JOANEDA HOUSE: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT REPORT
HISTORIC ST. AUGUSTINE PRESERVATION BOARD
A. Schematic Design Report.
A preceding report entitled Joaneda House: Schematic Design Report for the
Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board, dated April 10, 1975, contains
material not repeated in this report but which is incorporated by reference.
The Schematic Design Report shall be considered part of this report as if in-
cluded in full herein.
2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL INVESTIGATION
The Schematic Report discusses two archaeological investigations completed to
No additional archaeological work has bee mplished since the Schematic
Report was completed.
The first investigation is suammrizea in a rewritten unpublished manuscript
entitled Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board: Preliminary Report of
Excavations at the Joaneda House, B15L7. December 17, 1973 Jan. 2. 1974;
Thomas G. Ledford, Curator, Feb. 6, 1975; and is included as Appendix 2 in
the Schematic Report.
The second investigation is recorded as field notes and drawings of excavated
areas of the first floor by Robert H. Steinbach on March 12, 17, 18, 19,
and 20, 1975, and is included as Apps. x 3 in the Schematic Report.
The architectural paragraphs below incorporate certain information from these
The Schematic Report discusses chronology or ownership r 'umented by Hamnan,
J. E., 4-24-70, for the Historic St. Augustine Pres. ation Board.
No additional historical documentation has been accomr. ed since the Schema-
tic Report was completed.
This documentation is included as Appendix 1 of the Sc. Di,. Duort and is
referenced in the architectural paragraphs below.
3. ARCHITECTURAL INVESTIGATION
Further architectural investigation confirrr the conclusions of the Schematic
Report stating that majox clemen; 3 of original construction remain in
reasonably good condition.
However, certain floor joists, wall plates, and other members must be extensively
repaired at a projected cost greater than anticipated in the Schematic Report.
4. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION
A. Interior First Floor Flooring.
The West and Ea., Rooms have been investiga ed; the floor of the South Room has
not been investigated.
Although ac :-_ nal archaeological work in all floor areas is des- able, it is
probable -.hat the original floor was of wood planks supported -v coquina
blocks a. noted in Steinbach's r port (Schematic Report, Appenuix 1).
The coquina ocks were laid without mortar on tamped earth and were approximately
three to five inches thick (See Photographs 9, 11, 19, 23).
The blocks were laid in rows running north-south; starting rows were provided
hard against the east and west masonry walls of both the East and West Rooms
(See Photographs 11, 23).
4. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION (Continued)
A. Interior First Floor Flooring (Continued).
In the East Room, four rows total were provided; the two flanking the extreme
walls, and two intermediate rows at the third points of the room, or appro-
ximately 2'-10" apart (See Photograph 23).
In the West Room, nine rows total were provided; the two flanking the extreme
walls, and seven intermediate rows approximately 2'-4" apart.
Blocks within each row were occasionally continuous but seem to have been spaced
apart in most areas (See Photographs 11,23).
Spacing between blocks is difficult to estimate because a number were disturbed
when the white sand fill was installed, but distances up to three feet seem
The top of the blocks were at an elevation ranging between 6'-10" M.S.L. to
6'-11-7/8" M.S.L.; assume 6'-11" M.S.L. average.
In order to determine the thickness of assumed wooden floor construction above
the blocks, the walls and early plaster were closely examined.
At masonry walls the lower unexposed faces of masonry were often left unfinished
and project as ledges into the rooms (See Photograph 19).
The bottom of the wooden flooring would, have covered the ledges and extended to
the finished wall face.
The highest ledge observed is in the West Rooman south of the fireplace, and is
at 7'-3-3/4" M.S.L., or approximately 4-3/4" above the average elevation
of the tops of the coquina blocks.
The 4-3/4" dimension probably represents the approximate thickness of a wooden
nailer or sleeper centered above and parallel to each row of coquina blocks.
The sleeper spanned between the separate blocks and provided level bearing and a
In order to determine the thickness of the original floor planks, it is necessary
to assume that the original plaster was installed after the floor and was
terminated by it.
Some evidence of the termination of original plaster was found south of the
fireplace in the West Room at approximately 7'-5i" M.S.L., or approximately
1-3/4" above the top of the sleepers.
The 1-3/4" dimensions probably represents the approximate thickness of the floor
planks; an estimated plank width could not be determined from field evidence.
Dark silt found in an arc in front of the hearth and north door threshold accu-
mulated over a period of time by filtering between the flooring planks.
The relatively large accumulation of silt may indicate the original planks were
However, the excellent quality of the dressed finish on the attic floor joists
and local precedent strongly favor the better quality tongue and groove or
rabb e ted joint.
The most probable joint was the rabbeted, for this joint would maintain a
finished appearance after shrinkage, but also allow silt and sand to pass
through more easily than a tongue and groove.
B. Stair Landing, First Floor.
Stair landings and possible configurations of original attic access are dis-
cussed under "Indeterminate Modifications".
C. Porch Floor.
The tabby porch floor is discussed in Ledford's report. (Schematic Report,
D. Attic or Loft Floor.
The existing joists are approximately 3" x 6" spaced approximately 2'-6" apart
with an early bead hand-planed on the face side of each bottom edge.
The joists are built into masonry below the plate at each wall and are original.
The faces are hand-planed smooth.
The planed finish and beaded edges indicate the joists were intended to be
exposed to view.
Traces of whitewash indicate they were exposed to view and whitewashed before
machine-sawn wood lath was installed.
4. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION (-Continued)
D. Attic or Loft Floor (Continued).
At the north wall, one hand-wrought 6" spike was found driven diagonally
through the plate into the top of the joist below.
Additional connections have not been found but are probably present.
This connection and the lack of other positive ties between joists and the
plate are inadequate by modern standards.
Very little original flooring remains in place.
However, several heart pine planks of two types were found in the north and
south unused eaves of the attic space (See Photographs 25, 26, 39, 30).
The first type was approximately 7/8-inch thick, rabbeted along each long
side to produce a "T" shape in cross section with one 10-inch face and
one ll-inch face.
Although at least one plank was planed both sides, most were planed one side.
Two coats of whitewash were apparent on the bottom finished faces exposed to
view in the rooms below.
These planks were fastened with hand-wrought nails, and are probably the ori-
ginal attic flooring.
When installed alternate boards were inverted in order to cause rabbeted edges
As discussed above, this type of joint was probably used in first floor planks
The second type was approximately 1-5/16 inches thick, tongue-and-groove,
11-3/4 inches wide face, 12-3/16 inches wide overall.
The tongue was approximately 5/16 inches wide, with eased edges.
Both edges of one face were finished with a slight "V"; all examined planks
were fastened with cut nails.
Areas in which these planks were installed could not be determined with cer-
tainty, but they apparently replaced earlier planks that had deteriorated.
E. House Roof Rafters.
The earliest existing rafters are approximately 3 inches by four inches, spaced
approximately 2'-6" apart, and aligned with the attic floor joists.
Recent rafters span above earlier rafters on the south slope adjacent gable
ends in order to warp the roof surface to conform with later gable slopes.
Examination revealed that finishes varied, as follows:
One had top and one side adzed, bottom and other side hand-sawn.
One had bottom and one side adzed, top and other side hand-sawn.
At least five members were hand-sawn both sides.
Apparently no members were adzed both sides.
The presence of sawing and absence of adding indicates examined members were rip-
sawn from large trunks and not individually formed frman saplings.
The rough exposed finishes indicate that the loft was considered a secondary,
The roof is framed as a simple gable with 45 degree pitch.
There is no ridge beam; the northern rafters are tenoned into mortised slots in
the southern rafters and fastened with 3/4-inch wooden pegs +; 8" long shaped
by hand (See Photograph 32).
Each rafter is fastened to the plate with two nails driven through its top into
the plate; whether the nails are hand-wrought or cut cannot be determined
until restoration begins.
The nails are the only fasteners apparent; rafter ends were flat bevel cut with-
out tenons or other means to transfer horizontal shear or thrust to the plate.
Each matching pair of rafters is numbered with Roman numerals incised in the
west face of each rafter near the ridge, from I through and including XIII.
The numbers four and nine are written 11I and VIIII, respectivrly (See Photo-
Roman numerals and general construction techniques indicate that these rafters
are original, but a clearer determination must await identification of the
F. Porch Roof Rafters.
The existing rafters are approximately 3 inches by 3-1/2 inches, spacing identi-
cal to the main house rafters.
The bottom edges are side beaded in a manner similar to the attic floor joists,
indicating the porch rafters were intended to be exposed to view.
- 3 -
4. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION (Continued)
F. Porch Roof Rafters (Continued).
The northern end of the porch rafters bear upon the southern roof rafters at
approximately'mid-span (See Photograph 30).
The southern endsbear upon a parapet like extension of the upper part of the
south masonry wall approximately five inches thick and two feet tall (See
The southern ends are cut flush with the south face of the south wall.
It is apparent that these rafters at one time continued above the South Room
and Porch as seen by the sloping tops of the masonry east and west walls
of the South Room (See Photographs 5, 6).
The porch rafters were part of original construction, for there is no evidence
that the main house rafters received any stripping or other roofing material
in the attic area above which the porch rafters are framed (See Photograph
Neither the size of the porch beam carrying the rafters, nor the column sizes
or spacing could be determined by field investigation.
G. Porch Ceiling Joists.
Pockets for ceiling joists are visible in the south face of the south wall (See
Photographs 4, 7).
The middle 1/3 of the wall has no pockets (See Photographs 5).
The bearing surfaces of the pockets are approximately eight feet above existing
Since the rafters above these joists were clearly intended to be exposed to view,
the ceiling joists are a later addition and not part of original construction.
The lack of pockets in the middle 1/3 can be explained by assuming that joists
spanned east-west in this area, or by assuming a ceiling was omitted to ac-
cnmmodate a stair to the second floor in this area.
No original roofing materials remain.
Same 5/4-inch thick stripping for shingles remain, but it may not be original.
Where recent rafters span above earlier rafters on the south slope, rectangu-
lar nails are visible where wood stripping was once applied to receive
Some nails are cut but some may be wrought; further investigation during restora-
tion is required.
The existing dormer is framed with contemporary dressed lumber.
The dormer framing bears upon early or original shingle stripping which is
"sandwiched" between the bottom of the dormer plate and the top of the roof
Original rafters at each side of the dormer have been replaced; ends of original
rafters at ridge remain.
The presence of the original or early stripping bearing on the later rafters
indicates the original rafters deteriorated and were replaced from within
the attic; the stripping was not deteriorated and was left in place.
A poor weatherseal between dormer wall and roof caused these particular rafters
The presence of the stripping and the method of repair are not conclusive evi-
dence, but do strengthen the probability that a dormer was part of original
J. Masonry Walls.
Additional investigation confirms the Schematic Report assumption that all coquina
masonry walls of the main rectangular structure are original.
The walls surrounding the Southwest Room are also probably original, as noted in
the Schematic Report, but more positive proof is required by archaeological
i restigation of the footings.
The symmetry of the east gable, south slope, is a later addition.
The 'eatment of the west gable is similar.
4. ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION (Continued)
J. Masonry Walls (Continued)
The original south slope was identical with the north slope to the point at which
the porch rafters intersected the south slope.
At this point the gable may have flattened to follow the porch rafter slope, or
may have continued to match the north slope; the void between slopes may have
been sealed with shingles, siding, or other material.
Additional investigation will be conducted during restoration.
It should also be noted that the coquina masonry extension of the south wall
from the plate line to the porch rafters may have been a later addition,
possibly added with the gable modification (See Photograph 30).
This area may have been sealed originally with the same material utilized at
the gable ends.
K. Door Openings and Frames.
Further investigation confirms conclusions of the Schematic Report, except as
The former exterior south door, West Room, and east door, West Room are definitely
part of original construction.
This is confirmed by the presence and design of the coquina lintels, the splayed
masonry jambs, and the elevation of the original thresholds.
The exterior south door of the East Room may be original, and is discussed under
"Remodelling of Indeterminate Date".
The east exterior door of the South Roanm is probably original, but additional
archaeological data is required.
L. Window Openings and Windows.
Conclusions of the Schematic Report remain correct with the following exceptions
Although original or early plaster continues behind window frames, the jamb mem-
bers of one frame are definitely recent replacements.
Jamb frames of doubled 2 x 4's were discovered in the north window, east wall,
The wooden head member of this frame appears to be original, since it is built
into the masonry at both jambs.
All original wood sills have been replaced, as discussed under "Remodelling of
Further investigation will be conducted during restoration when selected finishes
have been removed.
A drawing of a typical frame, based upon field information accessible to date,
is included as Figure 2.
M. Fireplace and Chimney.
Further investigation indicates the back of the firebox and the rear (west) side
of the chimney flue are in the same plane.
As far as can be determined visually, the coquina masonry firebox and chimney
are part of original construction.
The flue is charred near the firebox but is otherwise in good condition.
The hearth has not been archaeologically investigated to date.
Schematic Report comments remain valid.
Very early or original plaster was discovered behind the west wall cabinetwork
in the West Room and was utilized to determine wooden floor thickness, as
discussed under "Interior First Floor Flooring".
Very early or original plaster is also evident on the gables of the attic in
areas concealed from view by later framing.
The presence of the plaster indicates the entire attic space was originally
exposed to view, and confirms that attic partitions did not predate the
post-1906 partitions now in place.
5. REMODELLING OF INDETERMINATE DATE.
There is evidence that remodelling and/or repairs of limited extent occurred
at times other than the Post-1906 remodelling verified by Ledford (Sche-
matic Report, Appendix 2).
Field examination of the windows in the East and West Roans indicates original
sills were of wood greater than 2" in thickness, as determined by discolora-
tion of adjacent mortar and remains of deteriorated wood.
The wooden sills were removed and replaced with plastered brick stools at un-
determined dates (See Photographs 34, 40, 41).
The stool thickness was subsequently increased by at least one additional coat
of plaster prior to the present coat; this work cannot be dated at present.
Rough jambs and trim at the north window, east wall, East Room, were replaced
after 1900 as seen by the use of wire nails and stock milled lumber; fur-
ther investigation may reveal similar alterations elsewhere.
These jambs were investigated to determine if shutter pintles were attached;
no evidence was found.
C. North Door. West Room.
The present door to Treasury Street from the West Room probably dates from the
post-1906 remodelling or later, as evidenced by its design and hardware.
Also, the threshold of this door matches the elevation of the concrete tile floor.
However, the present frame is in a partially bricked-up opening originally 4'-22"
in rough masonry width (See Photograph 35).
In addition, the rough sill of this earlier opening was discovered at elevation
7'-02", M.S.L., or approximately 5" below the estimated elevation of the ori-
ginal wooden floor, and approximately 61" below the elevation of the con-
crete tile floor (See Photograph 11).
The rough sill elevation is probably associated with the early wooden floor, for
an exterior wooden threshold installed in a mortar bed could account for the
5" difference in elevation.
However, two pieces of evidence indicate the larger opening was not part of ori-
First, the coquina lintel blocks above the opening are at the same elevation and
of the same thicknesses, approximate lengths, and design as adjacent window
lintels in the West and East Rooms (Compare Photograph 35 with 34 and 39).
This is a strong indication that the original opening was a window, since neither
the original West Room east nor south door lintels match window lintels in
elevation or exact dimensions (See Photographs 36, 37).
Secondly, the interior masonry jamb returns are not splayed but are cut at 90
to the wall surface.
This is not in keeping with known original openings and indicates later remodelling
Thus the larger door was not original but was installed when the wooden floor was
This door may have been installed to provide exterior access when the south door
entrance from the porch was sealed.
D. Sealed Exterior South Door. West Room.
Removal of interior plaster revealed an opening sealed with brick and coquina
The splayed jambs and coquina lintel indicate the opening is part of original
However, the lower portion of the opening was sealed with coquina masonry,
apparently to allow installation of a window (See Photograph 37).
The window was subsequently removed and the remainder of the opening was sealed
with brick masonry and plastered over.
The dates of this work cannot be determined by current field data.
However, it is certain that the opening was sealed before the "L" or "U" shaped
stair was installed, for the lower flight of steps or a landing would have
interfered with the functioning of both door and window.
- 6 -
5. REMODELLING OF INDETERMINATE DATE
E. South Door, East Room.
The rough masonry opening dimensions and the coquina lintel clearly indicate
that at least the upper portions of this opening are original (See Photo-
The aromatic cedar rough frame is early if not original (See Figure 1), and is
a curious combination of English and Spanish detailing (See Manucy*, p. 82,
However, the similarity of design and elevation above M.S.L. of the lintel with
adjacent window lintels and the similarity of the opening width with adja-
cent windows indicates that this opening may have been a window originally.
A further indication is the location of this opening directly opposite the win-
dow in the north wall.
Remaining field evidence is too scant to determine whether the original opening
was door or window.
In any event, the cedar frame probably dates from the first half of the 19th
century, indicating that change from window to door occurred quite early.
F. North Door, South Room.
This opening is a later addition, as indicated by no provision for a lintel of
any kind, 900 jambs, and a threshold elevation matching that of the concrete
This opening does not predate the tile floor and is no earlier than the post-1906
G. South Door, South Room.
When the original roof line is projected to the south wall of the South Room,
the low wall height results in maximum opening height of approximately six
feet including lintel and frame.
The opening was probably made during or after the post-1906 remodelling, when
the original roof was removed and the wall extended to new ceiling and roof
construction, allowing installation of a standard door.
Field notes by Steinbach accompanying Appendix 3 of the Schematics, and included
herein as Appendix 1, describe a concrete slab found in the southeast corner
of the West Room (See Photographs 13 and 14).
The finish elevation of the concrete matched that of the concrete tile floor of
The white sand fill utilized to support the recent hexagonal tile floor extends
beneath the slab, indicating the slab is of the same date as the tile floor.
It is possible that the stair itself predated the slab, for the stair could have
been shored up and the slab poured beneath.
The combined evidence of the concrete slab and a framed opening in the attic floor
joists suggests that three types of stairs were possible: "L" shaped, "U"
shaped, or straight run.
The use of concrete rather than tile indicates the underside was enclosed as a
storage or closet area, or at least concealed from view.
The "L" shape of the slab could indicate either an "L" or "U" shaped stair.
If "L" shaped, the stair consisted of two flights with an intermediate corner
The lower flight would have been parallel with the south wall.
The upper flight would have been parallel and between the interior east wall and
the first joist to the west.
However, there is no physical evidence that the upper flight framed between the
partition and joist.
Since the partition and joist are original, evidence of an early stair should be
Thus the existence of an "L" shaped stair is improbable.
* Manucy, Albert, The Houses of St. Augustine 1565-1812. Convention Press, Jack-
sonville, Florida, 1962.
- 7 -
5. REMODE.T.TNG OF INDETERMINATE DATE
H. Stairs (Continued).
The existence of a straight run stair is also improbable.
In order to obtain adequate length of run and a first floor landing, the flight
would have risen from a point a few feet south of the present door to Trea-
sury Street and terminated at or near the south wall.
Steinbach found no evidence of a landing in the first floor tile other than the
"L" shaped concrete.*
Furthermore, this location of the stair would have resulted in very poor space
utilization in the West Room.
The upper landing, assuming the rear addition was utilized, would have been
The most probable configuration, therefore, is a "U" shaped stair related to
both the framed opening in the ceiling and the "L" shaped concrete slab.
The bottom of the "U" would have been an intermediate landing, with or without
winders, hard against the south wall above the east-west "leg" of the con-
The lower flight of very few treads would have begun at the north end of the
north-south "leg" of the concrete slab.
The upper flight would have risen from the landing to the north end of the framed
opening in the attic floor.
The bottom of the upper flight was not concealed from view; therefore, the con-
crete tile continued beneath.
This configuration provides a three-foot wide landing in the attic and adequate
headroom at all points.
However, the location of the upper flight would have blocked second floor access
to the south addition.
It is possible this stair preceded the south addition, and was removed and
plastered over when another stair was provided in the area of new construc-
6. POST-1906 MAJOR REMODELLING
Ledford mentions and documents a post-1906 remodelling which enclosed the origi-
nal south porch (See Schematic Report, Appendix 2).
An undated photograph (See Figure 3) and undated crude drawings of the building
(See Figures 5, 6, 7) show an addition extending ten or eleven feet south of
the southern porch wall.
Since all of the addition is labelled "stuccoed frame", including the porch area,
it is probable that the southern extension is part of the post-1906 remodel-
ling of the porch, although not investigated or mentioned by Ledford.
There is no architectural evidence of another major remodelling of the house,
either pre-1906 or post-1906.
Work of this period is characterized by standard mill dimension lumber and the
use of wire nails.
B. Work Accomplished.
The post-1906 remodelling subdivided the south porch into two enclosed rooms, and
provided two or three additional new rooms to the south.
The subdivision of the porch is evidenced by a vertical line in the stucco where
the partition intersected the south wall of the present building.
Also, joist pockets in the same wall indicate the second floor framing over the
east half of the porch ran north-south; apparently the central roam framing
ran east-west (no pockets); and above the present Southwest Room ran north-
The new addition was covered by a 6:12 slope gabled shingled roof, the north-
south ridge of which intersected the original east-west ridge of the house
at its centerline (See Figure 7 and Photograph 4).
Limited habitable attic space was provided by the dormers.
*Confirmed verbally with Herschel Shepard.
6. POST-1906 MAJOR REMODELLING
B. Work Accomplished (Continued).
Access to the new attic was by means of a narrow hall from the existing attic,
located opposite the original dormer (See Photograph 4).
This access would have required the removal of the "U" shaped stair discussed
under "Remodelling of Indeterminate Date".
However, it is possible that at the time of remodelling the original and new
attics did not interconnect, but were served by separate stairs, one of
which was located in the new addition.
In the original building, the attic partition, door, cripple studs forming the
low partitions at the eaves, and lath and plaster date from this remodelling.
The window opening in the east gable end probably dates from this period.
The north and south doors of the South Room probably date from this period.
The floor elevation of the new addition was apparently the same as the original
building and probably slab on grade (See Figures 5, 6, 7).
However, it is not possible to determine whether the hexagonal tile was installed
at this time since all evidence has-been removed.
7. SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
The sequence listed is tentative and based upon detailed investigation discussed
It is hoped further information will become available during restoration.
B. Description of Original Building (1806).
East Rocam,West Room, South Room, and South Porch.
Three windows in the north wall, two windows in the east wall, and possibly one
window in the south wall, East Room, at the present door.
All windows 6/6, single hung.
Main entrance from Porch into West Room.
Door from Porch into South Room.
South Room had no other openings and was utilized for storage.
Door from West Room into East Room.
All doors six-panel.
All first floor ceiling joists exposed to view and perhaps whitewashed.
Attic floored full width and length and utilized as a secondary but habitable
area with one dormer.
Cypress shingled roof over stripping.
Ladder access to the attic from the West Room.
Off-grade wooden floor.
C. Earliest Remodelling (1806 4Postlg906).
Main entrance relocated by converting entrance from porch into window and chang-
Sing north wall center window into main entrance of considerable width.
New access to porch provided by converting south window of East Room into door.
Attic made easily accessible and habitable by adding "U" shaped stair in south-
east corner of West Room.
(Note that the above changes are interrelated and possibly occurred at the same
Window sash, sills, and frames replaced and repaired.
Illuminating gas installed.
Probably reroofed; north dormer possibly rebuilt.
D. Post-1906 Remodelling.
Four to six-room wood frame stuccoed structure added to south.
Original wood floor replaced with concrete tile.
Porch enclosed and partitioned; roof over Porch and South Room replaced.
Window sash, sills, and frames repaired.
Attic partitioned and plastered.
- 9 -
7. SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE (Continued)
D. Post-1906 Remodelling (Continued).
South gables rebuilt to conform to intersecting roof requirements.
"U" shaped stair probably removed and new stair provided in new addition.
North dormer rebuilt.
North and south doors to South Room provided.
Metal window grilles installed.
Electrical service reworked.
- 10 -