a second floor to the East Wing, including a narrow
south balcony since removed.
(b) Added as in (5)(a), but the balcony turned and extended south
across the east face of the West Wing.
(c) Added as in (5)(a), but the balcony was the full north-south
width of the present south rooms of the East Wing.
- 14 -
(6) Between 1791 and 1802, Sanchez:
(a) Did nothing more to the house.
(b) Enlarged (5)(a) or (5)(b) above to the configuration des-
cribed in (5)(c).
In addition, a number of other questions remain unresolved. After an archaeo-
logical draft report is prepared, the archaeologists, historians, restoration
architect, and other related professionals should meet in conference .and pre-
pare a joint interim report to be used as an aid in restoration.
b. Many areas of the building require careful architectural investigation
not possible in the research phase. This work should be accomplished during
the demolition phase of restoration when roof coverings and finish materials
are being removed. Investigation should include:
(1) Examination of roof framing in areas not previously accessible,
particularly at wall plates and above Rooms 203, 204 and 207.
(2) Examination of door and window openings, and classification of
doors, frames, sash, and trim by date, as far as possible.
(3) Examination of early finishes and construction materials now con-
(4) Examination of the stair, particularly the lower flight, which
may have extended to the east rather than turn at the landing.
The above information, combined with the interim report, should result in a
reasonably accurate knowledge of construction sequences and approximate dates.
Examination of the building should continue until restoration is complete.
A final joint report should then be issued by all involved professionals.
Preliminary Historical Report on the DeMesa-Sanchez
(Spanish Inn) Site
B-7, L-6, At. Augustine, Florida
Without Chain of Title Appended
I. FIRST SPANISH PERIOD
1. Owner: Antonio de Mesa
a. employed as Shore Guard, a minor position
in the Royal Treasury
b. born in Veracruz, Mexico
c. married in 1746 to Geronima Santollo of
d. fathered 7 children, 4 girls and 3 boys
e. went to Havana, Cuba in 1763 with his family
f. died in Havana before 1770
a. 11 varas N-S x 71 varas E-W
(31.6 ft. x 195.2 ft.) one vara = 33 inches
b. bounded on south by tabby house owned
by infantryman Lucas Escovedo on a lot
measuring 18 varas x 71 varas
(1) section of tabby structure located today
on Lot 6: see expansion of lot to the
south in 1835 & 1874 (total = 15.4 ft.)
a. stone house
(1) construction materials of all houses in St.
Augustine: 36% stone, 41% tabby, 23% wood
c. one story
II. British Period (1764-84)
1. owner: William Walton
a. head of William Walton Co. of New York City
Appendix 1 1
(1) export company contracted to supply St.
Augustine from 1726-1754
(2) earned 200,000 pesos annually from Florida
(3) citizens of St. Augustine contracted debts
of over 25,000 pesos with company by 1763
(4) Jesse Fish served as factor for the company
in St. Augustine at end of First Spanish Period
b. fourth largest property owner in St. Augustine in
early British Period (1765)
(1) solely or jointly owned 10 lots & 23 buildings
(a) relationship of debts to the company and
(b) speculator and absentee proprietor
c. died in 1768
a. 11 varas x 71 varas
b. same as DeMesa: 1769 Jeffery map shows Walton house
bordered on south by Escovedo's tabby structure
a. through 1769, same as DeMesa
b. Walton made no alterations
B. 1768 1771
a. lot & building reverted to British crown
C. 1771 1784
1. owner: Joseph Stout
a. employed as government surveyor
b. petitioned governor for land and Gov. Grant granted
lot and building in 1771
Appendix 1- 2
(1). one of 12 grantees in St. Augustine in 1771
c. left St. Augustine in 1784
a. 12 varas x 86 varas (33 ft. x 236.5 ft)
b. lot enlarged by vara (16.5 inches) to the south
and 15 varas (41.25 ft.) to the east
a. one story m #aoi4 k Lui~
b. roofed with shingles (tejamani)
c. no additional architectural details in documents
III. Second Spanish Period (1784-1821)
A. 1784 1803
1. owner: don Juan Sanchez
a. August 11, 1784 purchased property from Joseph Stout
for 450 pesos
b. employed as Chief Master Caulker of the Royal Works
with 420 pesos annual salary
c. born in Puerto Real, Andalusia, Spain
d. married in Cuba to Maria del Carmen Castaneda
of St. Augustine
e. fathered two girls
f. died in 1802
B. 1803 1832
1. owner: heirs of don Juan Sanchez
a. Maria del Carmen Castaneda, wife (inherited one-
half of property)
b. Maria de los Dolores Sanchez, daughter (one-quarter)
c. Maria del Rosario Sanches,.daughter (one-quarter)
Appendix 1 3
1. 12 varas x 86 varas
2. same as Stout
1. 1788: Rocque Map and Key
a. 3 room stone house with an outbuilding (kitchen) to
the east and a loggia to the south
(1) no documentary evidence as to who added additional
rooms and outbuilding
b. construction materials of all houses in St. Augustine: 43%
stone, 7% tabby, 50% wood
(1) of all wood structures, 84% were worthless huts
c. Sanchez house listed in good condition
(1) only 21% of extant masonry houses were listed in
d. second floor over one of the first floor rooms, probably
the western most room
e. according to map title, the map and key reflect housing
situation as of April 1, 1788
f. in Stout sale to Sanchez, no mention of partial upper
g. conclusion: Sanchez added second floor over front room
2. 1791: Book of Mortgages
a. second floor completed over entire structure, except
b. roofed with shingles
3. 1802: Inventory and Appraisal
a. calculate configuration
b. appraised value of house and kitchen: 2380 pesos
Appendix 1 4
IV. American Period (1821 ff.)
a. Lewis G. Melizet (Havana) and John M. Melizet
(Philadelphia) purchased property from Maria del Carmen
Castaneda and daughters (Havana) for price of $1,000.00
2. 1832 1977
a. 21 owners
b. building served as residence, boarding house, barber
shop, antique shop, restaurant, tearoom, artists studio
a. 12 varas x 86 varas
b. same as 1771 1835
2. 1835 1874
a. 36 ft. x 256 ft.
b. addition of 3 ft. to the south and 19.5 to the east
3. 1874 present
a. 47 ft. x 159 ft.
b. addition of 11 ft. to the south and loss of 97 ft.
to the east
1. 1893 1899
a. building assumed approximate present configuration
b. owner was Frederick Sulzner who used first floor as
a music shop from which he sold pianos and organs
Appendix 1 5
CITY DIRECTORY LISTINGS. SPANISH INN
1930 41 St. George Vacant
1934 41 St. George Old Spanish Inn (museum)
1937 41 St. George Old Spanish Inn (museum)
1940 43 St. George Old Spanish Inn (restaurant) Ruth Pontius
1945 41 St. George Mrs. Margaret Butler antiques
43 St. George Mrs. Margaret Butler
1947 41 St. George Mrs. Margaret Butler antiques
43 St. George Mrs. Margaret Butler
1949 41 St. George Fla. Times Union Office
43 St. George Mrs. Margaret Butler Antiques
43 St. George Frank K. Sturges
1951 41 St. George Treasure Island antiques
43 St. George Mrs. Bertha H. Wiles gifts
1953-54 41 St. George Vacant
43 .St. George Old Spanish Inn antiques
1955 41 St. George Vacant
43 St. George Vacant
1957 41 St. George Vacant
43 St. George Vacant
1959 47 St. George Old Spanish Inn museum
1960 43 St. George Old Spanish Inn museum
Overton G. Ganong
June 1977 Appendix 2
JUL L 8 1977
St. Augustine, Florida
August 1, 1802
Actions taken to inventory, appraise, and adjudicate the goods
left by Don Juan Sanchez, who died intestate.
In St. Augustine, Florida, on July 20, 1802, Don Fernando de la Puente and
Don Fernando de la Maza Arredondo, having been chosen by the widow and heirs of
Don Juan Sanchez to inventory, appraise, and divide the goods left by the latter
at his death intestate, went to the dwelling of the said widow, she being present
with the heirs, and began the inventory in the following manner - -
A large masonry house in San Carlos (sic) Street where the widow
lives with her family.
Another small (masonry house) on.the same street in front of the
A lot contiguous along the south (side) of the previously mentioned
(There follows a listing of slaves and a few personal belongings.)
In Saint Augustine, Florida, on July 21, 1802, we, Don Fernando de la
Puente and Don Fernando de la Maza Arredondo .; in order to proceed with
the appraisal name, for that pertaining to houses and lots, the Masters
of Masonry and Carpentry Don Jose Lorente and Don Antonio Llambias; for the
silver and gold valuables, the Master Don Pedro Lefebree; and for the fruit
trees and slaves, Don Bartolome de Castro and Don Juan Gianopoly. Having gone
to the residence of the said widow with the aforementioned appraisers, and finding
the heirs present, we began the appraisal in the following manner.
Appendix 3 1
Appraisal of the large House, block 2, no. 6
For 38 1/3 varas of masonry of the north 86 2
wall and cuchillo 15 pulgadas thick
at 18 reales per vara
931 (varas) of masonry of the east 210 3
wall at 18 reales per vara
38 1/3 (varas) of (masonry) for the south 86 2
wall at 18 reales per vara
88 (varas) of (Masonry) of the'west wall 198
at 18 reales per vara
14 (varas) of Sitaron of the division of 21
the parlor (sala), nine pulgadas
thick, at 12 reales per vara
66 (varas) of concrete floor of the parlor 24 6
and room (aposento) at 3 reales per vara
Cuchillo. Literally "knife." Defined as
something cut off or ending in an acute angle, such as a board
cut at an angle, a room with oblique walls, a triangular-shaped
piece of ground, etc. In the context of this appraisal the term
most likely means gble.
Source: Real Academia Espanola, Diccionario de la lengua espanola, 1970.
Citaron thin masonry partition wall.
Appendix 3 2
74 (varas) of masonry of the north wall of the 166 4
quarters of the dining room, 15 pulgadas thick,
at 18 reales per vara
f.5v Total of the reverse 793 1
24 varas of masonry of the east wall,
15 pulgadas thick, at 18 reales per vara 54
74 (varas) of (masonry) of the south wall at
18 reales per vara 166 4
-11 (varas) of Sitaron of the lower division,
vara thick, at 12 reales per vara 16 4
11 (varas) of (citaron) of the upper division
at 12 reales per vara 16 4
15 (varas) of (citaron) of the parapets (pretiles),
and pillars that support the upper floor of the
dining room, one half vara thick, at 21 reales
per vara 39 3
80 (varas) of the concrete (hormigon) floors of
the rooms and dining room at 2 reales per vara 25
18 (varas) of masonry of the south wall of the
stairway, 1 foot (pie) thick, at 15 reales per
vara 33 6
S Appendix 3 3
40(varas) of (masonry) of the two walls north
and south at 8 reales per vara
30 (varas) of (masonry) of the two walls east
and west at 8 reales per vara
1596 square (varas) of the whole lot, including
that occupied by the said (kitchen), at 1
real per vara
Appraisal of the Small House. Block 7, no.
(Appraisal of Rodriguez-Avero-Sanchez House follows.
appraisal indicates a masonry fireplace and chimney)
Carpentry of the Large House
For .... .The roof of said house 213
For .. .. the floors (pisos) 186
For .... .a balcony 103
For .. the railing (barandas) of the gallery 25
For........ the ceiling 112
For .. a stairway and pantry 53
For 10 .... doors with their ironwork 127
For 6 windows with the same (ironwork) 52
For . a partition (division) of boards 8
For 1 .. esquinero (built-in corner cabinet?) with
its glass window (vidriera) 15
For 1 . kitchen 25
Note that its.kitchen
Appendix 3 4
~: ~ 1 9 L .
a.C11 2. ..*.L~;t fI.
I, I,, tI; 'K
9%. 99 ,L i 0 'k: ; -
*... .. ...* c* 44
1r Sr 90 '
.6bL I-h !J **
*c 9 '
--i .1 Ir~ 9 ;:Ei
*C a ....
~ *9 r a
S .r .
.2 J .*
ow .** .- ..~ I .t -
9 .#r ..r .- *' 93,
9..6 1 .
9. 9 ., ... ''
.~ I 1 .s b9. .
*1 :. .. ~~ -~ ."
* I .o 9. 9
9. **: **. -~ 9* -i
S .~C *9 S
*. pU '9.
Sl .. -.'-_- .. .._ _. __. I -- 'o_ -
.I...... ... .. -. .
R IS T L FLOOR PLAN
S4 -- CAL. : / -I. '-
., ,PRO,, T L U F
II i'- .
J1 PROPOSED TRENCH LAYOUT FOR FIRST FLOOR
NOTE: See Door Elevations for appearance of each face. See Sheet 4 of 1958 HSAPB drawings for additional dimensions.
See 1977 interview with Parker for additional descriptions. All doors require careful examination; see Parker's
Similar to 103
101A 2-10-3/4 x 6-10-3/4
101B + 2-11-1/2 x 6-7-1/2
102 Pair + 2-8 x 6-7-1/2 x
102A + 2-9-3/4 x 2-7-3/4
103 2-8 x 6-7-1/2 x 1-9/16
104 2-11-1/2 x 6-7-1/2 x
105 1-9 x 4-10-1/2 x 1-1/4
105A + 3-1 x 6-4
106 2-11-1/2 x 6-8-1/2
*Modern 10 panel with
lite in one panel
Modern 11 panel
Modern 27 panel east
face; modern 11 panel
Early 5 panel with
Modern 11 panel
Similar to 103
Early with new
Made of early
Early on south
face; recent copy
Remoye door &
Remove door &
Restore door &
Remove door &
Replace door &
Restore door &
drawn from photos
2 conc. floors
Same as 101B
*HSAPB drawings indi-
cate pre-1900 storefront
door with sidelights may
have remained thru 1958
107 + 2-8 x 6-7 x 1-5/16
107A 2-4-3/4 x 6-0-1/2 x
108 2-5 x 6-5-1/4
108A 3-1-1/4 x 5-11-1/4
110 2-7-5/8 x 6-4-1/4 x
1-3/8 + 9/16" plank N. side
110A 2-11-3/4 x 6-5 x 1-9/16
H1OB 2-7-1/2 x 6-7 x 1-3/8
+ 9/16" plank W. side
111 2-6-1/2 x 6-5-1/4 x 1-5/8
112 2-7 x 6-5 x 1-1/4
113 2-7-3/4 x 6-7 x 1-1/2
114 + 2-2 x 5-7
115 2-10-1/4 x 6-5-1/2 x 1-3/16"
+ 9/16" planks west side
Removed probably modern
Modern 11 panel
Removed probably of
Same as 110A
Modern 30 panel one side;
vertical plank other
EAst face vertical planks
West face 11 panel
Modern 5 panel
Vertical planks one side,
Z-braced frame other side
Modern 4 panel subdivided
to 12 panels on N. side
Late pre-1900, 4 panel
Recent vertical plank
Original was early pre-
1900, 6 panel, raised
Recent copy of
Same as 110A
Early frame may
remain under modern
Early frame with
Replace door &
Same as 110A
Remove & replace
drawn from photos
Frame was white
at one time
Evidence of ear-
lier door on west
Early head may
Evidence of ear-
lier door on east
Made of pecky
Modern "H" hinges
Same as 202
2-7-5/8 x 6-7-5/8 x 1-3/8
Pair 1-6 x 6-11
3-5 x 6-6 x 1-3/8
2-9-7/8 x 6-3 x 1-1/8
2-7-3/4 x 6-8 x 1-3/16
2-8-1/8 x 6-7-1/2 x 1-3/8
3-3 x 6-8-1/4 x 1-1/8
Same as 202
Modern; glazed in diamond
pattern, perhaps field
Each a modern 10 panel;
top 4 panels glazed
Removed before frame
was painted black
Pre-1900 4 panel with
slightly raised panels
2-bottom panels beveled
1 side; upper panel is
9 light casement window
Early with classic
revival trim added
Early with classic
revival head added
on west side
Early with classic
revival head; entab-
lature south side
Not early, but dates
Not early, but
dates from door
Early with heavy
bead, classic re-
vival head in N.
To be deter-
visible in 1938
Door not shown
in frame on HSAPB
plaster of earlier,
larger window or
& frame or re-
move & replace
Restore or re-
locate at 203
To be deter-
trimmed at bottom
Earlier door or
window) was in
Evidence of ear-
lier 4-6 x 7-4
opening in plaster
hardware and hinges
appear to be ori-
ginal with door
2-0 x 6-7-1/2 x 1-3/8
2-8-1/2 x 6-7-1/2 x 1-1/4
2-11-1/8 x 6-5
Pair 1-10-1/2 x 6-2 x 1
2-11-1/4 x 6-5-1/4
2-11 x 6-5 x 1-1/4
2-4 x 6-6
+ 1930's 5 panel
raised panel 4-panel
3-panel with 3 lites
in upper panel above
2 vertical lower panels
+ 1930's; 2-panel
Early with heavy
hinges not original
lockset not ori-
Door reused from
lain rimlock not
Original HL hinges
with clinched nails;
rimlock with porce-
Same as 210A
Rimlock with porce-
lain knob; not ori-
Door may have been
reused in this open-
Rimlock with metal
Jl(DCOoR 105 ONLY)
i ( 27-PANEL
^ -- -
() 4-PALNELS-PANEL 6- PANEL
q-PANEL /;'Z- PANEL
w/I VISION w/ q PANE .UN
-PANEL Yt YION PANEL
11 II -PANrmL
/ IU5- PANEL
-/DOO 107 ONLY)
. BOTH SIDES
4.I iT i
NL L 4 I A --
/2 PANEL w/3 C7o- PANELw/
PANE VSlO M PANEL\@/ 4 VISION PAwMELL
m "I a
DOOR IOIA ONLY'
\ EOTH SIES
Elevations and detailed dimensions of window frames and sash are -recorded
on four 18-1/2" x 35" tracings in the files of the Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board. The tracings are undated and unidentified except for
the title "Window Details at Old Spanish Inn, St. Augustine, Florida".
The tracings probably supplement floor plans dated May, 1958. Windows in
place in December 1977 were as shown on these tracings except as noted.
Dates noted "(Parker)" were determined from Appendix 8 and field evidence.
All other dates are based on tentative construction sequences established
by.documentary and field evidence.
Post 1930 (Sanborn)
12/8 recent sash and frame, with in-
terior shutters. Each shutter is 13
panel window face, 3 panel room face
Same as 1.
In-opening casement glazed with colored
lites; recent frame. See comments at 4.
Evidence of window in wall; plastered
Same as 3. Openings at locations of 3
& 4 may have been provided when 3A & 4A
were closed, possibly 1802-1888. Present
sash are similar to 26 & 27 and may not
Evidence of window; plastered over (Par-
Recent 6/6 single hung with recent cre-
nellated frame. Inside shutters, 5 panels
both inside and outside faces. HSAPB
drawings show window similar to 3 & 4 in
Now missing but shown as horizontal slid-
ing on HSAPB drawing.
Recent four lite wood sash. Embellish-
ments probably added by Bath.
Appendix 6 6
19 1893-99 (Sanborn)
20a, 20b 1893-99 (Sanborn)
See Door 11
Appendix 6 7
Parker notes old sash reused; otherwise
same as 5.
Recent 6/6 single hung with recent frame;
inside shutters with 3 panels room face, 13
panels window face when closed,
Parker notes the sash in 11 was replaced and
10 was in place in 1959. Early parts, if
remaining, could date between 1802-1888. No
early portions are visible.
Six lite fixed (?) sash and frame.
Early 12/8 sash in early frame; single hung;
classic revival head apparently added; early
metal keeper at left jamb.
Same as 13, but no keeper.
Same as 13 but lower sash missing; classic
revival head added; metal keeper.
Recent 6/6 sash in recent frame; double hung.
6/6 single hung with classic revival head;
In-opening.casement with colored lites.
Evidence of window opening; plastered over.
6/6 single hung sash is recent. Frame pro-
bably early but has been reworked; similar
in size to 21, 22, 23.
Single light, single sash.
Now missing, but shown on HSAPB drawings.
Early frame similar to 13 but slightly lar-
ger overall. 12 pane upper sash, lower miss-
ing. Badly racked. HSAPB drawing shows 12
lite lower sash.
12/12 similar to 21.
Appendix 6 8
6/6 sash appears recent but is indicated
on HSAPB drawing. Frame similar to 21 in
size and details; earlier sash probably
Early 6/6 single hung sash. Frames early
but beaded trim is recent. Wood keeper at
Same as 24 but metal keeper plus wood
In-opening casement glazed with colored
Same as 26.
FIELD NOTES ON ATTIC FRAMING
EAST ROOM (KITCHEN)
Attic of kitchen and space to west.
Wall plate on north side is 4-1/2" deep by 8" wide and is hand-hewn.
There are a total of 7 ceiling joists spanning from masonry wall to masonry
Six of the ceiling joists appear to be hand-hewn.
The 7th, which is the 3rd going from east to west from the face of the chimney
in the east wall, has been cut apparently with a vertical stroke saw.
The joists appear to be equally spaced.
The first joist is located at the west face of the chimney in the east wall,
then the joists are equally spaced and the final joist is against the
masonry wall at the west side of the building.
The spacings of the joists varies 35-1/2, 36-1/2.
The approximate spacing on the average is around 36 inches on center.
The size of the ceiling joist is as follows:
Starting from east to west: 3-1/4 by 7-3/8; 2-1/4 by 7-1/4, 3-1/8 by 6 and
this is the member that is cut on a vertical stroke machine, 2-3/8 by 7,
2-1/2 by 7-1/4, 2-1/4 by 7-3/4 and the last one against the wall is 2-3/4
This ceiling joist is hard against the face of a plastered coquina gable end.
The ceiling joists bear directly upon the plate at the north wall and on top
of the ceiling joints and notched down into the tops of the hand-hewn
ceiling joist is a 7-3/4 by 1" vertical saw supplementary plate upon which
the roof rafters bear.
The roof rafters are located approximately on the center lines of the ceiling
The rafters are toenailed directly upon this supplementary plate.
The fact that this plate is vertical sawn indicates that the roof has at least
All of the rafters have been vertical saw cut.
The depth of the rafter over the east masonry wall is exactly 4".
Then from east to west the size of the rafters is as follows: 3-7/8 by 3-1/8,
4-1/4 by 3, 4-1/8 by 3-1/4, 3-3/4 by 3, 4 by 3-1/8, 4-1/8 by 3, and 3-3/4
by 3, the last member being hard against the stucco surface of the gable
end at the west end.
Correction, the last member stands off the gable end by approximately 3".
These members are framed on top of the supplementary plate on the north wall by
being toenailed to the top of the plate.
They are not notched in or over.
At the ridge, the rafters are butt jointed in a vertical joint and there is
evidence of a toenailed connection, although they may be spiked through
The shape of the gable is not symmetrical.
The south side of the gable is at a considerably lesser slope than the north.
At the north wall, the slope of the rafters is almost exactly 12 and 12.
The rafters on the south half of the roof are not the.same size as the rafters
on the north, but are generally somewhat smaller, particularly in depth,
although the span is greater.
Appendix 7 1
There are three collar beams or wind braces located at every other rafter.
these are scrap material measuring approximately 5 by 1/2.
Another of these braces measures 5/8 by 5-3/4.
This is the center one.
These braces are vertical saw cut.
The previous dimension was from the westernmost.
The easternmost is 3/4 by 5".
They are not installed horizontally, or level but slope up to the south slightly.
The size of the rafters on the south side of the gable are as follows, starting
with the rafter over the masonry wall on the east side:
First rafter is 3-3/4" over the masonry wall.
The next is 3-3/4 by 3, 4 by 3-1/4, 3-7/8 by 3, 4 by 3-1/4, 4-1/8 by 3, 4 by 3,
and 3-3/4 by 3 which is the last rafter on the west side adjacent to the
masonry gable end wall. (These dimensions depth x width)
The framing of the rafters to the supplementary plate on the south side is simi-
lar to that on the north.
The runners supporting the lath for the ceiling of the room below are circular
They measure approximately 3/4 by 3" and are spaced at approximately 16" on
center, but not exactly.
The laths themselves are circular saw cut at the ceiling.
At the south wall the ceiling joists are notched slightly to receive the supple-
There is lath with stucco visible between the ends of the ceiling joists,and
supplementary short stub columns between the main plate and the bottom of
the supplementary plate act as nailers to receive the lath.
All of the lath and stucco work appears to be of recent origin.
The rafters over the porch to the south are scabbed to the east face of the
The tops of the porch rafters are in the same plane as the tops of the main
rafters and extend out over the porch, but it can't be seen from inside whe-
ther the roof pitch changes or not.
A typical porch rafter measures 3-1/4" deep by 2-1/4" wide: correction 2-3/4 wide,
although this may not be a true dimension due to the fact that these are
cut on a bevel at the ends where scabbed to the ceiling joists.
All roof sheathing boards appear to have been either vertical saw cut or were
run through a standard planing machine.
The latter seems to be more possible.
These marks are almost certainly planing marks, in fact.
The edges of the sheathing boards were circular saw cut.
These boards measure 7/8 by 7-3/4 typically and are spaced apart slightly to a
varying degree sometimes a 1/4", sometimes up to 2".
All nails visible penetrating the sheathing are wire nails.
No cut nails are visible anywhere in this sheathing.
The bottom of the tin roofing is directly laid to the top of the sheathing.
At the east gable of this space, masonry work appears to have been accomplished
all at one time.
There are some cracks in the wall at the south half of this gable, the cause of
which is uncertain.
The chimney or upper portion of the chimney is not centered on the gable, and
in fact is of irregular shape.
Appendix 7 2
The top of the fireplace or chimney extending up from the room below is not
symmetrical with the upper portion of the chimney extending through the
The portion of the chimney from the top of the ceiling joists to just below
the rafters is of coquina.
The portion of the chimney just from this point penetrating the roof is brick.
The top of the masonry terminating with the top of the ceiling joists measures
5'8" wide by 2'3" deep, measured from the inside face of the gable end out
to the west.
The center of this construction is approximately one foot south of the center
of the gable.
The upper portion of the chimney at the lower portion, approximately half way
up in the attic measures 1'9" by 3'll" and the north face of this exten-
sion is approximately 4" south of the north face of the masonry construction
The upper portion of this part of the chimney tapers in slightly to the bottom
of the brick work, which measures approximately 3' wide by 1' from the east
The north face of the brick portion of the chimney is about 1' north of the
center line of the gable.
The masonry gable end at the west end of this attfc space appears to be symet-
The center of its gable aligns with the ridge of the gable over the east room
and the gable end is symmetrical about this line.
It is apparent that this masonry construction preceded the wooden joists and
rafters visible in this eastern portion of the building.
At the south end of this gable end, a parapet wall projects above the low por-
tion of the gable.
This masonry wall is an extension of the masonry wall visible on the floor below
and forms a parapet that terminates within the attic space west of the gable
The gable wall apparently was constructed prior to the parapet for there is a
distinct construction line where the parapet meets the top of the sloping
portion of the gable.
CENTRAL ROOM, EAST OF CHIMNEY
The following is a description of the central portion of the house.
The masonry wall with the parapet located just off center down the middle of
this wing of the house begins at the gable end wall at the east end of this
portion of this house and extends to the west.
The evidence that the parapet was constructed after the gable end can be found
in first the construction joint which occurs between the masonry construction
and the gable end wall; secondly, in the fact that short kick rafters remain
which are not now in use and which have been removed for the six bays on the
east end of the structure.
These kick rafters supported a lower sloping roof to the south.
Below the kick rafters, there is evidence that earlier stripping was located on
top of the main roof rafters.
Therefore, this would indicate a sequence of three roofs.
The earliest roof, over this middle portion was a symmetrical gable, the slope of
the northern half of which was 12 and 12.
However, the southern half appears to be slightly greater pitch, perhaps 13 and
12, and it is obvious at the ridge that the angle thus formed is less than.
Appendix 7 3
In any event, the ridge continues the ridge from the room to the east.
From botton of ceiling joists to top of rafter at ridge center line is
The rafters at the north wall spring directly from the top of the wall plate.
The wall plate is not continuous from the room to the east.
There is a butt joint within the thickness of the gable end wall.
In this portion of the house, there is no supplementary plate bearing on top
of the ceiling joists; rather the roof rafters spring directly from the
top of the plate and the ceiling joists are spiked with two large head
long spikes to the side of the rafters.
It is apparent that an earlier ceiling was in the room.
What appear to be earlier ceiling joists are located approximately 4" above
the top of the present furring upon which the lath is nailed.
The roof sheathing boards and metal roofing typical above the eastern room
are continuous above this room.
The width of the attic from face to face of roof rafter at a point even with
the top of the furring to which the lath is nailed is 129-1/2".
Inside dimension of the north rafter from ridge to same point on inside face
Inside dimension of the south rafter is 96-1/4.
These dimensions were measured on the first rafter pair to the west of the
gable wall on the east side of the middle portion of the building.
The rafters are not side lapped but are mortised and tenoned together and
pegged at the ridge.
The south rafter contains the tenon; the north rafter, the mortise.
Pegs are hand carved and measure approximately 3/4" in diameter.
Over the gable at the east end, the first rafter pair is built into the top of
the gable and flush with the top of the gable.
These measure 3-3/8" deep by 3-3/4" wide.
The next pair measured: north rafter, 3-3/4 by 4-7/8; south rafter, 3-3/4 by
4-3/4, width by depth.
Supplementary rafter 2-3/4"wide by 4-1/4"deep.
This pair is marked with the Roman Numeral VIII.
The original pair are hand-hewn and the supplementary rafter is vertical saw
The next pair to the west, north rafter measures 3-3/4 wide by 4-3/4 deep;
south rafter 3-3/4 wide by 5" deep; supplementary rafter, 3-1/2 by 3-7/8".
Finishes same as noted before.
This pair has the Roman Numeral VIIII.
The next pair north rafter measure 3-7/8 by 3-1/2; south rafter 3-3/4 by 4,
both hand-hewn, Roman Numeral II.
Supplementary rafter is 2-3/4" wide by 3-7/8 deep vertical saw cut.
Bottom side of this supplementary rafter has evidence of nail holes and some
fire marking, which is true for the pair.
The next pair has the Roman Numeral X.
North rafter is flanked by a pair of 3/4 by 7-3/4 scabs full length nailed on
with cut nails.
The width of the original member is 3-3/4".
South rafter is 3-3/4 by 4", hand-hewn.
Supplementary rafter, 3-5/8 wide by 3-1/2 deep, vertical saw cut.
Appendix 7 4
This pair of rafters occurs adjacent to and just east of the chimney at which
a break in construction is visible.
This pair is 16" east of the east face of the chimney.
Cumulative dimensions of rafter spacing measured from the inside face of the
east gable to the west are as follows: each dimension is read to the west
face of the rafter 32-1/4, then 68-1/2, 108, and 146-1/2 to the last
pair to the east of the chimney.
The additional dimension from the west face of this last pair to the west
face of the rafter occurring on the west face of the chimney is 33-3/4".
The original ceiling joists in this area are hand-hewn and measure approxi-
mately 1-3/4 by 3-1/8.
These joists may have been nailed to only one side of the rafters.
The plate above the north wall is in very poor condition and is approximately
5" in width.
Depth cannot be verified.
There are short stubbed columns located in the former parapet wall on the west
side of this attic space.
These columns support the supplementary rafters that continue the present south
These members are vertical saw cut and rest on plinth blocks installed in
notches which apparently were originally provided to receive kick rafters
similar to those still in existence in the westernmost part of this attic
not yet described.
These short stubbed columns measure 3 by 4; the first to the east, the second
is 3 by 7, the third is 2-5/8 by 8, and the last 3-1/4 by 4-1/8.
There is evidence in the north parapet wall that a wooden plate does support
the ends of the rafters on the south side of the gable.
This plate is built into the masonry wall and plastered over.
The chimney has a strange configuration in that only the eastern portion ex-
tends through the roof.
The bottom portion, which is supported by planks at the level of the plaster,
measures approximately 2'11" by 1'5" and extends above the ceiling approxi-
The eastern portion of the chimney extends through the roof.
The east face is flush with the lower portion and the upper part of the chim-
ney measures 13" from east to west and 18" from north to south.
The chimney is composed of an orangy brick under-fired and very poorly con-
It was apparently plastered or stuccoed on the exterior faces.
CENTRAL ROOM, WEST OF CHIMNEY
The following describes the western portion of the central part of the house
in the attic.
The general almost symmetrical gable configuration in this portion of the
attic continues as found in the east part of the attic.
However, this portion of the attic has a shallow inverted "tea tray" type
This may be an indication that the same type of ceiling was formerly located
in the eastern portion of these spaces.
Appendix 7 5
The framing is similar to that in the eastern portion except that on the
ceilings a supplementary flat board has been located between each pair
of rafters, spanning from north to south to support the plaster laths.
These supplementary framing members vary greatly in size; some are hand-
hewn, some are circular saw cut.
None appear to be vertically saw cut.
All of these members are of scrap lumber, some of which has been used pre-
All of which is a clear indication that this ceiling is of relatively recent
origin in this western portion of the attic to the white boards located
in the attic space at the eastern edge of what may be the earliest portion
of the house.
There are, beginning at the approximate center line of the chimney, six pairs
of rafters and ceiling joists.
The rafters are numbered beginning at the center line of the chimney on the
Numbers VI, III, IIII, XI, V, and VII.
These members are all paired and are all hand-hewn.
These members appear to have a better hand-hewn finish than the members in the
eastern portion of the attic.
The first supplementary rafter on the south side of the roof located above the
approximate center line of the chimney is vertical saw cut.
However, supplementary rafter, at pair III is circular saw cut; also at IIII;
also at XI, V, VII.
In sighting down the kick rafters in this portion of the roof, it is apparent
that they do not intersect where the supplementary rafters bear upon the
wall at the south side of the house.
They fall a few feet to the north of that intersection if projected.
It should be noted that there are whitewashed wide planks measuring 1 by
8-1/4 at the east end of the attic, and measuring approximately the same
plus or minus at the west end of the attic.
These planks are half lapped and are whitewashed both faces at both the east
and west ends of the attic.
The remains of these planks are also visible at the very top of the gable.
The planks are nailed to the west face of attic framing, and there is clear
evidence in the parapet wall to the south that these planks at one time
at least extended as high as the top of the kick rafters in those walls.
The planks at the west gable end went right to the ridge of the framing.
These planks are all nailed with hand wrought nails.
There is evidence at the west end that there were vertical studs to which
these planks were nailed at one point in time.
However, this may not be an indication of stud lines since these markings in
the boards do not seem to penetrate.
These boards were in place prior to the application of the last coat of stucco
to the parapet wall visible in the attic.
The dimensions of the shingle stripping located on the southern rafters is
approximately 1-1/4 by 2, and these members are located approximately
7" on center.
Shingle nails visible in this stripping are cut nails.
The stripping was apparently pit sawn (or hand sawn).
Appendix 7 6
Some loose members of stripping in the attic indicate that the stripping
is held to the rafters with hand-wrought nails.
The west end of the middle section clearly demonstrates that the western
portion of the house preceded the middle portion, at least as far as
roof construction is concerned.
Portions of earlier stripping still exist adjacent to the whitewashed boards
at the west end of the middle portion of attic, clearly indicating that
the east slope of the west part of the building at one time continued
down above the plate of the west wall of the west portion of the build-
The following comments refer to the attic over the main western portion of
the house stretching from north to south.
All roof framing members in this portion of the attic are hand-hewn.
Some of the rafters are framed in cypress.
Ceiling joists appear to be pine.
Ceiling joists are half lapped into or onto the rafters and secured by two
The spikes appear to be hand wrought.
The ceiling joists are half lapped to the north face of the rafters.
The rafters are numbered with Roman Numerals which are not consecutive and
which read from north to south as follows:
Gable end framing is not numbered.
Then XVII, then XIIII, then XII, then XIIIII on the west rafter and VX on
the east rafter.
Next XI and IX respectively on the west and east rafters.
Next XIII and IIIX respectively on the west and east rafters.
Next X on both rafters.
Next IXX and XVI respectively west to east.
Next VIIII and VIIII.
Next VIII both rafters.
Next VI both rafters.
Next II on west rafter; no mark on east rafter.
Next VII on west, VII on east.
Next V on both rafters.
Next IIII on both rafters.
Next III both rafters.
There are a total of 18 groups of rafters and joists from north to south, in-
cluding the one against the north wall and the one against the south wall.
The sizes of rafter groups and joists are as follows (width x depth):
From north to south, first note that the roof pitch is almost surely 12 and
12 as visually evident but not checked by measurements.
First group against north wall at both west and east rafters; width indeter-
minate because of wall; depth approximately 5", wooden peg at ridge is
The joist is spaced approximately 2" from the face of the wall and measures
3-1/8 by 4.
Appendix 7 7
Group XVII: west rafter 4-1/4 by 5; east rafter 3-3/8 by 4-1/4; joist
3-3/8 by 3-3/4.
Group XIIII: west rafter 3-3/4 by 4-5/8; east rafter 3-3/4 by 4-3/4; joist
2-7/8 by 3-3/4.
Group XII: west rafter 3-3/4 by 4-1/2; east rafter 4 by 4-1/2; joist 2-3/4
Group XIIIII and VX: west rafter 3-1/2 by 4-3/4; east rafter 3-3/4 by 4-1/4;
joist 3-1/2 by 4-1/4.
Group XI: 3-1/2 by 4-3/8; 4 by 4; 3-1/2 by ?-3/4.
Group XIII: 4 by 4-3/4; 3-1/4 by 4-1/2; 3-1/4 by 3-1/4.
Group X: 3-3/4 by 4-1/2; 3-3/4 by 4-1/4; 2-3/4 by 3-3/4.
Group XXXI and XVI: 3-1/2 by ?-3/4; 3-1/2 by 5; 3-1/4 by 3-1/2.
Group VIIII: 4-1/8 by 4-1/8; 3-3/4 by 4-1/2; 3-1/4 by 3-3/4.
Group VIII: 4-1/4 by 4-3/4; 4 by 4-1/4; 2-3/4 by 3-1/2.
Group VI: 4 by 5, 4 by 4-1/4; 3 by 4-1/2.
Group II: 3-1/2 by 4-3/4; 3-3/4 by 5; 3 by 3.
Group VII: 4 by 4-3/4; 4 by 5; 3 by 3-3/4.
Group V: 4 by 5, 4 by 4-1/4; 3-3/4 by 3-1/2.
Group IIII: 3-1/2 by 4-1/4; 3-1/2 by 4-/34; 3-1/2 by 4-1/4.
Group III: 4 by 5; 4 by 4-1/2; 3-1/4 by 4.
Final group is partially built into the south end wall.
The width of its members could not be determined.
The depth however is 5 on the east, 4-1/2 on the west.
The joist is approximately 2 to 3" off of the face of the wall and measures
3 by 4-1/4.
Three-quarter inch thick boards span across the bottoms of ceiling joists to
support lath for plaster ceilings.
These members are approximately 16" on center and average 4 to 6" in width.
At the eastern edge of the main house attic, rafters kick out from the main
rafters on the east side to the top of a later parapet apparently construc-
ted on the existing masonry wall below.
This must be verified, however; this parapet appears to be a continuation of
the south wall of the center space of the building.
A valley beam continues the slope of the kicker rafters from the middle por-
tion of the building around the corner and along the east side of the main
portion of the building.
A shaped valley board is still located above the valley rafter.
There is evidence between the kicker rafters and the spring line of the main
rafter that an earlier roof continued down to an earlier ridge or eave
opposite the plate.
The inverted dished ceiling of this portion of the house is considerably
higher than what appears to be dished ceilings in the middle portion of
The plate line appears to be approximately 11" measured vertically from the top
of the lath to the top of the plate on the intermediate partition running
east to west across this portion of the building.
This portion of the building exhibits the same milled sheathing boards seen
elsewhere and the metal roof continues above this portion of the building
At the ridge, the rafters are mortised and tenoned and held by means of a wooden
peg approximately 5/8 to 3/4" in diameter.
The tenon is on the east members; the mortise in the west members.
Appendix 7 8
4 I ,
CHIMNEY IN CENTRAL ROOM
At the partition flanking the fireplace in the middle portion of the build-
ing, the studs appear to be rough sawn circular cut members to which
the whitewashed planks are nailed in at least one case with wire nails.
Faces of the present chimney adjacent to the whitewashed planks do not bear
any evidence one way or the other as to whether the planks butted the
chimney in their present configuration or not.
At the masonry gable wall, at the east end of the central portion of the
building and at the west end of the kitchen area, the southern extension
of the gable is wood framed.
The gable wall tends to end at the south face of the parapet extension.
In any event, there is no evidence of the masonry wall extending to within
at least 2' of the attic south of this gable.
Appendix 7 9
An interview with David Parker regarding DeMesa House/Spanish Inn
on June 15, 1977.
TOP SOUTH SIDE: Little tile roof over the window, all iron
work was redone. Everything iron new 1959.
as is except spindles were changed. It was
cut off and shortened when they started.
was poured 1959. Always infringed into the street.
parts replaced. Casing was scabbed to outside
of the old frame.
Arch openings were replaced, The whole front of coquina was laid
by "Al" the Maintenance Man at Security First Federal. The doors
were all made up of plywood, picture molding and one-by stuff.
They were made up of 2 & 3 panel doors left in the building itself.
The iron work on the doors was sent over from Spain. The rest
was made by.Ivan Smith's Company in Jacksonville except where
noted. The"iron grills were in a design book that Bath had of the
architects in Spain. The 43 was sent over from Spain. The little
door overhang arrangement was added later.
Center door was there doors weremade from doors found in the Inn.
Frame (casing) was scabbed'on. Sash was all replaced.
The arch was not touched except to add the iron grill. This was
made by Ivan Smith. Rings.were added (to the planking to the
DOOR 101 A Casing faced and worked in to match architects drawings.
Doors again were made up of doors found in the Inn.
DOOR 104 overhang already there. Casing as was. The niche
by statue of St. Augustin was cut in and attached to
ROOM 107 Windows sash to the left replaced, one on the right
was there when job started.
DOOR 107 made up of parts in the Inn by the HSAPB crew. Stucco
was pulled from south side of building and upstairs
sash remains as was. Covered by the iron grill as
sent down on detail sheets. Exterior iron work done
by Ivan Smith Company.
ROOM 110 Casing left, door replaced window, original sash.
Iron work by Ivan Smith.
UPSTAIRS Nothing done except addition of two grills.
Some demolition took place in the rear of the building.
A small wooden addition. Back steps were there in '59.
Left as was demolition took place behind little wall.
Appendix 8 1
SPACE 113 & 115
ROOM 101 & 104
DOOR 101 B
ROOMS 101, 102
Was some sort of kitchen area that served
the rest of the,building when it was a tea
room. It was a wooden addition.
Most of patio there. Part pulled up to make
plantings. Area by well was possibly an old
cistern covered with coquina. A hole was
punched in and the well set on top of it.
Spanish piece was sent over by Bath. The wood-
work was designed in Spain. The gate was
added during Bath's residence. The two low
patio walls were added. The planter in the
northwest corner existed at the time.
Support for hearth to the second floor was
completely redone. Ceiling was stripped. Mantel
was original. Tiles were from Bernwerthe a'nd
Bernhardt in Lyon Building they were Mexican
importers. The fireplace was not relined
merely opened. The tile panel of Menendez
came with Bath. The interior shutters were
added during work.
Was opened and made larger. A wall was taken
out. The masonry wall wasn't taken out.. The
whole area was lathed and covered with plaster.
A Victorian type arch wallpaper and plaster.
The ceiling was stripped and painted. When
Bath came down, it was natural. The boards
were cut in on the level of the second floor.
The idea was to break it into two levels. The
ceiling was never taken.down, This room predates
Nothing was touched. The original casings are
in the hallway.
Panel added by Bath
In .room 103 the ceiling was stripped. Several
supporting members of the balcony were removed
and changed (not positive). The old trick was
to take a foot adze and rough them up. Some
supporting work may have been done on the
balcony. The balcony never stuck out beyond t]
sidewall. New wiring has been put in. Was
\,N one room. East wall possibility of a large
opening filled in with concrete block.
-nothing was touched on the stair support in the
stair support in the northwest corner. The support
in the center (east wall) was put in because of
some deflection upstairs. This was done after '59.
Bath moved into the second floor and everything
started to go. It was put in to raise the sinking
floor in the little room which was a study that
Bath had. A
Appendix 8 2
DOOR 107 A
TO ROOM 115
Casing was original.
West wall was added and east wall of front room.
It was an L shaped room. The ceiling was just
stripped and painted., .The north window in room 106
Ytwas an original window. Baseboards,were replaced
Nothing was done except the woodwork. Replastered
the north wall. Replastered the entire wall
and did the base. Everything is the same
Stripped ceiling. When taking the lathe off, they
found an inset which appears to be a window
(south wall). They left it and hung a large
crucifix. Room was replastered. No fireplaces
were taken out at all. The window in the north
wall the sash was taken out in '59. The sill
was there and the sash scaled off and all base-
boards and woodwork except casings were replaced.
Peeled entirely of plaster and left with cowuina.
Fireplace there-door casings, doors done pursuant
to drawing. North window new sash. South
window old sash. Anyplace they had.a six over
S,-six or small multi pane sash, they left it.
Anywhere they didn't, they replaced it.
No new doors. There was one large opening closed
by Mr.Parker in '59. The mantel was a shambles.
They peeled all the plaster off.
This was all part of the little wooden addition.
Door was made. The small stuff was sent over by
the architect. Most of the stuff was built in Spai
because it could not be found. Was built from some
old supplies of walnut they had. The iron work
was supposedly old. There were three pieces of
furniture that was old. One little table that he
had great aspirations for.
The ceiling was replastered. They started to stri
the ceiling and found .there was nothing there of ar
V' consequence so they just let it go. Relatively
All woodwork was there. Framing going up in wall
was all there. Some fairly modern work. Fraser
did a lot of work. He had the whole front rebuilt
by "Al" (Security First Federal). Fraser owned
it before Marguerita Phillips. He closed up the
arches. Bath was the one who stripped the finishes
Where they were redone, he redid them. The only
S finishes that are original in the house are the
front two rooms on the southside and part of a roon
on the north side. A 8
Appendix 8 3
Basically cosmetics to allow Bath to move in
-and live here. Any work done was done by
The sagging floor, cabinet built and windows
cased was all, doneby Bath. He built cabinet
and cased in the windows. Most of the doors
were in the building but reworked to Bath's
Fireplace after '59. The whole place was a
disaster. Had front two rooms redone because
they were used as a study. Everything else don
up there was done by someone else.
None of upper porch was touched.
The architect required in hisdrawings that the
roof be covered with Spanish tile which meant
that the whole roof would have to be rebuilt.
Bath was talked out of doing it and left the
roof in its entirety with the understanding
that nothing would support that much weight
so it was left. All rafters are just as they
were in '59. The balcony was replaced.
The fixtures were locally crafted by Ivan Smith
Mr. and Mrs. Bath stayed upstairs part-time.
They used a study, living room and a little
bedroom.' The rest was shut up.
The trim was added at a later date. The keysto
shape was added on. The ceiling was like it is
Has the original mantel. The upstairs tiles
Were there, the ones downstairs weren't.
Appendix 8 4
-~~~ i I'LiII
f I i7if "
I- I~ I ii I I II .3' -9
r 1 V di
.JoI.4J p.JrLSO KJ ZQ---a-
if3 i c -
.___ I -- --:---' '