HomeMy WebLinkAboutBig Basin Way 21000 HPCI
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868 -1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga's City Council announces the following public hearing on
WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2009, AT 7:00 P.M.
The hearing will be held in the City Theater, located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue in Saratoga, California.
Details regarding the project described below are available at the Saratoga Community Development
:Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICATION NUMBER:
REQUESTED ENTITLEMENT:
21000 Big Basin Way
City of Saratoga
Hakone Foundation
517 -36 -009
LNDMR.K09 -0001
Historic Landmark Status
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant requests approval to designate . Hakone Gardens as a Historic Landmark. Hakone
Gardens is a traditional Japanese garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate
garden in the Western Hemisphere. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed this property
as part of a regular meeting on February 10, 2009 and approved recommendation of designating the
subject property as a Historic Landmark to City Council.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision
of the City Council pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the Saratoga City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the
City Council's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Monday a
week before the meeting (April 6th). If you have questions. Planners are available at the public counter
between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of
this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out -of -date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project.
If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we
encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your
Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
PUS
Community-Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09 -0001)
- -•�-� : - • '- 55�70C�5199
.r`.:l a�S.S�s .y :mss :�i Y'i�'.it -? ��s =6•: j`t�:�. _�
.- _ ........
C�J �q`C •I
c��AR �`�2Op9
COMMU�1TyD,F oOGA
503 -55 -018 'Mew
ROBERT B WILDS
OR CURRENT OWNER
i con
J
NIXIE 951 DE 1 00 03/27.109
RETURN TO SENDER
VACANT
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 95070519999 '*0377 - 05335 -24-39
I1111 11111)1111111 111 1111 11111111111111111111111111111 11111111
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09-0001)
PUBLIC NOTICE
517-36-09, 010, 011
CITY OF SARATOGA
ATTN: CHRIS RIORDAN #
13777 FRUITVALE AVEN U
SARATOGA CA 95070
... . ......
110 Z 2009
91T Y, OF b,
COMMUN6� -NI I 'y'u'-A
t I - z I I I
.... 1, 1 if. I.. I..
r
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga -
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09 -0001)
PUBLIC NOTICE
503 -55 -005
ASHOK K & SAMIR SHARMA
OR CURRENT OWNER
Dnniv hell i Mn
NIXIE 951 DE 1 00 03127/09
RETURN TO SENDER
NO MAIL RECEPTACLE
UNABLE TO FORWARD
GC: 9S070SI9999 *0977— OS187 -24 -39
I
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09 -0001)
'j 4� L")
F. U . L..a .0 .._N 0 T.1 C E .
^95070 05199
NA a p 200
ry0 ff
503 -55 -017 j CD��M�NII ypF� ���
ROBERT B WILDS FNT
OR CURRENT OWNER
1aF -'1 ANARRIC; KNOLLS RD
NZXIE 951 DE i 00 0127109
RETURN TO SENDER
VACANT
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 9SO70519999 *0477- OSE+SS -24 -39
IIJI;11) 1111„1 M HIM) I1 11111JIII1111111
Ly
I�
NA a p 200
ry0 ff
503 -55 -017 j CD��M�NII ypF� ���
ROBERT B WILDS FNT
OR CURRENT OWNER
1aF -'1 ANARRIC; KNOLLS RD
NZXIE 951 DE i 00 0127109
RETURN TO SENDER
VACANT
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 9SO70519999 *0477- OSE+SS -24 -39
IIJI;11) 1111„1 M HIM) I1 11111JIII1111111
Community Development Department „
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09 -0001)
VA(
P_UBLI_C NOTICE_
70in5199
MAR �0&1w
Dry or 4
517 -13 -023 OOti1MUNITY®� Et�ANjk17
MARTIN CAGAN
OR CURRENT OWNER
� ^ ^+ n/l1J1 KAAAI On
NIXIE 951 DE 1 00 03127109
RETURN TO SENDER
VACANT
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 95{{070519999 jj *0577- 0ei33 -24 -39
fll�lllll'l��)11�IIIII�)I11 I111III�I Ii�I1�tII1II�I1'I�II�IIII�
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
(CR LNDMRK09 -0001)
`i
PEAR � u'�►I(1Q
(;1T`f Wr
COMMUNITY
PU.BLIC.NOT1_CE.
�^9tbO 01@5199
.nV;',•:zi� CF;,.e %�:Tx_ ..x +.tiir4";,:1.!t'``! °!;i •�i4 :5,..,
517 -32 -001 503 -48 -014
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
PO BOX 36006
r.. ,..
_ ......... .� .............
N =xIE 95i DC 1 00 03/27109
RETURN TO SENDER
NO SUCH NUMBER
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 95070519999 X0477 - 050229 -24 -39
1111)11111111)11 11111111111 1111113 1111111111111111) 111111))111
N =xIE 95i DC 1 00 03/27109
RETURN TO SENDER
NO SUCH NUMBER
UNABLE TO FORWARD
BC: 95070519999 X0477 - 050229 -24 -39
1111)11111111)11 11111111111 1111113 1111111111111111) 111111))111
s• r►
ORDINANCE NO. 267
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
>F]AKONE GARDENS AT 21000 BIG BASIN WAY AS
A HISTORIC LANDMARK
(APN 503 -48- 030,031; 517 -07 -026)
fhe City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows:
Section I- Findinbs: After carefiil review and consideration of the report _ n,d
reconnniendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission concerning Hakone Gardens
located at 21000 Big Basin Way (the "Property ") together with the application prepared
by the Hakone Foundation and supporting materials provided by the l,orrndation and
re\,iewed by staff and the 1- teritage Preservation Commission, the City Council herc.iw
deterualnes that:
x The Property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social.
economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or arch hitectural .history of the City, the
County, the State or the nation in that Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japane;;c.
garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in ta.;e
Western Hemisphere which is a rich cultural link to Saratoga's history and has
been and will continue to be enjoyed by both countless visitors to and citizens of
Saratoga.
The Property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period +:►r
method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use o!:' 1ndigc:r;o1J.S
raterials in that the garden is in fbrrn, a hill and water garden in the strolling
pond style, typical of the Zen gardens of the middle 1.70' century. The Upper
(Moon Viewing) House was constructed without nails or adhesives of "joirt.ery"
construction, using pegs, mortises and tenons, instead of nails ind i!i
the old :Japanese cabinet -maker style.
-.l"he property is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder,
or arcl:;itect in that the gardens were designed and landscaped by Mr. N. Aihara., a
well regarded Japanese landscape architect who was related .to the Court
(gardeners of the Emperor of Japan. The Upper (Moon Viewing) {-louse wlas
designed and constructed by M.r. T. Shintani with an authentic "joinery" style of
construction
• The property embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics
representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or
district within the City in that Hakone Gardens has been owned by the Clt:y of
Saratoga since 1966 and recognized as an important contributor to the Ciry's
Historic Resource Inventory since 1988. The Japanese gardens and auth.cr•tically
designed and constructed Japanese buildings, including the upper (moon viewing;
house, four distinct Japanese gardens, the water garden, and several structures, are
authentic examples of Japanese landscape and architectural design. The lower
house (once the principle residence of the Stine Family) remodeled by the City in
1980 serves as a community meeting room.
The Property embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment
constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or
special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value in that the H:akone.
Gardens was constructed in 1918 and is a traditional Japanese garden considered
to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the Western Hemisphere.
The garden is constructed in the strolling pond style typical of the Zen garden of
the middle 17`h century.
Section 2 — Designation: The Property is hereby designated as a Historic Landmark
pursuant to section 13- 15.060 of the Saratoga City Code_
Section 3- Publication: This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within
fifteen ( 15) days after its adoption.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 15th day of April, 2009, and was adopted by
the following vote following a second reading on the 6`h day of May, 2009.
AYES: Councilmember Susie Nagpal, Howard Miller, Jill Hunter, Vice Mayor
Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page
NOES: None
A13SENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Chuck Page, Mayor
ATTEST:
ATM ullivan, City Clerk
APPROVED As TO FORM:
RICRARD TAYLOR, CITY ATTORNEY
9
PROOF OF PUBLICAiiON t-iling Stamp
(2015.5 GC,P.) PROOF OF PUBLICATION
State of California
County of of Santa Clara
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident: of the County aforesaid: I am
over the age of 18 years, and not party to
ol- interested..•_in the above entitled
matter. I am the principal clerk of the
printer of the: Saratoga News
14375 Saratoga Avenue, Suite E2
Saratoga, California 95070•'59789➢
a newspaper of general circulation, CITY OFSARATOGA
NOTfCE OF OROINAgCE
printed every Wednesday in the City of No 10-;',DES IGNATIN.
PROPEk,y KNOWN. AS
HAKONE "ARbENS,AT,21000
Sall lose, California, County of Santa BIG BASIN NDMA K. (APN
Clara, and which newspaper has been 503 -48- 030,031;. 517 -07-
026)
Comprehensive Summary:
'
adjudged a newspaper of general This ordinance .designates
the 'property known as
circulation by the Superior Court of the Hakone Gardens at 21000
Big Basiri Way as a Historic
State 0 f Landmark: Pursuant to sec -
County of Santa Clara, tion 13- 15.060 of the
Saratoga City Code the City
California, Case number 3281 -48, dated Councilis;authorizedtodes-
ignate as,historic landmarks
properties,foutd..'to meet
June 2, 1975 that the notice of which the specified standards. The
ordinance , finds" that the
annexed is a printed copy (set in type Hakone Gardens, meets the
standards set, forth in the
City Code and designates the
not smaller than nonpareil has been property as a historic land-
mark.
published in each regular and entire The ordiaance'was adopted
May 6, 2009. .The full text
of the. ordinance. is available
issue of said newspaper and not in any for review at'www:sarato-
ga.ca.us and in the office of
supplement thereof on the following the City Clerk at 13777
Fruitvale Avenue; Saratoga,
California during regular
dates, to wit: business hours.
Councilmembers..voting for
the ordinance: Susie Nagpal,
ViceM -M-r Ka Jill Hunter,
Vice Nlay�or Kathleen'King,
Mayor CY uck'Pa.ge .
Councilmern bers'. voting,
against the ordinance:
- - - - - - -- - None .
ALL IN THE YEAR 2009 /s/ Ann SUllivan
City'Clerk ,
I certifv (or declare) under penalty of (Pub'SN 5/19)
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Dated:
at San lose, a for nia
} F_
Kathy ghtson `1
(
April Hope Halberstadt o Nr
Commissioner \\I// � a
County of Santa Clara `ter
Historical Heritage Commission
County Government Center, East Wing
70 West Hedding Street, 1 Oth Floor, San Jose, CA 951 10
Phone (408) 293 -2860
---aujUj LP.aQ cOR;P -
VV ,
Subject: - Summary of 12/22 Telephone Conversation
Date: Monday, December 22, 2008 3:29 PM
From: Dana Peak <Dana.peak @pin.sccgov.org>
To: <criordan @saratoga.ca.us>
Cc: April Halberstadt <aprilhalb @gmail.com>
Conversation: Summary of 12/22 Telephone Conversation
Hi Chris.
You asked if I could summarize what we discussed by telephone this morning:
Mon, Dec 22, 2008 3:32 PM
Hakone Gardens was evaluated in 1998 in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. It
appears a project was proposed that involved federal funds, HUD monies. As a result, properties within the area of
potential effect were evaluated and Hakone Gardens was one of the properties evaluated for its eligibility for listing in
the National Register of Historic Places (as required by the National Historic Preservation Act). A formal
determination through the Section 106 process was made that the property is eligible for individual listing in the
National Register under Criteria C (embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values or represents a significant and
distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.) The Caretaker's Cottage was determined
to be a contributor to a district.
The California Register of Historical Resources automatically includes resources formally determined eligible for (or
listed in) the National Register through federal preservation programs including National Historic Preservation Act
Section 106 reviews of federal undertakings. So you are correct, Hakone Gardens is listed in the California Register
by.default, due to the determination of eligibility. Though please know that not all properties listed in the "Directory
of Properties in the Historic Property Data File" are listed in the California Register. As the "Directory of Properties in
the Historic Property Data File" is just an inventory of all types of properties, with and without designations /listings.
I'm mailing you a copy of the page from the Directory that Hakone Gardens is listed in, as well as a bulletin
explaining the State Historic Resources Inventory Directory.
While Hakone Gardens is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and the City of Saratoga's historic
resource inventory, it is not a designated city landmark. The grant funds that were awarded to Hakone Gardens
Foundation were awarded on the condition that the property be designated a city landmark before the grant funds
can be distributed. The grant agreement also requires that.the work for which the grant money was awarded be
reviewed and approved by the Saratoga historic preservation commission before the work begins. That is why the
landmark designation needs to move forward now, so a historic preservation permit can be issued for the proposed
work. I don't have further information on the grant agreement right now, I'll forward you the information when I get
it.
Documentation and evaluation of the property will be needed as part of the application for landmark designation.
The property will need to be evaluated against the city's landmark criteria. I suspect Hakone Gardens will be eligible
under additional criteria besides architecture (criteria c). I have ordered the documentation from the Northwest
Information Center that came out of the determination of eligibility in 1998. Hopefully, there will be some decent
factual information there. Be careful with existing information because some of it may be hearsay or stories that
have been told for a long time that may not be true. As you said, DPR 523 series forms will need to be prepared for
the property, documenting and evaluating all the features on the site, there are quite a few components on the
property. I'm mailing you the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Evaluation and professional standards.
We can meet after the new year and discuss further.
Thanks!
Dana H DEC � 3 ?nnR
Dana Peak, Program Manager
CITY �,:
County of Santa Clara COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Office
70 W. Hedding Street, East Wing, 7th floor
San Jose, CA 95110
(408) 299 -5798 direct line
(408) 288 -9198 fax
www.sccplanning.org
Page 1 of 2
o Nr
Dana Peak
Program manager
County of Santa Clara
Planning Office (408) 299 -5770
County Government Center, East wing, 7th Floor
70 west Hedding Street, San Jose, California 951 10
DIRECT (408) 299 -5798 FAX (408) 288 -9198
dana.peak @pin.sccgov.org www.sccplanning.org
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION * * * Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File for SANTA CLARA County. Page 72 02-09 -01
'ROPERTY- NUMBER PRIMARY -# STREET.ADDRESS ............. NAMES ............................. CITY.NAME........ OWN YR -C OHP- PROG.. PRG- REFERENCE- NUMBER STAT -DAT NRS CRIT
014080
066364
WASHINGTON ST
WASHINGTON ST, 800 BLOCK
SANTA CLARA
P
1885
HIST.SURV.
5052-0185 -9999
5S
014070
531
WASHINGTON ST
WASHINGTON ST
WASHINGTON PK BASEB STADIUM
SANTA CLARA
U
PROJ.REVW.
HUD871109N
•12/16/87
6Y
014071
551
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1905
HI'ST.SURV.
5052-0181 -0000
5S
014072
561
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1880
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0182-0000
5S
014073
807
WASHINGTON ST
NUTTMAN FUNERAL HOME, ST CLARES RE
SANTA CLARA
SANTA CLARA
P
P
1890
1918
HIST.SURV.
HIST.SURV.
5052-0183 -0000
5052-0184 -0000
4S
014074
014075
810
824
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1885
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0185 -0001
5S
4D
014076
831
WASHINGTON ST
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1890
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0185 -0002
4D
•014077
844
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1915
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0185-0003
5D
014078
860
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1890
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0185 -0004
5D
.014079
890
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1895
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0185 -0005
5D
014081
1116
WASHINGTON ST
DR PAULS HOUSE, MAHAN HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
SANTA CLARA
P
P
1920
1892
HIST.SURV.
5052 -0185 -0006
5D-
014082
1155
WASHINGTON ST
SENATOR FRANCK HOUSE SITE
SANTA CLARA
P
1856
HIST.SURV.
HIST.SURV.
5052 -0186 -0000
5052- 0187-0000
3S
3S
014083
1179
WASHINGTON ST
FRANCK HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1905
HIST.RES.
HIST.SURV.
SPHI -SCL -023
5052 -0188 -0000
08/28/72
7L
4S
014084
014085
1184
WASHINGTON ST
RUSSELL /ROBINSON HOUSE, MILLER HOU
SANTA CLARA
P
1861
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0189 -0000
3S
014086
1270
1367
WASHINGTON ST
MULHALL HOUSE, GIUDICI HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1881
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0190 -0000
5S
014087
1391
WASHINGTON ST
MENDONCA HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0191 -0000
5S
014088
1475
WASHINGTON ST
CUNNINGHAM HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1890
HIST.SURV.
5052 - 0192 -0000
5S
WASHINGTON ST
BUILDING AT 1475 WASHINGTON STREET
SANTA CLARA
P
1885
HIST.SURV.
5052-0193 -0000
01/01/82
2S2
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -82- 0002 -0000
05/07/82
2S2
AC
014089
1687
WASHINGTON ST
PROJ.REVW.
FHWA820202A
03/11/82
2S2
SANTA CLARA
P
1910
HIST:SURV.
5052-0194 -0000
5S
112039
073736
4000
LAFAYETTE ST
AGNEWS INSANE ASYLUM -_BLDG 213
(VIC) SANTA CLARA
S
1906
HIST.RES.
NPS- 97000829 -0060
08/13/97
1D
ABC
SW MONTEREY RD & ED
TWENTY ONE MILE HOUSE
(.VIC) SANTA CLARA
M
1852
NAT.REG.
43 -0012
08/06/93
6Z2
NAT.REG..
43 -0012
12/19/91
073733
116439
14650
21000
6TH ST
NARDIE HOME
SARATOGA
P
0
TAX.CERT.
537.9- 43-0004
09/02/86
6X3
BIG BASIN WY
CARETAKER'S COTTAGE - HAKONE GARDE
SARATOGA
M
1917
—HIS% RES.---
DOE-43 -98. 0016 =0001-
07/03/98
2D2
C
116438
21000
BIG BASIN WY
HAKONE GARDEN
SARATOGA
M
�PROJ.REVW.—.HUD980
1917 HIST.RES.
3K _
DOE-43 -98- 0016 =9999
07/03/98
07/03/98
2D2
2S2
C
C
014586
14800
MONTALVO RD
VILLA MONTALVO
SARATOGA
P
=— PROJ..REVW._HUD98D403K_—
19151— HIST.SURV.
5070-0001 -0000
07/03/98
01/01/78
2S2
1S
C
014592
PIERCE RD
PAUL MASSON MOUNTAIN WINERY
SARATOGA
P
1907,�HIST-.-$URV.
5070 - 0007 -0000
01/01/83
1S
014587
15800
SANBORN RD
WELCH -HURST HOUSE
SARATOGA
C
1902
HIST.RES.
LH1ST.SURV.
SHL -0733 - 0000
5070- 0002 -0000
04/08/60
01/01/78
7L
1S
125769
13659
SARATOGA AVE
CENTRAL PARK HERITAGE ORCHARD
SARATOGA
M
1841
ST.PT.INT.
43 -0048
7J
ST.PT.INT.
43 -0046
7J
124826
SARATOGA -LOS GATOS
RD
PBW SF-634 -02 TELECOM FACILITY
SARATOGA
P
PROJ.REVW.
FCC000602K
06 /15/00
7
085084
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE
RD
CAST IRON LIDDED FUEL OIL CONTAINE
SARATOGA
P .
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0006
04/01/93
1D
AC
077381
12795
SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE
RD
MILLER /MELONE RANCH /MILLER HOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1911
NAT.REG.
43 -0015
04/01/93
1S
AC
085078
12795
SARATOGA - SUNNYVALE
RD
RANCH HOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
HIST.SURV.
5070 - 0008 - 9999
5070 - 0008-0001
04/01/93
1S
AC
04/01/93
1D
AC
085085
12795
SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE
RD
MELONE /MILLER RANCH COMPLEX
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070 -0008 -0007
04/01/93
1D
AC
085079
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE
RD
GARAGE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070 - 0008 -0002
04/01/93
1D
AC
085081
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE
RD
TANKHOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070 - 0008 -0003
04/01/93
1D
AC
085083
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE
RD
AVIARY
SARATOGA
P
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008-0005
04/01/93
6X1
085082
12795
SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE
RD
WINDMILL
SARATOGA
P
HIST.SURV.
5070 - 0008 -0004
04/01/93
1D
AC
090278
SR 9
SARATOGA
SARATOGA
U
HIST.RES.
SHL- 0435 -0000
04/11/49
7L
091210
MONTEBELLO RD
MONTEBELLO SCHOOL
(VIC) SARATOGA
D
1892
H1ST.RES. I.jSPHI
-SCL- -030
11/19/74
7L
091245
SANBORN RD
JUDGE JAMES R. WELCH'S REDWOOD LOD
(VIC) SARATOGA
C
1912
HIST.RES. , SPHI :SCL -048
05/05/77
7L
CALIFORNIA STATE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Department of Parks & Recreation.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE BULLETIN #8
User's Guide to the
California Historical Resource Status Codes
Historic Resources Inventory Directory
This Technical Assistance Bulletin #8 provides guidance on use of the California
Historical Resource Status Codes (adopted by the Office of Historic Preservation in
August 2003, formerly known as the National Register Status Codes) and provides a
key to the programmatic and evaluation codes used in the Statewide Historical
Resources Inventory (HRI) database maintained by the Office of Historic Preservation
(OHP) and the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS).
This publication has been financed in part with Federal funds from the National Park Service, Department
of the Interior, under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and administered by the
California Office of Historic Preservation. The contents and opinions do not necessarily reflect the views or
policies of the Department of the Interior, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation by the Department of the Interior. Under Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the U.S. Department of the Interior
strictly prohibits unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, or handicap in its
federally- assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity,
or facility as described above, or if you desire further information, please write to Office for Equal
Opportunity, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Box 37127, Washington DC 20013-
7127.
November 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................... ............................... 2
GUIDE TO THE CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODES ................ 3
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODES ...... ..............................4
UsingStatus Codes ....................................................................... ..............................5
Assigning Status Codes ........ ...............................
Highlights of Status Codes Revisions........ ..........7
.......................
CodeConversions ......................................................................... ..............................8
GUIDE TO THE HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY DIRECTORY ....................... 12
InformationCenters ...................................................................... .............................12
Historical Resources Inventory ..................................................... .............................13
Additional Sources of Historical Resources Information ............... .............................13
Historical Resources Inventory Directory ...................................... .............................14
Sample Page from Historic Resources Inventory Directory .......... .............................16
Historical Resources Inventory Individual Property Printout ......... .............................18
APPENDICES................................................................................ ............................... 21
Appendix 1 - Historic Resources Inventory Directory & Printout Key ........................21
Appendix 2 - Evaluator Codes ...................................................... .............................24
Appendix 3 — Numbering Conventions for Historical Resources .. .............................26
Appendix 4 - Numbering Conventions for Transaction Logs ........ .............................28
Appendix 5 - CHRIS County Codes .............................................. .............................29
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 2
GUIDE TO THE
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODES
Background
The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) initially created the National Register Status
Codes in 1975 as a database tool to classify historical resources in the state's inventory
which had been identified through a regulatory process or local government survey. In
the early 1990s, a system of complex elaborations on the code groups was adopted
which resulted in nearly 150 individual codes. Many were ambiguously defined; others
were never even used. Implicit within the status codes was a hierarchy reflecting the
level of identification, evaluation and designation to which a property had been
subjected which did not always convey the significance of the resource for purposes of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The California Register of Historical Resources was created in 1998 by an act of the
State Legislature. Under the provisions of that legislation, the following resources are
automatically included in the California Register:
Resources formally determined eligible for, or listed in, the National Register of
Historic Places through federal preservation programs administered by the Office
of Historic Preservation, including the National Register program; the Tax
Certification program; National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 reviews of
federal undertakings;
State Historical Landmarks (SHL) numbered 770 or higher; and
Points of Historical Interest (PHI) recommended for listing in the California
Register by the State Historical Resources Commission.
For the purposes of CEQA, resources eligible for or listed in the California Register are,
by definition, "historical resources." Additionally, resources included in a local register of
historical resources or deemed significant, i.e., given a status code 3 -5 in a survey
meeting OHP's requirements, are presumed to be historically or culturally significant for
purposes of CEQA.
In spite of the need to identify resources eligible for the California Register for CEQA
purposes, the NRHP codes only addressed National Register and local eligibility. As a
consequence, by failing to address California Register eligibility, environmental review
and local land use planning decisions which relied on the status codes assigned prior to
2004 may have been made on the basis of incomplete information.
Effective August 2003, in order to simplify and clarify the identification, evaluation, and
understanding of California's historic resources and better promote their recognition and
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 3
preservation, the (former) National Register status codes were revised to reflect the
application of California Register and local criteria and the name was changed to "California
Historical Resource Status Codes."
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODES
(effective as of August 2003)
Available online in a single page format at http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?paqe_id=1069
1 Properties listedan the National Register (NR) orhthe California RegisterICR)
1D Contributor to a district or multiple resource property listed in NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR.
1S Individual property listed in NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR.
1 CD Listed in the CR as a contributor to a district or multiple resource property by the SHRC
1CS Listed in the CR as individual property by the SHRC.
1CL Automatically listed in the California Register — Includes State Historical Landmarks 770 and above and Points of
Historical Interest nominated after December 1997 and recommended for listing by the SHRC.
2 Pro erties determined el igibles:for$listmgjn the Nati,onal,Register_(NR)_or the California�Register (CR)
26 Determined eligible for NR as an individual property and as a contributor to an eligible district in a federal
regulatory process. Listed in the CR.
2D Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by the Keeper. Listed in CR.
2D2 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process. Listed in CR.
2D3 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by Part I Tax Certification. Listed in CR.
2D4 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO. Listed in CR.
2S Individual property determined eligible for NR by the Keeper. Listed in CR.
2S2 Individual property determined eligible for NR by a consensus through Section 106 process. Listed in CR.
2S3 Individual property determined eligible for NR by Part I Tax Certification. Listed in CR.
2S4 Individual property determined eligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO. Listed in CR.
2CB Determined eligible for CR as an individual property and as a contributor to an eligible district by the SHRC.
2CD Contributor to a district determined eligible for listing in the CR by the SHRC.
2CS Individual property determined eligible for listing in the CR by the SHRC.
... 4 , ,..._
3__ Appears eligible for NatonalyRegister (NR ) ornCalifornia .Register (CR)YthroughrSurvey Evaluation
.
3B Appears eligible for NR both individually and as a contributor to a NR eligible district through survey evaluation.
3D Appears eligible for NR as a contributor to a NR eligible district through survey evaluation.
3S Appears eligible for NR as an individual property through survey evaluation.
3CB Appears eligible for CR both individually and as a contributor to a CR eligible district through a survey evaluation.
3CD Appears eligible for CR as a contributor to a CR eligible district through a survey evaluation.
3CS Appears eligible for CR as an individual property through survey evaluation.
s w,
4 Appears eIigible fo ' tional 9egist6(. R) I rk,C; ' r_ ka Register (CR) through other evaluation
4CM Master List - State Owned Properties — PRC §5024.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 4
5 Properties Recognized as HistoncallySignificantrby Local Government„ ,
5D1 Contributor to a district that is listed or designated locally.
5D2 Contributor to a district that is eligible for local listing or designation.
5D3 Appears to be a contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation through
survey evaluation.
5S1 Individual property that is listed or designated locally.
5S2 Individual property that is eligible for local listing or designation.
5S3 Appears to individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation.
5B Locally significant both individually (listed, eligible, or appears eligible) and as contributor to a district
that is locally listed, designated, determined eligible, or appears eligible through survey evaluation.
. i -'
Not,t legible for Listing or Designation as specified
6C Determined ineligible for or removed from California Register by SHRC.
6J Landmarks or Points of Interest found ineligible for designation by SHRC.
6L Determined ineligible for local listing or designation through local government review process; may warrant
special consideration in local planning.
6T Determined ineligible for NR through Part I Tax Certification process.
6U Determined ineligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO.
6W Removed from NR by the Keeper.
6X Determined ineligible for the NR by SHRC or Keeper.
6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process — Not evaluated for CR or Local Listing.
6Z Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation.
7 Not.Evaluafed for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) orgNeedsRevaluation
7J Received by OHP for evaluation or action but not yet evaluated.
7K Resubmitted to OHP for action but not reevaluated.
7L State Historical Landmarks 1 -769 and Points of Historical Interest designated prior to January 1998 —
Needs to be reevaluated using current standards.
7M Submitted to OHP but not evaluated - referred to NPS.
7N Needs to be reevaluated (Formerly NR Status Code 4)
7N1 Needs to be reevaluated (Formerly NR SC4) — may become eligible for NR w /restoration or when
meets other specific conditions.
7R Identified in Reconnaissance Level Survey: Not evaluated.
7W Submitted to OHP for action — withdrawn.
Using Status Codes
Users of the California Historic Resource Status Codes should keep in mind that
the status codes are broad indicators which, in most cases, serve as a starting
place for further consideration and evaluations. Because the assigned status code
reflects an opinion or action taken at a specific point in time, the assigned status code
may not accurately reflect the resource's eligibility for the National Register, California
Register, or local listing or designation at some later time.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8
Individuals and agencies attempting to identify and evaluate historical resources need to
consider the basis for evaluation upon which a particular code was assigned, i.e., date
of evaluation, the reason and criteria applied for evaluation, the age of the resource at
the time of evaluation, and any changes that may have been made to the resource that
would impact its integrity. Keep in mind that:
• Older surveys and evaluations were biased towards architectural values (Criteria
C (NR) and 3 (CR)). Resources may not have been evaluated for significance for
their association with important event or people or their information potential.
• Identification and evaluation of resources in compliance with Section 106 does
not involve evaluations for the California Register or any local designations.
• Because the California Register was not implemented before 1999, relatively few
resources in the HRI have been evaluated for eligibility for the California Register.
• Because the National Register generally excludes resources less than fifty years
old, resources that were once determined ineligible for the National Register
because they were less than 50 years of age, need to be reevaluated for
eligibility after they have aged.
• Our understanding of historical significance changes over time. In 2004, there is
a greater appreciation and understanding of social and cultural history than in
earlier years. Understanding of the importance of cultural landscapes and
resources of the recent past is evolving as historic preservationists are grappling
with how to recognize and characterize these types of resources.
Assigning Status Codes
In many cases, more than one status code logically could be assigned. Since resources
listed in or determined eligible for the National Register are automatically listed in the
California Register, it is not necessary to use codes for both the National register and
the California Register.
Resources identified and evaluated in local government surveys may appear to be
eligible for the National Register or the California Register as well as be a locally
designated landmark or eligible for local designation. For local government purposes, it
may be desirable to show more than one code. However, when the data is incorporated
into the HRI, the code with the lowest initial number (1 -5) will be used.
Example:
Codes assigned in survey - 3S/5S1
Code assigned in data base — 3S
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 6
Because resources may meet the criteria for multiple designations, it is important to
include that information in the significance statements on the DPR 523B forms or in a
narrative evaluation.
Highlights of Status Codes Revisions
The codes revision undertaken in 2003 clarified definitions, consolidated groups of
closely related codes, and created new codes to reflect the evaluation of resources for
the California Register. Note that the code elaborations, i.e., 2D2 or 5D1, serve OHP's
data management purposes. For CEQA purposes, it is the initial code, 1- 5, that is
relevant.
Under the broad definition for status code 1, "Properties listed in the National
Register (NR) or the California Register (CR)," 1 D and 1 S will continue to signify
National Register listing as they have in the past. Additions of 1 CD, 1 CS", and
1 CL will denote resources listed on the California Register by the State Historical
Resources Commission, paralleling formal listing on the National Register by the
Keeper. Because properties listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in
the NR are automatically listed in the California Register, there is no need to
assign dual codes.
The definition of status code 2 is broadened to "Properties determined eligible for
listing in the National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR)." Just as 2s
were previously used and will continue to be used to identify resources formally
determined eligible for the National Register through a regulatory process, 2Cs
will identify resources formally determined eligible for the California Register by
the State Historical Resources Commission.
• The parallel between the resources identified through a survey as appearing
eligible for the National Register and those which appear eligible for the California
Register are reflected in the 3 codes which are broadly defined as "Appears
eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through Survey
Evaluation."
Formerly, 4s were assigned through surveys to properties that had the potential,
if some circumstance or event was to happen in the future, to become eligible for
the National Register. Thus by definition, resources identified as 4s were not
eligible for the National Register. Yet under CEQA, they.were presumed to be
historical resources. OHP will convert all former 4s to either a 7N or 7N1,
whichever is appropriate, to signify that these resources need to be reevaluated
using current standards and applying both National Register and California
Register criteria. Henceforth, a status code of 4 will be broadly defined as
"Appears eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through
other evaluation," and will be used to denote those state owned properties
evaluated pursuant to Public Resources Code §5024.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 7
• To facilitate their CEQA reviews and making other land use planning decisions,
local governments asked for codes that more clearly identified locally significant
properties that are not eligible for either NR or CR. The 5 status codes are
broadly defined as "Properties Recognized as Historically Significant by Local
Government."
Formerly, status codes 5S3 and 5D3 were used to identify properties that were
not eligible for the California Register, National Register or local listing but
warranted special consideration in local planning, will be converted to 6L,
"Determined ineligible for local listing or designation through local government
review process; may warrant special consideration in local planning."
Under the CHRS codes, 5D3 and 5S3 now will be used to identify resources
which appear eligible for local designation through a historic resources survey
evaluation. 513 is used to identify resources that are locally significant both
individually (listed, designated, eligible for listing or designation, or appears
eligible for local listing through a survey evaluation) and as a contributor to a
district that is locally listed or designated, determined eligible, or appears eligible
for local listing through a survey evaluation.
The broad definition of status code 6 is now "Not Eligible for Listing or
Designation as specified." Several of the 6 status codes denote only that a
resource was evaluated and determined ineligible for the National Register
through a regulatory process; as the resource was not evaluated for the
California Register or local significance, it should be evaluated, using current
standards, for the California Register and /or local designations. Resources
formerly identified as not eligible for the National Register may be eligible for the
California Register or meet locally established criteria and thus still warrant
consideration under CEQA or at a local level under a local ordinance.
• Similarly, resources given a status code 7, have either not been evaluated for the
National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR) or need revaluation. It can
not be assumed that they are not historic resources; they need to be evaluated
using current standards and criteria.
Code Conversions
At some point in the future, National Register Status Codes entered into the Historic
Resources Inventory data base prior to August 2003 will be converted to the revised
California Historical Resource Status Codes. In cases where the status code assigned
in the past can be converted to more than one new code, the program code will be used
to help determine the new status code. (Note: Until the conversion is complete, the old
codes will continue to appear in the inventory.)
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8
Old NR
Status
Code
DESCRIPTION of former NR Status Codes
NEW CHR
STATUS
CODE
1
Property is listed on the Nat. Register.
1 S OR 1D
113
Listed in NR as an individual property and as a Contributor.
1S OR 1D
1D
Listed in NR as a Contributor to a district or multi. resource property.
1 D
is
Listed in NR as an individual property.
is
2
Determined elig. for Nat. Register in a formal process.
2S, 2D, 26
2B
Deter. elig. for NR as separate and as a contributor.
26
261
Determined elig. by the Keeper for separate and as a contributor.
2B
262
Det. elig. by Keeper as separate & as a contributor by consensus.
26
263
Det. elig. as separate by consensus and as contributor by Keeper.
26
2B4
Determined elig. by consensus as separate and as a contributor.
2B
2D
Determined elig. for Nat. Reg. as a contributor to a district.
2D
2D1
Determined elig. for listing as a contributor by the Keeper.
2D
2D2
Determined-elig. for listing as a contributor by consensus det.
2D
2D3
Det. elig. for NR list as a contrib. by other than cons. det. or keeper.
2D
2D4
Det. elig. for NR as a contrib. by MOA Participant w/o review by OHP
2D
2S
Determined elig. for Nat. Reg. as separate listing.
2S
2S1
Determined elig. for separate listing by the Keeper.
2S
2S2
Det. elig. for separate listing by a consensus determination.
2S
2S3
Det. elig. for NR list as individ. by other than cons. det. or keeper.
2S
2S4
Det. elig. for separate listing by MOA Participant without review by OHP
2S
3
Appears elig. for NR to person completing or reviewing form.
3S, 3D, 313
3B
Appears elig. as se p. and as contributor to a documented district.
36
3D
Appears elig. as contributor to a fully documented district.
3D
3S
Appears eligible for listing in NR as a separate property.
3S
4
Might become eligible for listing on the Nat. Register.
7N
413
May become elig. for NR as separate and as a contributor.
7N
4B1
May become elig. for NR under 4S1 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
462
May become elig. for NR under 4S2 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
4B3
May become elig. for NR under 4S3 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
464
May become elig. for NR under 4S4 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
4B5
May become elig. for NR under 4S5 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
466
May become elig. for NR under 4S6 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
467
May become elig. for NR under 4S7 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
4B8
May become elig. for NR under 4S8 and 4D1 -4D8 or 4M1 -4M8.
7N
4D
May become elig. for NR as a contributing ro ert .
7N
4D1
May become elig. for NR as contrib. when Dist. becomes old enough.
7N
4D2
May become elig. for NR as contributor with more research on Dist.
7N1
4D3
May become elig. for NR as contrib. if context info. is expanded.
7N1
4D4
May become elig. for NR as contrib. if approp. prop. type defined.
7N1
4D5
May become elig. for NR as contrib. when prop. types are clarified.
7N1
4D6
May become elig. NR as contrib. if Dist. is eval. in dill. context.
7N1
4D7
May become elig. for NR as contrib. if integrity of Dist. is restored.
7N1
4D8
May become elig. for NR as contrib. when other like Dist. are lost.
7N1
4M
May become elig. for NR as a contributor.
7N
4M1
May become elig. NR as contrib. if restored and Dist. becomes old
enough.
7N1
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8
Old NR
Status
Code
DESCRIPTION of former NR Status Codes
NEW CHR
STATUS
CODE
4M2
May become eli . for NR as contrib. if restrd & more research on Dist.
7N1
4M3
May become eli . for NR as contrib. if restrd & context is expanded.
7N1
4M4
May become eli . NR as contrib. if restrd & approp. prop. type is defined.
7N1
4M5
May become eli . NR as contrib. if restrd & prop. types are clarified.
7N1
4M6
May become eli . NR as contrib. if rstrd & Dist. eval. in dill. context.
7N1
4M7
May become eli . NR as contrib. if rstrd & inte .of Dist. is rstrd.
7N1
4M8
May become eli . NR as contrib. if rstrd & oth like Dist. are lost.
7N
4R
May become a contributor to a listed /eli ./a ears. eli . dist.
7N
4S
May become eli . for NR as a separate property.
7N
4S1
May become eli . for NR as separate when it becomes old enough.
7N1
4S2
May become eli . for NR as separate with more research.
7N1
4S3
May become eli . for NR as separate if context info. is expanded.
7N1
4S4
May become eli . for NR as se p. if more approp. prop. type is def.
7N1
4S5
May become eli . for NR as se p. when re is. requirements are clarified.
7N1
4S6
May become eli . for NR as separate when eval. in another context.
7N1
4S7
May become eli . for NR as se p. when its integrity is restored.
7N1
4S8
May become eli . for NR as se p. when other like prop. are lost.
7N
4X
May become eli . for NR as contrib. to District that has not been doc.
7N
5
Ineligible for the NR but still of local interest.
5D1, 5D2,
5S, 5S2
5B
Elig. for Loc List only - Both as separate property and as contrib.
5B
561
Eligible for Local Listing only - Both 5S1 and 5D1.
513
562
Eligible for Local Listing only - Both 5S2 and 5D2.
56
563
Not Elig. Loc List but forspec. consid. in Loc Plan - Both 5S3 and 5D3.
6L
5B4
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S1 and 5D2.
5B
5135
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S1 and 5D3.
6L
5136'
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S2 and 5D1.
5B
5B7
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S2 and 5D2.
56
5B8
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S3 and 5D1.
5B
5B9
Elig. for Loc List only - Both 5S3 and 5D2.
56
5D
Elig. for Local Listing as contributor only.
5D2
5D1
Elig. for Local Listing only- contributor to District listed or eligible
under Local Ordinance
5D1
5D2
Elig. for Local Listing only- contributor to District listed or eligible
under possible Local Ordinance
5D2
5D3
Not Elig. for Local Listing- contributor to District eligible for special
consideration in Local Planning
6L
5N
Not Elig. for anything but Needs special consid. for other reasons.
6L
5S
Eligible for Local Listing only.
5S2
5S1
Elig for Local Listing only-listed or elig separately under Local Ordinance
5S1
5S2
Eligible for Local Listing only - likely to become eligible under Local
Ordinance
5S2
5S3
Not Elig for Local Listing-is elig forspecial consid in Local Planning
6L
5X
Unknown
not used
6
Det. inelig. for National Register listing.
6T, 6U, 6X,
6Y, or 6Z
6CW
Removed from the Cal. Register by the SHRC
6C
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 10
Old NR
Status
Code
DESCRIPTION of former NR Status Codes
NEW CHR
STATUS
CODE
6CX
Determined ineligible for listing in the Cal. Register by the SHRC
6C
61-1
Determined inelig. for NR by MOA Participant without review by SHPO
61-1
6U1
Determined inelig. for NR pursuant to a PA.
61-1
61,12
Det. inelig. for NR pursuant to Part 800 without review by SHPO.
61-1
6W
Removed from Nat. Reg. by Keeper.
6W
6W1
Removed from Nat. Reg. by Keeper - Listed Property destroyed.
6W
6W2
Removed from NR by Keeper - Property still extant - not re- evaluated.
6W
6W3
Dist. Rmvd from NR by K r - Prop. extant - Appears individually elig.
6W
6X
Determined inelig. for NR by Keeper.
6X
6X1
Det. inelig. for NR by Keeper with no potential for any listing.
6X
6X2
Det. inelig. NR by Keeper, no potential for NR, n /eval for Loc List.
6X
6X3
I Det. inelig. NR by K r, n /eval potential NR, n /eval Loc List.
6X
6Y
Det. ineli . for NR by consensus.
6Y
6Y1
Det. inelig. for NR by consensus with no potential for any listing.
6Y
6Y2
Det. lneli . NR by consensus, no potential NR, n /eval for Loc List.
6Y
6Y3
Det. inelig. NR by consen., n /eval potential NR, n /eval Loc List.
6Y
6Y4
Det. inelig. NR /consensus, appears elig. for Loc. List or may become elig.
for NR
6Y
6Z
Found inelig. for NR.
6Z, 6U, 6X,
6Y, or 6Z
6Z1
Found.ineli . for NR with no potential for any listing.
6T, 6U, 6X,
6Y, or 6Z
6Z2
Found inelig. for NR, no potential for NR, n /eval for Loc List.
6T, 6U, 6X,
6Y, or 6Z
6Z3
Found.ineli . NR, n /eval for potential for NR, n /eval for Loc Lst.
6T, 61-1, 6X,
6Y, or 6Z
7
Not evaluated.
7W, 7R, or
poss ible 6s
7C
SUBMITTED TO AN INFORMATION CENTER - NOT EVALUATED
removed
7CD1
Contributor to a district listed in the Cal. Register by the SHRC
1 CD
7CD2
Contributor to a district det elig for listing in the Cal Reg by the SHRC
2CD
7CRD
CR district contributor automatically by being NR- listed, det. elig. for NR,
SHL > 770, or SPHI after 1/1/1998
1CL, 2B,
2S, or 2D
7CRS
CR Individual property listed automatically by being NR- listed, det. elig.
for NR, SHL > 770, or SPHI after 1/1/1998
1CL, 213,
2S, or 2D
7CS1
Individual property listed in the Cal Register by the SHRC
1CS
7CS2
Individual property det elig for listing in the Cal Register by the SHRC
2CS
7J
Received by OHP for evaluation or action but not yet evaluated.
7J, 7K, 7W
7K
Resubmitted to OHP for action but not reevaluated.
7K
7L
Evaluated for a Register other than the National Register.
7L, 1CL
7M
Submitted to OHP for eval. but not evaluated - referred to NPS.
7M
7R
Submitted as Part of a Recon Level Survey: NOT EVALUATED!
7R
None
Property without evaluation status Mistakes
evaluate
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 11
GUIDE TO THE
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY DIRECTORY
Pursuant to federal and state laws, the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP)
is charged with the responsibility of maintaining a statewide inventory of historical
resources identified and evaluated through federal and state programs managed by
OHP. The California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) includes the
Historical Resources Inventory (HRI), information on resources which has been
acquired and managed by OHP since 1975, as well as information and records
maintained and managed, under contract, by the independent regional Information
Centers (ICs) located throughout California and the maintained by OHP.
Individuals and government agencies seeking information on cultural and historical
resources should begin their research by contacting the regional Information Center
which services the county in which the resource is located. The IC Roster which
identifies the locations, contact information, and counties served by each regional IC is
available online at http: / /www.ohp.parks.ca.gov /pages /1068 /files /IC %20Roster.pdf .
Information Centers
Twelve independent regional Information Centers (ICs) provide archeological and
historical resources information, on a fee - for - service basis, to local governments and
individuals with responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), as well as to the general public. In addition to providing public access to the
Historical Resources Inventory (HRI) maintained by OHP, the Information Centers
collect and maintain information on historical and archaeological resources which was
not reviewed under a program administered by OHP nor included in the HRI maintained
by OHP.
Information available at the ICs includes, but is not limited to, the following, which may
or may not have also been submitted to OHP:
Information on historic resources identified in local government surveys or in
local registers, ordinances, or through local planning processes as well as CEQA
evaluations.
• Individual property evaluations which are not prepared as part of the federal
regulatory process, including information on resources identified and evaluated
in CEQA documents.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 12
Archaeological surveys performed by academic or avocational groups which are
not associated with federal projects;
• Archeological and /or historical resource surveys conducted by agencies for
planning purposes that do not involve an undertaking subject to review under
Section 106 of the NHPA
Historical Resources Inventory
The Historical Resources Inventory (HRI) maintained by OHP includes only
information on historical resources that have been identified and evaluated through one
of the programs that OHP administers under the National Historic Preservation Act or
the California Public Resources Code. The HRI includes data on:
• Resources evaluated in local government historical resource surveys partially
funded through Certified Local Government grants or in surveys which local
governments have submitted for inclusion in the statewide inventory;
• Resources evaluated and determinations of eligibility (DOEs) made in
compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act;
• Resources evaluated for federal tax credit certifications;
• Resources considered for listing in the.National and California Registers or as
California State Landmarks or Points of Historical Interest.
Additional Sources of Historical Resources Information
Although the HRI includes more than 200,000 resources, it is not a comprehensive
listing of all the known historic resources in the State of California.
• Local governments as well as private cultural resources consulting firms also
collect and maintain records on historical resources that are not incorporated into
the statewide inventory and may not have been submitted to the appropriate
regional IC.
• Information on historical resources included in the Sacred Lands Inventory is
maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission.
Native American Heritage Commission
915 Capitol Mall, Room 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 653 -4082
nahc pacbell.net
http: / /ceres.ca.gov /nahc/
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 13
• Information on historical resources identified in the Submerged Shipwrecks
Inventory is maintained by the California State Lands Commission available
online at http: / /shipwrecks.slc.ca.gov /.
California State Lands Commission
100 Howe Ave., Suite 100 South
Sacramento, CA 95825 -8202
(916) 574 -1900
FAX (916) 574 -1810
http: / /www.slc.ca.gov/
Historical Resources Inventory Directory
Information on resources submitted to and evaluated by OHP is recorded in OHP's
archeological inventory or historical resource inventory databases. When information on
a historic resource is entered into the inventory database, the resource is assigned a
property number and the data captured on DPR 523 forms or other submittal documents
is summarized in the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) database. Archeological
resources are identified with a trinomial number assigned by the Information Center that
services the area within which the resource is located. Archeological site information is
protected and is not available to the general public. (See California Government Code
Section 6254.10 and Section 304 of the NHPA, (16 USC 470w -3)).
The HRI directory lists all the properties within a specified area (city, county, forest, or
military installation) for which information has been entered into the HRI by OHP.
Additional information for individual properties listed in the directory is displayed on the
HRI printout.
An HRI directory printout can be generated in the following formats.
Summarizes resource information for a specified county including the property -
number, primary- number, street address, resource name, city name, type of
ownership, year of construction, OHP program, program reference - number, status
date, historical resource status code, and evaluation criteria. This is the format used
for the directory updated and provided quarterly to the Information Centers.
Summarizes resource information drawn from the property database for a specific
city, county, military installation, or forest including the street address, resource
name, parcel- number, type of ownership, year of construction, property type, number
of resources included within a district, designations under programs other than the
National Register, landmark number if applicable, property number, OHP program,
program reference number, status date, status code, and applicable criteria.. An
annual report is provided to Certified Local Governments using this format.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 14
■ Using selection criteria from any combination of database fields, a customizable
report can be generated in response to a query requesting data from specific fields.
Note: Over the years, OHP has used a number of paper and electronic database
systems and different data capture protocols. Conversion from an older system to a later
system has occasionally resulted in fields for which there is no data and other minor
inconsistencies. There is also evidence that some data may have been lost in the
processes of conversion.
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 15
Sample Page from Historic Resources Inventory Directory
Below is a sample page from a directory printout for the County of Santa Clara. The large bold numbers denote specific items which
are explained on subsequent pages. The Directory Key which follows explains the meanings of the codes used in the data fields for the
directory and single property printouts.
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File for SANTA CLARA County.
PROPERTY- PRIMARY STREET.ADDRESS
NUMBER -#
1136554
1985
LOUIS RD
1136554
1985
LOUIS RD
2008509
601
MELVILLE AVE
2008509
601
MELVILLE AVE
008509
601
MELVILLE AVE
121177
601
MELVILLE AVE
121178
601
MELVILLE AVE
3079265
0
RAMONA
ST
4008527
518
RAMONA
ST
4008527
518
RAMONA
ST
008528
526
RAMONA
ST
008528
526
RAMONA
ST
5127964
528
RAMONA
ST
008530
532
RAMONA
ST
008530
532
RAMONA
ST
008531
538
RAMONA
ST
008531
538
RAMONA
ST
008532
541
RAMONA
ST
008532
541
RAMONA
ST
008535
668
RAMONA
ST
6008535
668
RAMONA
ST
6008535
668
RAMONA
ST
7008537
819
RAMONA
ST
7008537
819
RAMONA
ST
008537
819
RAMONA
ST
8077733 550 SAN JUAN ST
RESOURCE NAME
CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH PALO ALTO
CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH PALO ALTO
ALLEN, THEOPHILUS,HOUSE
ALLEN, THEOPHILUS,HOUSE
ALLEN, THEOPHILUS,HOUSE
ALLEN, THEOPHILUS,GARAGE
ALLEN, THEOPHILUS, COTTAGE
RAMONA STREET ARCHITECTL DISTRICT
GOTHAM SHOP
GOTHAM SHOP
GALLERY HOUSE
GALLERY HOUSE
528 -530 RAMONA STREET
UNIVERSITY TRAVEL
UNIVERSITY TRAVEL
THE PHOTOGRAPHERS GALLERY,
THE PHOTOGRAPHERS GALLERY,
RAMONAS RESTAURANT
RAMONAS RESTAURANT
PALO ALTO ART CLUB
PALO ALTO ART CLUB
PALO ALTO ART CLUB
UNIVERSITY AFRICAN METHODIST
EPISCOPAL ZION CHURCH
UNIVERSITY AFRICAN METHODIST
EPISCOPAL ZION CHURCH
UNIVERSITY AFRICAN METHODIST
EPISCOPAL ZION CHURCH
PHI PSI HOUSE
CITY
OWN
YR -C
OHP -PROG
PRG- REFERENCE - NUMBER
STAT -DAT
Status
Code
PALO ALTO
P
HIST.RES.
DOE- 42 -02- 0029 -0000
12/18/02
6Y
PALO ALTO
P
PROJ.REVW.
FCCO20816B
12/18/02
6Y
PALO ALTO
P
1905
HIST.RES.
NPS- 99000580 -9999
05/20/99
1S
PALO ALTO
P
1905
NAT.REG.
43 -0042
05/20/99
1S
PALO ALTO
P
1905
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0296 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1905
HIST.RES.
NPS- 99000580 -0001
05/20/99
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1905
HIST.RES.
NPS- 99000580 -0002
05/20/99
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1924
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0431 -9999
03/27/86
is
PALO ALTO
P
1925
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0314 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1925
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0431 -0001
03/27/86
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0315 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0431 -0002
03/27/86
1D
PALO ALTO
1926
TAX.CERT.
537.9 -43 -0046
07/23/01
7J
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0317 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0431 -0003
03/27/86
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0318 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1926
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0431 -0004
03/27/86
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1929
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0319 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1929
HIST.SURV.
4302 - 0431 -0007
03/27/86
1D
PALO ALTO
P
1927
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0322 -0000
3S
PALO ALTO
P
1927
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -98- 0015 -0000
06/18/98
2S2
PALO ALTO
P
1927
PROJ.REVW.
HUD980511A
06/18/98
2S2
PALO ALTO
P
1924
HIST.RES.
NPS- 96000297 -0000
03/29/96
2S
PALO ALTO
P
1924
NAT.REG.
43 -0026
PALO ALTO
P
1924
HIST.SURV.
4302- 0324 -0000
5S1
PALO ALTO
U
1900
PROJ.REVW.
FEMA920708C
10/16/92
2S2
CRIT
C
C
C
C
C
r
C
C
C
C
C
A
A
Explanation:
1. The Congregational Church was evaluated through the Section 106 project review process.
This action was recorded using the modern (circa 1995 — present) 2 line evaluation data entry
system. In this instance the property was determined ineligible for the National Register as
indicated by the 6Y status code. The top program- reference - number (DOE- 42 -02- 0029 -0000) is
for OHP's internal filed tracking and the second reference line (FCCO20816B) records the agency
responsible for submitting the project for OHP's review.
2. The Allen, Theophilus, House was initially identified and evaluated through survey # 4302-
0296 -000, date not given, and then subsequently nominated and listed to the National Register
under Criterion C for its architectural values. This action was recorded using the modern (circa
1995 — present) 2 line data entry system. The top program- reference - number (NPS- 99000580-
9999) records the National Register Information System's reference number; the status code 1S
indicates the resource was listed on the National Register. The Second line (43 -0042) links the
nominated resource with OHP's registration process tracking (reglog); the status code 1S reflects
the SHRC's recommendation to forward the nomination to the Keeper who has the authority to list
resources on the National Register. The cottage and garage, listed on separate lines, were also
listed on the National Register; their status as contributors to the multi - property listing is reflected
in the 1 D code.
3. The Ramona Street Architectural District was nominated to and subsequently listed on the
National Register under Criterion C for its architectural values. These actions were recorded using
a pre 1995 data entry system. There is one event line with a program reference number or
resource number formatted like modern survey records (4302- 0431 - 9999). This record actually
documents the district's listing in the National Register because it has the Historic Resource status
code of 1 S.
4. The Gotham Shop listing demonstrates a property evaluated through survey # 4302 -0314 and
given a 3S status code. It was subsequently listed as a contributor to the Ramona Street
Architectural District, under Criterion C for its architectural values, as demonstrated by the 4302-
0431- program- reference number and the 1 D status code.
5. The property at 528 -530 Ramona Street was submitted to OHP for review through the Tax
Certification program. The 7J status code tracks the submittal, and in the absence of a code
reflecting and evaluation for National Register eligibility, suggests that the certification process was
not completed.
6. The Palo Alto Art Club was initially evaluated through survey # 4302 -0332 and given a 3S
status code as it appeared individually eligible for the National Register. Subsequently, the
property was evaluated through the Section 106 project review process. This action was recorded
using the modern (circa 1995 — present) 2 line evaluation data entry system. The top program -
reference- number (DOE- 43 -98- 0015 -0000) is for OHP's internal filed tracking and the second
reference line (HUD980511A) records the agency responsible for submitting the project for OHP's
review. The 2S2 Status code reflects the determination of eligibility for the National Register by
consensus through the Section 106 review process.
7. The University African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was initially identified and evaluated
through survey 4302 -0324 and determined to be eligible for local listing. Subsequently, it was
nominated to the National Register under criterion A for its historical rather than architectural
significance. This action was recorded using the modern (circa 1995 — present) 2 line evaluation
data entry system. The top program- reference - number (NPS- 96000297 -0000) records the
National Register Information System's reference number. The status code 2S indicates that
resource was determined eligible for the National Register by the Keeper but not actually listed
due to the owner's objection. The second line (43 -0026) links the nominated resource with OHP's
registration process tracking (reglog); the accompanying status code indicates the SHRC's
recommendation to forward the nomination to the Keeper of the National Register.
8. The Phi Psi House was subjected to an evaluation through the Section 106 review process of a
FEMA project. This action was recorded using an interim (circa 1990 -1995) 1 line evaluation data
entry system. In this instance the property was determined eligible as an individual property for
the National Register through a consensus determination. The site records for these projects are
difficult to locate because the lack the internal file tracking reference number.
Historical Resources Inventory Individual Property Printout
The Historical Resources Inventory (HRI) Individual Property Printout displays the
summarized data for a single resource as shown in the two examples below.
HISTORIC PROPERTY FILE SINGLE PROPERTY PRINTOUT 09/26/03
Prop. #: 061544 RANCHO SANTA ROSA
Prim. #:
Address: County: RIV
22115 TENAJA RD X- Street:
MURRIETA 92362 Vicinity:
Parcel #:
Category: SITE
Owner Type: PRIVATE
Present Use: NONCOMMERCIAL
Other Recognition: S
Dates of Construction: 1846 - 1910
Architect:
CHL #: 1005
Builder: JUAN MORENO & A MACH
Historic Attributes: TREES - VEGETATION, RURAL OPEN SPACE
Eth:
Previous Determinations on this property:
Program Prog. Ref Number Eval Crit Eval -date Evaluator
HIST.RES.
SHL- 1005 -0000
1CL
02/18/92
ST
HIST
RES
COMMISSION
ST.HS.LDMK
33 -0017
1CL
02/18/92
ST
HIST
RES
COMMISSION
HIST.RES.
SPHI -RIV -059
7W
11/03/89
ST
HIST
RES
COMMISSION
ST.PT.INT.
33 -0010
7W
11/03/89
ST
HIST
RES
COMMISSION
ST.FND.PRG
619.0- HP -88 -33 -004
3S
12/20/88
PERSON
UNKNOWN
HIST.SURV.
2362 - 0057 -0000
3S
PERSON
UNKNOWN
Key to EVAL:
1CL: Automatically listed in the California Register — Includes State Historical
Landmarks 770 and above and Points of Historical Interest after December
1997 and recommended for listing by the SHRC.
7L: State Historical Landmarks 1 -769 and Points of Historical Interest
designated prior to January 1998 — Needs to be reevaluated using current
standards.
3S: Appears eligible for listing in NR as a separate property.
Explanation:
Determinations are listed chronologically with the latest submittal on top. In this example, the
Rancho was first recorded through a survey submittal prior to 1988. In 1988, the resource was
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 18
evaluated again as part of a state funding project and appeared eligible for listing to the National
Register. In 1989 the State Historic Resource Commission (SHRC) granted it the status of a State
Point of Historical Interest. Subsequently, in 1992, the SHRC then approved its nomination as a
California Historical Landmark in 1992, retiring its status as a State Point. The ST.PT.INT. AND
ST.HS.LDMK program entries link the inventory database with the registration tracking database.
These lines remain after the registration process to maintain the registration history. The site was
automatically placed on the California Register of Historical Resources with the Register's
enactment on January 1, 1998 based on its Landmark Number being after 770.
HISTORIC PROPERTY FILE SINGLE PROPERTY PRINTOUT 09/26/03
Prop. #: 039744 SANTORA BLDG
Prim. #: 30- 160372
Address: County: ORA
207 N BROADWAY X- Street:
SANTA ANA 92701 Vicinity:
Parcel #:
Category: BUILDING
Owner Type: PRIVATE
Present Use: COMMERCIAL
Other Recognition: C
CHL #:
Dates of Construction: 1928 -
Architect: LANSDOWN, FRANK
Historic Attributes: COMM.BLG, 1 -3ST.
Eth:
Previous Determinations on this property
Builder: SANTORA LAND COMPANY
Program Prog. Ref Number Eval Crit Eval -date Evaluator
HIST.RES.
NPS- 84000438 -0069
1 D
C
12/19/84
KEEPER OF THE REGISTER
HIST.RES.
NPS- 82000976 -0000
1S
C
12/27/82
KEEPER OF THE REGISTER
TAX.CERT.
537.9 -30 -0043
2D3
12/10/82
WESTERN REGION
HIST.SURV.
2701 - 0009 -0051
7K
01/01/81
PERSON UNKNOWN
HIST.RES.
DOE- 30 -80- 0006 -0094
2D2
AC
11/12/80
KEEPER OF THE REGISTER
PROJ.REVW.
FHWA801017A
2D2
AC
11/12/80
KEEPER OF THE REGISTER
HIST.RES.
SPHI -ORA -005
7L
09/01/76
PERSON UNKNOWN
1D: Listed in NR as a Contributor to a district or multiple. resource property.
1S: Listed in NR as an individual property.
2D3: Determined eligible for NR list as a contrib. by other than consensus determination or keeper.
7K: Resubmitted to OHP for action but not reevaluated.
2D2: Determined eligible for listing as a contributor by consensus determination.
7L : State Historical Landmarks 1 -769 and Points of Historical Interest designated prior to January 1998
— Needs to be reevaluated using current standards.
This property was evaluated as part of the following district:
2701 - 0009 -9999 DOWNTOWN SANTA ANA HISTORIC DIST.
Explanation:
Determinations are listed chronologically with the latest submittal on top. The Santora Building was
first recorded as a California Point of Historical Interest in 1976 prior to the creation of registration
process tracking. The next two lines show that in 1980, the building was evaluated as part of a
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 19
Federal Highways Administration project submittal through the National Historic Preservation Act's
Section 106 project review process. In this instance the property was determined eligible for the
National Register. When the property was surveyed it was not reevaluated. The property was
again determined eligible to the National Register as part of a tax certification program applied for
by the owner. The Keeper placed the building on the National Register in 1982 as a single
property. The building is a contributor to the 1984 Downtown Santa Ana National Register Historic
District. The property is on the California Register based on four different evaluations (Section 106,
Tax Certification, and both National Register evaluations).
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 20
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. - Historic Resources Inventory Directory & Printout Key
The following column headings and codes may appear on an HRI Directory or Individual
Property Printout.
Column
Identifies...
Heading
PROPERTY-
Property number assigned in the OHP database.
NUMBER
PRIMARY4
Identification number assigned by the California Historical Resources
Information System (CHRIS)
STREET.
Street number and street name. This field will not accept fractional or
ADDRESS
alphabetical street numbers. All numerical street names are
numerically designated; e.g. 1St" not "First ".
Name given to the resource by OHP or by the entity submitting the
RESOURCE
resource to OHP. It may be abbreviated or truncated and may, in
NAME
some cases, indicate the purpose for which the resource was
submitted to OHP.
The name of the city, town, nearest post office, or the approved
CITY.NAME
abbreviation for the National Forest
The type of ownership:
F = federal
C = county
OWN
D = special district
S = state
M = municipal
P = private
U = unknown
YR -C
Year of construction.
The program within OHP for which this resource was submitted for
consideration.
CODE DESCRIPTION
ARCH.INV. Archeological Inventory
HP -PROG
CAL.REG. California Register Applications
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information
System
FED.FND.PR Federally Funded Acq /Dev Proj.
HIST.RES. Historical Resource Information
HIST.SURV. Historic Resources Survey
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 21
Column
Identifies...
Heading
LOC.C.DIST Local Certified District (Tax)
MAINST.PRG Main Street Program
NAT.REG. National Register Applications
NUL Program Area Unknown
PROJ.REVW. Project Review - 106 Determinations
ST.AG.5024 Master List of State -owned Historic Properties
ST.FND.PRG State Funded Acquisition and Development
Projects
ST.HS.LDMK State Historical Landmark Applications
ST.PT.INT. State Point of Historic Interest Applications
TAX.(NPS) NPS's '91 Tax Certification Data
TAX.CERT. Tax Certification Actions
PRG-
Program's reference number for this determination. See Appendices
REFERENCE-
4 & 5.
NUMBER
STAT -DAT
Date this status was determined.
Status code assigned which reflects the resource's eligibility or listing
in either the National Register of Historic Places, the California
Register of Historical Resources, or local government register or
listing. Frequently, a resource has been evaluated under a number of
STATUS CODE
different programs at different times and received a different status
code for each evaluation incident. A separate listing of the resource is
made for each determination. The California Historical Resource
Status Codes are elsewhere in this Bulletin and online at
www.ohP.parks.ca.gov under Publications and Forms.
Reflects the National Register or California Register criteria under
which the resource has been listed or determined eligible:
NR CR
A 1 = associated with events
CRIT
B 2 = associated with persons
C 3 = embodies distinctive characteristics
D 4 = has yielded or has the potential to yield
information
Parcel #:
Parcel number that was designated by the documentation.
Code designating the type of property:
D = district
C
B = building
C = site
S = structure
O = object
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 22
Column
Identifies...
Heading
#PR
Number of total resources included within a district, both contributing
and non - contributing.
Codes for listings or designations other than the National Register of
Historical Places:
C = CA.POINT OF HISTORICAL INTEREST (CPHI)
H = HABS OR HAER (HIST.AM.BUILD.SURV. OR
HIST.AM.ENG.REC.)
L = LOCALLY DESIGNATED LANDMARK
N = NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK (NHL)
OTHREG
O = OTHER TYPE OF REGISTRATION OR DESIGNATION
P = STATE OR LOCAL PARK
R = CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
(CRHR)
S = STATE HISTORIC LANDMARK (SHL) OR (CHL)
CHL#
The State Historical Landmark number, if the property is a State
Historical Landmark
EVAL
Identifies the individual who made the evaluation and that person's
programmatic responsibility. See Appendix 1 Evaluator Codes
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 23
CODE
* *TA
NAME
Appendix 2 - Evaluator Codes
ABHS
ANNE BLOOMFIELD
AGPR
ANDREA GALVIN
AMPR
ANMARIE MEDIN
BHPR
BLOSSOM HAMUSEK
BMHS
BETTY MARVIN
BWPR
BRIAN WICKSTROM
CAHS
CARSON ANDERSON
CCPR
CLARENCE CAESAR
CCRG
CLARENCE CAESAR
CHRG
CYNTHIA HOWSE
CMHS
CHRISTY MCAVOY
CMPC
CHRISTY MCAVOY
CRRG
CAROL ROLAND
CWPR
CHERILYN WIDELL
DAPR
DANIEL ABEYTA
DBPR
DAN BELL
DCPR
DORENE CLEMENT
DDPR
DWIGHT DUTSCHKE
DNHI
DON NAPOLI
DNHS
DON NAPOLI
DSPR
DANA SUPERNOWICZ
DTRG
DIANNE THOMAS
EIPR
EUGENE ITOGAWA
EKHI
EILEEN KERR
GIRG
GENE ITOGAWA
GKHS
GARY KNECHT
GRPR
GARY REINOEHL
GWPR
GEORGIE WAUGH
HBPR
HENRY BASS
HKPR
HANS KREUTZBERG
HKRG
HANS KREUTZBERG
ICCH
INFORMATION CENTER
J1H1
JAN WOOLEY
J1RG
JAN WOOLEY
JBPR
JEFFERY BINGHAM
JCHI
JAY CORREIA
JCPR
JANICE CALPO
JDPR
JENNIFER DARCANGELO
JFPR
JAMES FISHER
JFRG
JAMES FISHER
JHPR
JULIA HUDDLESON
CAPACITY
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
CONSULTANT / HISTORIC SURVEY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP /PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
CONSULTANT/ HISTORIC SURVEY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
CONSULTANT / HISTORIC SURVEY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
CONSULTANT/ HISTORIC SURVEY
PRIVATE CONSULTATNT
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
OHP /SHPO
OHP /ACTING SHPO
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / HISTORIC INVENTORY
CONSULTANT /HISTORIC SURVEY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP /REGISTRATION UNIT
OHP /PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / HISTORIC INVENTORY
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
CONSULTANT / HISTORIC SURVEY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
IC / CHRIS
OHP / HISTORIC INVENTORY
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / HISTORIC INVENTORY
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 24
JMHS
JUDITH MARVIN
CONSULTANT / HISTORIC SURVEY
JNPR
JOAN RAPPOLD
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
JPMS
JANICE PREGLIASCO
OHP / MAIN - STREET PROGRAM
JRPR
JOHN SHARP
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
JSPR
JEANETTE SCHULZ
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
JSRG
JEANETTE SCHULZ
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
JSTA
JEANETTE SCHULZ
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
JTHS
JUDY TRIEM
CONSULTANT /HISTORIC SURVEY
JWPR
JOHN (CHUCK) WHATFORD
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
KPNP
KEEPER OF THE REGISTER
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
L1HS
LESLIE HEUMANN
CONSULTANT / HISTORIC SURVEY
LALA
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF LOS ANGELES
LHPR
LESLIE HARTZELL
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
LNLN
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
LWPR
LUCINDA WOODWARD
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
MBRG
MARVIN BRIENES
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
MLRG
MARYLN LORTIE
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
MMPR
MICHAEL MCGUIRT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
MNHI
MARIE NELSON
OHP / HISTORIC INVENTORY
MNPR
MARIE NELSON
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
MNRG
MARIE NELSON
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
MRPR
MICHAEL RONDEAU
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW
MSRG
JENAN M. SAUNDERS
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
MTHS
MARK THORNTON
CONSULTANT /HISTORIC SURVEY
NDPR
NICK DEL CIOPPO
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
NSHS
NANCY STOLTZ
CONSULTANT /HISTORIC SURVEY
NTPR
NATALIE LINDQUIST
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW
NWTA
NORBERT WALERY
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
PSRG
PATRICIA SEATON
OHP /REGISTRATION UNIT
RFPR
RICK FITZGERALD
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
RJPR
ROBERT JACKSON
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
RMPR
ROBERT MACKENSEN
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
RMTA
ROBERT MACKENSEN
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
RWHS
ROBERT W. WINTER
CONSULTANT/ HISTORIC SURVEY
S1 PO
ST HIST PRES OFFICER
OFFICE HISTORIC PRESERVAT
SCPR
STEADE CRAIGO
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW
SCTA
STEADE CRAIGO
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
SERG
SANDRA ELDER
OHP / REGISTRATION UNIT
SGPR
STEVE GRANTHAM
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
SHRC
ST HIST RES COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SMPR
STEPHEN MIKESELL
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
TBPR
TIMOTHY BRANDT
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
TBTA
TIMOTHY BRANDT
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
TVPR
THAD VAN BUEREN
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW UNIT
TWTA
TOM WINTERS
OHP / TAX CERTIFICATION
UNKN
PERSON UNKNOWN
CAPACITY UNKNOWN
WRNP
WESTERN REGION
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
WSPR
WILLIAM SEIDEL
OHP / PROJECT REVIEW
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 25
Appendix 3 - Numbering Conventions for Historical Resources
PROGRAM NUMBER KEY to Number
STATE HISTORIC LANDMARKS
State Historic Landmarks are ordered numerically, i.e. SHL -0001. In the case of
satellites the Landmarks will receive an extra two digits, i.e. SHL -0001 and its satellite
SHL- 0001 -01. The numbering of satellites generally begins with " -01 ". In some
isolated cases however, the numbering appears to begin at " -02 ".
Some State Historic Landmarks are part of a thematic nomination. In these cases
multiple properties may appear under one historic resource number. Generally
thematic properties will be identified as such in their name, i.e. John Medica's Garden
(Folk Art Them.).
S H L -#### -xxxx
## ## = State Historical Landmark number
xxxx = satellite
CALIFORNIA POINTS OF HISTORIC INTEREST
Points of Historic Interest are numbered numerically by county, i.e. SPHI -ALA -001. In
the case of satellite properties, the properties are first numbered numerically and then
alphabetically, i.e. SPHI -LAN -042 and its satellite SPHI -LAN- 042 -A. Occasional gaps
in numerical sequence may occur if a property has been retired from the Point of
Historical Interest program. This happens every time a property is upgraded from a
Point of Historical Interest to a State Historic Landmark.
SPH I- CCC -### -xxxx
DETERMINATIONS OF ELIGIBILITY
DOES -C C- YY - #### -xxxx
LISTED ON NATIONAL REGISTER
CCC = county initials
### = sequential number in county
xxxx = satellite
CC = county number
YY = year of determination
#### = sequential number
xxxx = contributor number
NPS- ## ###### -xxxx # ##### ## = National Park Service's National
Register Number
xxxx = contributor number
DESIGNATED NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 26
N H L-########-xxxx #### #### = National Park Service's National
Register Number
xxxx = contributor number
LISTED ON CALIFORNIA REGISTER
CR- #### # #- # ###### = OHP's California Register Number
SUBMITTED FOR INVENTORY IN ACCORDANCE WITH OHP'S SURVEY STANDARDS
zzzz - #### -xxxx zzzz =last four numbers of city zip
### #= resource inventoried in that zip code
xxxx = contributor number
SUBMITTED FOR LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER BUT NOT LISTED
REG- yymmdda -xxxx yy = year, mm = month, dd = day,
a = alpha ordering of submissions on a given day
xxxx = contributor number
ENTERED INTO THE CHRIS BY AN INFORMATION CENTER
P- CC- #### ## -xxxx P- CC- ###### = Primary Number, assigned
by the Information Center
CC = county number
###### = sequential number
xxxx = contributor number, assigned by OHP
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 27
Appendix 4 - Numbering Conventions for Transaction Logs
PROGRAM
NUMBER KEY to Number
PROJECT REVIEW (EIRLOG)
AAAA####### #a AAAA = 3 or 4- letter abbreviation for a federal
agency
###### = YYMMDD, year, month, day
a = sequential lettering of daily receipt
from an Agency
TAX CERTIFICATION (TAXLOG)
537.9- CC -#### CC = county number
#### = sequential number
STATE FUNDED PROJECTS (ST.FND.PRG)
619.0- SS- YY- CC -### SS =
YY =
CC =
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS (FED.FND.PRJ)
629.0 -YY- PPP- CC - ### or
629.0- PPP- YY- CC - ###
REGISTRATION PROGRAMS (REGLOG)
CC -####
state funding source
year of determination
county number
sequential number
PPP = federal funding source
YY =
year of determination
CC =
county number
#### =
sequential number
CC =
county number
#### =
sequential number
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 28
Appendix 5 - CHRIS County Codes
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 29
PRIMA Y
REPORT
,O
NUMBER
TRINOMIAL
NUMBER
NUMBER
TRINOMIAL
NUMBER
.
CODE
CODE
..
.
.. E
CODE
CODE
F11- .•:
►�
�►
- ►�
-
MIS
M. �0902
MINIM
NO
M =00,
► . •
�
PRIME I MR.
W
OEM
LTA 110
Technical Assistance Bulletin 8 29
4kcretary's Standards -- Evaluation 12/22/08 2:29 PM
NIPS z. A Cultural Resource Subject, I
°I
ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION:
Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
[As Antended and Annotated]
Contents Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Standards & Guidelines for:. Evaluation
Introduction
Preservation Planning Evaluation is the process of determining whether identified properties
meet defined criteria of significance and therefore should be included
Identification in an inventory of historic properties determined to meet the criteria.
Evaluation The criteria employed vary depending on the inventory's use in
resource management.
• Standards Standard I. Evaluation of the Significance of Historic
• Guidelines Properties Uses Established Criteria
• Technical Information
Registration The evaluation of historic properties employs criteria to determine
which properties are significant. Criteria should therefore focus on
Note on Documentation and historical, architectural, archeological, engineering and cultural
Treatment of Hist. Properties values, rather than on treatments. A statement of the minimum
Historical Documentation information necessary to evaluate properties against the criteria
should be provided to direct information gathering activities.
Architectural and Enoineerin
Documentation
Archeological Documentation
Historic Preservation Projects
Qualification Standards
Preservation Terminology
I 112:1_ 1
Because the National Register of Historic Places is a major focus of
preservation activities on the Federal, State and local levels, the
National Register criteria have been widely adopted not only as
required for Federal purposes, but for State and local inventories as
well. The National Historic Landmark criteria and other criteria used
for inclusion of properties in State historic site files are other
examples of criteria with different management purposes.
Standard Il. Evaluation of Significance Applies the
Criteria Within Historic Contexts
Properties are evaluated using a historic context that identifies the
significant patterns that properties represent and defines expected
property types against which individual properties may be compared.
Within this comparative framework, the criteria for evaluation take on
particular meaning with regard to individual properties.
Standard III. Evaluation Results in A List or Inventory
of Significant Properties That Is Consulted In
Assigning Registration and Treatment Priorities
The evaluation process and the subsequent development of an
inventory of significant properties is an on -going activity. Evaluation
of the significance of a property should be completed before
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch- stnds_3.htm Page 1 of 10
Sticretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
registration is considered and before preservation treatments are
selected. The inventory entries should contain sufficient information
for subsequent activities such as registration or treatment of
properties, including an evaluation statement that makes clear the
significance of the property within one or more historic contexts.
Standard IV. Evaluation Results Are Made Available
to the Public
Evaluation is the basis of registration and treatment decisions.
Information about evaluation decisions should be organized and
available for use by the general public and by those who take part in
decisions about registration and treatment. Use of appropriate
computer- assisted data bases should be a part of the information
dissemination effort. Sensitive information, however, must be
safeguarded from general public distribution.
Top
Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for
Evaluation
Introduction
These Guidelines link the Standards for Evaluation with more
specific guidance and technical information. These Guidelines
describe one approach to meeting the Standards for Evaluation.
Agencies, organizations, or individuals proposing to approach
evaluation differently may wish to review their approach with the
National Park Service.
The Guidelines are organized as follows:
The Evaluation Process
Criteria
Application of Criteria within a Historic Context
Inventory
Recommended Sources of Technical Information
The Evaluation Process
These Guidelines describe principles for evaluating the significance
of one or more historic properties with regard to a given set of
criteria.
Groups of related properties should be evaluated at the same time
whenever possible; for example, following completion of a theme
study or community survey.
Evaluation should not be undertaken using documentation that may
be out of date. Prior to proceeding with evaluation the current
condition of the property should be determined and previous
analyses evaluated in light of any new information.
Evaluation must be performed by persons qualified by education,
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local - law /arch_stnds_3.htm Page 2 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation 12/22/08 2:29 PM
training and experience in the application of the criteria. Where
feasible, evaluation should be performed in consultation with other
individuals experienced in applying the relevant criteria in the
geographical area under consideration; for example, the State
Historic Preservation Officer or local landmarks commission.
Evaluation is completed with a written determination that a property
is or is not significant based on provided information. This statement
should be part of the record.
Criteria
The purposes of evaluation criteria should be made clear. For
example, the criteria may be used "to evaluate properties for
inclusion in the county landmarks list," or "to implement the National
Register of Historic Places program."
For Federal cultural resource management purposes, criteria used to
develop an inventory should be coordinated with the National
Register criteria for evaluation as implemented in the approved
State comprehensive historic preservation plan.
Content of Criteria: Criteria should be appropriate in scale to the
purpose of the evaluation. For example, criteria designed to describe
national significance should not be used as the basis for creating a
county or State inventory. Criteria should be categorical and not
attempt to describe in detail every property likely to qualify. Criteria
should outline the disciplines or broad areas of concern (history,
archeology, architectural history, engineering and culture, for
example) included within the scope of the inventory; explain what
kinds of properties, if any, are excluded and the reasons for
exclusion; and define how levels of significance are measured, if
such levels are incorporated into the criteria. If the criteria are to be
used in situations where the National Register criteria are also
widely used, it is valuable to include a statement explaining the
relationship of the criteria used to the National Register criteria,
including how the scope of the inventory differs from that defined by
the National Register criteria and how the inventory could be used to
identify properties that meet the National Register criteria.
Information Needed to Evaluate Properties: The criteria should be
accompanied by a statement defining the minimum information
necessary to evaluate properties to insure that this information is
collected during identification activities intended to locate specific
historic properties. Generally, at least the following will be needed:
1. Adequately developed historic contexts, including identified
property types. (See the Guidelines for Preservation Planning
for discussion of development of historic contexts.)
2. Sufficient information about the appearance, condition and
associative values of the property to be evaluated to:
a. Classify it as to property type;
b. Compare its features or characteristics with those
expected for its property type; and
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -3.htm Page 3 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
c. Define the physical extent of the property and
accurately locate the property.
To facilitate distinguishing between facts and analysis, the
information should be divided into categories including identification
and description of pertinent historical contexts; description of the
property and its significance in the historical context; and analysis of
the integrity of the property relative to that needed to represent the
context.
Usually documentation need not include such items as a complete
title history or biography of every owner of a property, except where
that information is important in evaluating its significance.
Information on proposed or potential treatments or threats, such as
destruction of a property through uncontrollable natural processes, is
also not needed for evaluation, unless those effects are likely to
occur prior to or during the evaluation, thereby altering the significant
characteristic of the property. If archeological testing or structural
analysis is needed for evaluation, it should not proceed beyond the
point of providing the information necessary for evaluation and
should not unnecessarily affect significant features or values of the
property.
When more information is needed: Evaluation cannot be
conducted unless all necessary information is available. (See
Information Needed to Evaluate Properties.) Any missing information
or analysis should be identified (e.g. development of context or
information on the property) as well as the specific activities required
to obtain the information (archival research, field survey and testing,
or laboratory testing). When adequate information is not available, it
is important to record that fact so that evaluation will not be
undertaken until the information can be obtained. In some cases
needed information is not obtainable, for example, where historical
records have been destroyed or analytical techniques have not been
developed to date materials in archeological sites. If an evaluation
must be completed in these cases, it is important to acknowledge
what information was not obtainable and how that missing
information may affect the reliability of the evaluation.
Application of the Criteria within a Historic Context
The first step in evaluation is considering how the criteria apply to
the particular historic context. This is done by reviewing the
previously developed narrative for the historic context and
determining how the criteria would apply to properties in that context,
based on the important patterns, events, persons and cultural values
identified. (See the discussion of the historic context narrative in the
Guidelines for Preservation Planning.) This step includes
identification of which criteria each property type might meet and
how integrity is to be evaluated for each property type under each
criterion. Specific guidelines for evaluating the eligibility of individual
properties should be established. These guidelines should outline
and justify the specific physical characteristics or data requirements
that an individual property must possess to retain integrity for the
particular property type; and define the process by which revisions
or additions can be made to the evaluation framework.
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -3.htm Page 4 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
Consideration of property type and integrity: After considering
how the criteria apply to the particular historic context, the
evaluation process for a property generally includes the following
steps:
1. A property is classified as to the appropriate historic
context(s) and property type(s). If no existing property type is
appropriate, a new property type is defined, its values
identified, and the specific characteristics or data
requirements are outlined and justified as an addition to the
historic context. If necessary, a new historic context is defined
for which values and property types and their integrity
requirements are identified and justified.
2. A comparison is made between the existing information
about the property and the integrity characteristics or data
required for the property type.
a. If the comparison shows that the property
possesses these characteristics, then it is evaluated as
significant for that historic context. The evaluation
includes a determination that the property retains
integrity for its type.
b. If the comparison shows that the property does not
meet the minimum requirements, one of several
conclusions is reached:
1. The property is determined not significant
because it does not retain the integrity defined
for the property type.
2. The property has characteristics that may make
it significant but these differ from those expected
for that property type in that context. In this
case, the historic context or property types
should be reexamined and revised if necessary,
based on subsequent research and survey.
The evaluation should state how the particular property meets the
integrity requirements for its type. When a property is disqualified for
loss of integrity, the evaluation statement should focus on the kinds
of integrity expected for the property type, those that are absent for
the disqualified property, and the impact of that absence on the
property's ability to exemplify architectural, historical or research
values within a particular historic context.
The integrity of the property in its current condition, rather than its
likely condition after a proposed treatment, should be evaluated.
Factors such as structural problems, deterioration, or abandonment
should be considered in the evaluation only if they have affected the
integrity of the significant features or characteristics of the property.
Inventory
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -3.htm Page 5 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
An inventory is a repository of information on specific properties
evaluated as significant.
Content: The inventory should include:
1. Summaries of the important historic contexts. These may be
in the form of an approved plan or analysis of historic
contexts important in the history of the geographical area
covered by the inventory.
2. Descriptions of significant property types of these contexts,
whether or not any specific properties have been identified.
3. Results of reconnaissance surveys or other identification
activities, even if the level of information on specific properties
identified as part of those activities is not sufficient to evaluate
individual properties.
4. Information on individual properties that was used in
evaluation.
• Historic contexts are identified by name, with reference
to documents describing those contexts, or with a
narrative statement about the context(s) where such
documents do not exist.
• A description of the property. Part of this description
may be a photographic record.
• A statement that justifies the significance of the
property in relation to its context(s). This statement
should include an analysis of the integrity of the
property.
• Boundaries of the property.
• A record of when a property was evaluated and
included in the inventory, and by whom.
• Records on demolished or altered properties and
properties evaluated as not significant should be
retained, along with full description of areas surveyed,
for the planning information these records provide
about impacts to properties and about the location and
character of non - significant properties to prevent
redundant identification work at a later time.
Maintenance: Inventory entries should be maintained so that they
accurately represent what is known about historic properties in the
area covered by the inventory. This will include new information
gained from research and survey about the historic contexts,
property types, and previously evaluated properties, as well as
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local - law /arch_stnds_3.htm Page 6 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
information about newly evaluated properties. For individual
properties, addition of kinds of significance, change in the
boundaries, or loss of significance through demolition or alteration
should be recorded.
Uses and Availability: An inventory should be managed so that the
information is accessible. Its usefulness depends on the organization
of information and on its ability to incorporate new information. An
inventory should be structured so that entries can be retrieved by
locality or by historic context.
The availability of the inventory information should be announced or
a summary should be distributed. This may be in the form of a list of
properties evaluated as significant or a summary of the historic
contexts and the kinds of properties in the inventory. Inventories
should be available to managers, planners, and the general public at
local, State, regional, and Federal agency levels.
It is necessary to protect information about archeological sites or
other properties whose integrity may be damaged by widespread
knowledge of their location. It may also be necessary to protect
information on the location of properties such as religious sites,
structures, or objects whose cultural value would be compromised by
public knowledge of the property's location.
Tm
Recommended Sources of Technical Information
Current Recommendations Archaeological Method and Theory: An Encyclopedia. Linda Ellis,
editor. Garland Publishing, Inc., New York, 2000.
Cultural Resource Significance Evaluation: Proceedings of a U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Workshop 3 -4 October 1994, Vicksburg,
Mississippi. Frederick L. Briuer and Clay Mathers, editors. US. Army
Corps of Engineers, IWR Report 96 -EL -3, 1996.
Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties (WordPerfect
file). Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National
Register, History and Education, 1995.
Geophysical Exploration for Archaeology: An Introduction to
Geophysical Exploration. Bruce W. Bevan. Midwest Archeological
Center Special Report No. 1. Department of the Interior, National
Park Service, Midwest Archeological Center, Lincoln, Nebraska,
1998.
"Other Questions that Count: Introductory Comments on Assessing
Significance in Historical Archaeology." William B. Lees and Vergil
E. Noble. Historical Archaeology 24(2):10 -13, 1990.
Researching a Historic Property. Department of the Interior, National
Park Service, National Register, History and Education, 1991,
revised 1998.
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -3.htm Page 7 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation 12/22/08 2:29 PM
Settler Communities in the West: Historic Contexts for Cultural
Resource Managers of Department of Defense Lands. Robert Lyon,
editor. National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region, 1994.
National Park Service 9994 Thematic Framework. Department of
the Interior, National Park Service.
Trends and Patterns in Cultural Resource Significance: An Historical
Perspective and Annotated Bibliography (. dp f file). Frederick L.
Briuer and Clay Mathers. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water
Resources Support Center IWR Report 96 -EL -1, 1996.
Property Types:
Guidelines for Identifying, Evaluating and Registering Aids to
Navigation (WordPerfect file). Department of the Interior, National
Park Service, National Register, History and Education, 1990.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation
Properties. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1998.
Guidelines for Idenfifng, Evaluating and Registering America's
Historic Battlefields. Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, National Register, History and Education, 1992.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Cemeteries and Burial
Place. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National
Register, History and Education, 1992.
How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes.
Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register,
History and Education, 1990.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Historical Archeological
Sites (WordPerfect file or .zip file). Department of the Interior,
National Park Service, National Register, History and Education,
1992, revised 1999.
Guidelines for Identifying. Evaluating and Registering Historic Mining
Properties. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1992, revised 1997, 1999.
How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Post Offices
(WordPerfect file). Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1984, revised 1994.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Nominating Properties that Have
Achieved Siginificance in the Past Fifty Years. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, National Register, History and
Education, 1979, revised 1990, 1996, 1998.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic
Landscapes. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1991, revised 1999.
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -3.htm Page 8 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
Guidelines for Evaluatinq and Documenting Properties Associated
with Significant Persons. Department of the Interior, National Park
Service, National Register, History and Education, 1989.
Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural
Properties. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1990, revised 1992, 1998.
Nominating Historic Vessels and Shipwrecks to the National Register
of Historic Places. Department of the Interior, National Park Service,
National Register, History and Education, 1992.
OWN _q
MW W
..
MUM
41 AMIN
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local — law /arch_stnds_3.htm Page 9 of 10
Secretary's Standards -- Evaluation
12/22/08 2:29 PM
See also Archeology & Ethnography Program
National Register of Historic Places
<< Identification I Intro I Registration >>
NIPS Laws I Search I E -mail I Links to the Past 9
Privacy & Disclaimer
MJB
�J
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch- stnds -3.htm Page 10 of 10
Se(jetary's Standards - - Qualifications Standards 12/22/08 2:30 PM
NPS t m A Cu- ultural Resource Subject
ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION:
Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
[As Amended and Annotated]
.Contents Professional Qualifications Standards
Standards & Guidelines for:.
Introduction
Preservation Planning
Identification
Evaluation
Registration
Note on Documentation and
Treatment of Hist. Properties
Historical Documentation
Architectural and Engineering
Documentation
Archeological Documentation
Historic Preservation Projects
Qualification Standards
Preservation Terminology
The following requirements are those used by the National Park
Service, and have been previously published in the Code of Federal
Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61. The qualifications define minimum
education and experience required to perform identification,
evaluation, registration, and treatment activities. In some cases,
additional areas or levels of expertise may be needed, depending on
the complexity of the task and the nature of the historic properties
involved. In the following definitions, a year of full -time professional
experience need not consist of a continuous year of full -time work
but may be made up of discontinuous periods of full -time or part-
time work adding up to the equivalent of a year of full -time
experience.
History
The minimum professional qualifications in history are a graduate
degree in history or closely related field; or a bachelor's degree in
history or closely related field plus one of the following:
I. At least two years of full -time experience in research, writing,
teaching, interpretation, or other demonstrable professional
activity with an academic institution, historic organization or
agency, museum, or other professional institution; or
2. Substantial contribution through research and publication to
the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of history.
Archeology
The minimum professional qualifications in archeology are a
graduate degree in archeology, anthropology, or closely related field
plus:
1. At least one year of full -time professional experience or
equivalent specialized training in archeological research,
administration or management;
2. At least four months of supervised field and analytic
experience in general North American archeology, and
3. Demonstrated ability to carry research to completion.
In addition to these minimum qualifications, a professional in
prehistoric archeology shall have at least one year of full -time
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -9.htm Page 1 of 3
Sec(etary's Standards-- Qualifications Standards 12/22/08 2:30 PM
professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of
archeological resources of the prehistoric period. A professional in
historic archeology shall have at least one year of full -time
professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of
archeological resources of the historic period.
Architectural History
The minimum professional qualifications in architectural history are a
graduate degree in architectural history, art history, historic
preservation, or closely related field, with coursework in American
architectural history, or a bachelor's degree in architectural history,
art history, historic preservation or closely related field plus one of
the following:
1. At least two years of full -time experience in research, writing,
or teaching in American architectural history or restoration
architecture with an academic institution, historical
organization or agency, museum, or other professional
institution; or
2. Substantial contribution through research and publication to
the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of American
architectural history.
Architecture
The minimum professional qualifications in architecture are a
professional degree in architecture plus at least two years of full -time
experience in architecture; or a State license to practice architecture.
Historic Architecture
The minimum professional qualifications in historic architecture are a
professional degree in architecture or a State license to practice
architecture, plus one of the following:
1. At least one year of graduate study in architectural
preservation, American architectural history, preservation
planning, or closely related field; or
2. At least one year of full -time professional experience on
historic preservation projects.
Such graduate study or experience shall include detailed
investigations of historic structures, preparation of historic structures
research reports, and preparation of plans and specifications for
preservation projects.
<< Hist. Preserv. Projects I Intro I Preserv. Terms >>
NPS Laws I Search I E -mail I Links to the Past
N
Privacy & Disclaimer
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -9.htm Page 2 of 3
Secretary;s Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
It
NPS i I 2i A- Cultural Resource Subject J 11.
ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION:
Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
[As Antended and Annotated]
.Contents
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Standards & Guidelines for%
Preservation Planning
Introduction
Preservation Planning
Preservation planning is a process that organizes preservation
• Standards
activities (identification, evaluation, registration and treatment of
• Guidelines
historic properties) in a logical sequence. The Standards for
• Technical Information
Planning discuss the relationship among these activities while the
remaining activity standards consider how each activity should be
Identification
carried out. The Professional Qualifications Standards discuss the
education and experience required to carry out various activities.
Evaluation
Registration The Standards for Planning outline a process that determines when
an area should be examined for historic properties, whether an
Note on Documentation and identified property is significant, and how a significant property
Treatment of Hist. Properties should be treated.
Historical Documentation
Preservation planning is based on the following principles:
Architectural and Enaineerin
Documentation
Archeological Documentation
Historic Preservation Projects
Qualification Standards
Preservation Terminology
—C —
• Important historic properties cannot be replaced if they are
destroyed. Preservation planning provides for conservative
use of these properties, preserving them in place and
avoiding harm when possible and altering or destroying
properties only when necessary.
• If planning for the preservation of historic properties is to
have positive effects, it must begin before the identification of
all significant properties has been completed. To make
responsible decisions about historic properties, existing
information must be used to the maximum extent and new
information must be acquired as needed.
• Preservation planning includes public participation. The
planning process should provided a forum for open discussion
of preservation issues. Public involvement is most meaningful
when it is used to assist in defining values of properties and
preservation planning issues, rather than when it is limited to
review of decisions already made. Early and continuing public
participation is essential to the broad acceptance of
preservation planning decisions.
Preservation planning can occur at several levels or scales: in a
project area; in a community; in a State as a whole; or in the
scattered or contiguous landholdings of a Federal agency.
Depending on the scale, the planning process will involve different
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -1.htm Page 1 of 13
Secretary% Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
segments of the public and professional communities and the'
resulting plans will vary in detail. For example, a State preservation
plan will likely have more general recommendations than a plan for
a project area or a community. The planning process described in
these Standards is flexible enough to be used at all levels while
providing a common structure which promotes coordination and
minimizes duplication of effort. The Guidelines for Preservation
Planning contain additional information about how to integrate
various levels of planning.
Standard I. Preservation Planning Establishes
Historic Contexts
Decisions about the identification, evaluation, registration and
treatment of historic properties are most reliably made when the
relationship of individual properties to other similar properties is
understood. Information about historic properties representing
aspects of history, architecture,* archeology, engineering and culture
must be collected and organized to define these relationships. This
organizational framework is called a "historic context." The historic
context organizes information based on a cultural theme and its
geographical and chronological limits. Contexts describe the
significant broad patterns of development in an area that may be
represented by historic properties. The development of historic
contexts is the foundation for decisions about identification,
evaluation, registration and treatment of historic properties.
Standard II. Preservation Planning Uses Historic
Contexts To Develop Goals and Priorities for the
Identification, Evaluation, Registration and
Treatment of Historic Properties
A series of preservation goals is systematically developed for each
historic context to ensure that the range of properties representing
the important aspects of each historic context is identified, evaluated
and treated. Then priorities are set for all goals identified for each
historic context. The goals with assigned priorities established for
each historic context are integrated to produce a comprehensive and
consistent set of goals and priorities for all historic contexts in the
geographical area of a planning effort.
The goals for each historic context may change as new information
becomes available. The overall set of goals and priorities are then
altered in response to the changes in the goals and priorities for the
individual historic contexts.
Activities undertaken to meet the goals must be designed to deliver
a usable product within a reasonable period of time. The scope of
the activity must be defined so the work can be completed with
available budgeted program resources.
Standard III. The Results of Preservation Planning
Are Made Available for Integration Into Broader
Planning Processes
http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch-stnds-1.htm Page 2 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning
12/22/08 2:28 PM
Preservation of historic properties is one element of larger planning
processes. Planning results, including goals and priorities,
information about historic properties, and any planning documents,
must be transmitted in a usable form to those responsible for other
planning activities. Federally mandated historic preservation planning
is most successfully integrated into project management planning at
an early stage. Elsewhere, this integration is achieved by making the
results of preservation planning available to other governmental
planning bodies and to private interests whose activities affect
historic properties.
TOP
Secretary of the-Interior's Guidelines for
Preservation Planning
Introduction
These Guidelines link the Standards for Preservation Planning with
more specific guidance and technical information. They describe one
approach to meeting the Standards for Preservation Planning.
Agencies, organizations or individuals proposing to approach
planning differently may wish to review their approaches with the
National Park Service.
The Guidelines are organized as follows:
Managing the Planning Process
Developing_ Historic Contexts
Developing Goals for a Historic Context
Integrating Individual Historic Contexts - Creating the Preservation
Plan
Coordinating with Management Frameworks
Recommended Sources of Technical Information
Managing the Planning Process
The preservation planning process must include an explicit approach
to implementation, a provision for review and revision of all
elements, and a mechanism for resolving conflicts within the overall
set of preservation goals and between this set of goals and other
land use planning goals. It is recommended that the process and its
products be described in public documents.
Implementing the Process
The planning process is a continuous cycle. To establish and
maintain such a process, however, the process must be divided into
manageable segments that can be performed, within a defined
period, such as a fiscal year or budget cycle. One means of
achieving this is to define a period of time during which all the
preliminary steps in the planning process will be completed. These
preliminary steps would include setting a schedule for subsequent
activities.
Review and Revision
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -I.htm Page 3 of 13
Secretaryts Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
Planning is a dynamic process. It is expected that the content of the
historic contexts described in Standard I and the goals and priorities
described in Standard II will be altered based on new information
obtained as planning proceeds. The incorporation of this information
is essential to improve the content of the plan and to keep it up -to-
date and useful. New information must be reviewed regularly and
systematically, and the plan revised accordingly.
Public Participation
The success of the preservation planning process depends on how
well it solicits and integrates the views of various groups. The
planning process is directed first toward resolving conflicts in goals
for historic preservation, and second toward resolving conflicts
between historic preservation goals and other land use planning
goals. Public participation is integral to this approach and includes at
least the following actions:
1. Involving historians, architectural historians, archeologists,
folklorists and persons from related disciplines to define,
review and revise the historic contexts, goals and priorities;
2. Involving interested individuals, organizations and
communities in the planning area in identifying the kinds of
historic properties that may exist and suitable protective
measures;
3. Involving prospective users of the preservation plan in
defining issues, goals and priorities;
4. Providing for coordination with other planning efforts at local,
State, regional and national levels, as appropriate; and
5. Creating mechanisms for identifying and resolving conflicts
about historic preservation issues. The development of
historic contexts, for example, should be based on the
professional input of all disciplines involved in preservation
and not be limited to a single discipline. For prehistoric
archeology, for example, data from fields such as geology,
geomorphology and geography may also be needed. The
individuals and organizations to be involved will depend, in
part, on those present or interested in the planning area.
Documents Resulting from the Planning Process
In most cases, the planning process produces documents that
explain how the process works and that discuss the historic contexts
and related goals and priorities. While the process can operate in
the absence of these documents, planning documents are important
because they are the most effective means of communicating the
process and its recommendations to others. Planning documents
also record decisions about historic properties.
As various parts of the planning process are reviewed and revised to
reflect current information, related documents must also be updated.
Planning documents should be created in a form that can be easily
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -1.htm Page 4 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
revised. It is also recommended that the format language and
organization of any documents or other materials (visual aids, etc.)
containing preservation planning information meet the needs of
prospective users.
Developing Historic Contexts
General Approach
Available information about historic properties must be divided into
manageable units before it can be useful for planning purposes.
Major decisions about identifying, evaluating, registering and treating
historic properties are most reliably made in the context of other
related properties. A historic context is an organizational format that
groups information about related historic properties, based on a
theme, geographic limits and chronological period. A single historic
context describes one or more aspects of the historic development of
an area, considering history, architecture, archeology, engineering
and culture and identifies the significant patterns that individual
historic properties represent, for example, Coal Mining in
Northeastern Pennsylvania between 1860 and 1930. A set of historic
contexts is a comprehensive summary of all aspects of the history of
the area.
The historic context is the cornerstone of the planning process. The
goal of preservation planning is to identify, evaluate, register and
treat the full range of properties representing each historic context,
rather than only one or two types of properties. Identification
activities are organized to ensure that research and survey activities
include properties representing all aspects of the historic context.
Evaluation uses the historic context as the framework within which to
apply the criteria for evaluation to specific properties or property
types. Decisions about treatment of properties are made with the
goal of treating the range of properties in the context. The use of
historic contexts in organizing major preservation activities ensures
that those activities result in the preservation of the wide variety of
properties that represent our history, rather than only a small, biased
sample of properties.
Historic contexts, as theoretical constructs, are linked to actual
historic properties through the concept of property type. Property
types permit the development of plans for identification, evaluation
and treatment even in the absence of complete knowledge of
individual properties. Like the historic context, property types are
artificial constructs which may be revised as necessary. Historic
contexts can be developed at a variety of scales appropriate for
local, State and regional planning. Give the probability of historic
contexts overlapping in an area, it is important to coordinate the
development and use of contexts at all levels. Generally, the State
Historic Preservation Office possesses the most complete body of
information about historic properties and, in practice, is in the best
position perform this function.
The development of historic contexts generally results in documents
that describe the prehistoric processes or patterns that define the
context. Each of the contexts selected should be developed to the
point of identifying important property types to be useful in later
http: / /www.nps.gov /history/local -law /arch - stnds -I.htm Page 5 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
preservation decision - making. The amount of detail included in these
summaries will vary depending on the level (local, State, regional, or
national) at which the contexts are developed and on their intended
uses. For most planning purposes, a synopsis of the written
description of the historic context is sufficient.
Creating a Historic Context
Generally, historic contexts should not be constructed so broadly as
to include all property types under a single historic context or so
narrowly as to contain only one property type per historic context.
The following procedures should be followed in creating a historic
context.
1. Identify the concept, time period and geographical limits for
the historic context
Existing information, concepts, theories, models and descriptions
should be used as the basis for defining historic contexts. Biases in
primary and secondary sources should be identified and accounted
for when existing information is used in defining historic contexts.
The identification and description of historic contexts should
incorporate contributions from all disciplines involved in historic
preservation. The chronological period and geographical area of
each historic context should be defined after the conceptual basis is
established. However, there may be exceptions, especially in
defining prehistoric contexts where drainage systems or
physiographic regions often are outlined first. The geographical
boundaries for historic contexts should not be based upon
contemporary political, project or other contemporary boundaries if
those boundaries do not coincide with historical boundaries. For
example, boundaries for prehistoric contexts will have little
relationship to contemporary city, county or State boundaries.
2. Assemble the existing information about the historic context
a. Collecting information: Several kinds of information are
needed to construct a preservation plan. Information about
the history of the area encompassed by the historic context
must be collected, including any information about historic
properties that have already been identified. Existing survey
or inventory entries are an important source of information
about historic properties. Other sources may include literature
on prehistory, history, architecture and the environment; social
and environmental impact assessments; county and State
land use plans; architectural and folklife studies and oral
histories; ethnographic research; State historic inventories
and registers; technical reports prepared for Section 106 or
other assessments of historic properties; and direct
consultation with individuals and organized groups.
In addition, organizations and groups that may have important
roles in defining historic contexts and values should be
identified. In most cases a range of knowledgeable
professionals drawn from the preservation, planning and
academic communities will be available to assist in defining
contexts and in identifying sources of information. In other
http: / /www.nps.gov /history /local - law /arch_stnds -l.htm Page 6 of 13
Secretarys Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
cases, however, development of historic contexts may occur
in areas whose history or prehistory has not been extensively
studied. In these situations, broad general historic contexts
should be initially identified using available literature and
expertise, with the expectation that the contexts will be
revised and subdivided in the future as primary source
research and field survey are conducted. It is also important
to identify such sources of information as existing planning
data, which is needed to establish goals for identification,
evaluation and treatment, and to identify factors that will affect
attainment of those goals.
The same approach for obtaining information is not
necessarily desirable for all historic contexts. Information
should not be gathered without first considering its relative
importance to the historic context, the cost and time involved,
and the expertise required to obtain it. In many cases; for
example, published sources may be used in writing initial
definitions of historic contexts; archival research or field work
may be needed for subsequent activities.
b. Assessing information: All information should be reviewed to
identify bias in historic perspective, methodological approach,
or area of coverage. For example, field surveys for
archeological sites may have ignored historic archeological
sites, or county land use plans may have emphasized only
development goals.
3. Synthesize information
The information collection and analysis results in a written narrative
of the historic context. This narrative provides a detailed synthesis of
the data that have been collected and analyzed. The narrative
covers the history of the area from the chosen perspective and
identifies important patterns, events, persons or cultural values. In
the process of identifying the important patterns, one should
consider:
• Trends in area settlement and development, if relevant;
• Aesthetic and artistic values embodied in architecture,
construction technology or craftsmanship;
• Research values or problems relevant to the historic context;
social and physical sciences and humanities; and cultural
interests of local communities; and
• Intangible cultural values of ethnic groups and native
American peoples.
4. Define property types
A property type is a grouping of individual properties based on
shared physical or associative characteristics. Property types link the
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -1.htm Page 7 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
ideas incorporated in the theoretical historic context with actual
historic properties that illustrate those ideas. Property types defined
for each historic context should be directly related to the conceptual
basis of the historic context. Property types defined for the historic
context "Coal Mining in Northeastern Pennsylvania, 1860- 1930"
might include coal extraction and processing complexes; railroad and
canal transportation systems; commercial districts; mine workers'
housing; churches, social clubs and other community facilities
reflecting the ethnic origins of workers; and residences and other
properties associated with mine owners and other industrialists.
a. Identify property types: The narrative should discuss the kinds
of properties expected within the geographical limits of the
context and group them into those property types most useful
in representing important historic trends.
Generally, property types should be defined after the historic
context has been defined. Property types in common usage
( "Queen Anne House," "mill buildings" or "stratified sites ")
should not be adopted without first verifying their relevance to
the historic contexts being used.
b. Characterize the locational patterns of property types:
Generalizations about where particular types of properties are
likely to be found can serve as a guide for identification and
treatment. Generalizations about the distribution of
archeological properties are frequently used. The distribution
of other historic properties often can be estimated based on
recognizable historical, environmental or cultural factors that
determined their location. Locational patterns of property
types should be based upon models that have an explicit
theoretical or historical basis and can be tested in the field.
The model may be the product of,historical research and
analysis ( "Prior to widespread use of steam power, mills were
located on rivers and streams able to produce water power"
or "plantation houses in the Mississippi Black Belt were
located on sandy clay knolls "), or it may result from sampling
techniques. Often the results of statistically valid sample
surveys can be used to describe the locational patterns of a
representative portion of properties belonging to a particular
property type. Other surveys can also provide a basis for
suggesting locational patterns if a diversity of historic
properties was recorded and a variety of environmental zones
was inspected. It is likely that the identification of locational
patterns will come from a combination of these sources.
Expected or predicted locational patterns of property types
should be developed with a provision made for their
verification.
c. Characterize the current condition of property types: The
expected condition of property types should be evaluated to
assist in the development of identification, evaluation and
treatment strategies, and to help define physical integrity
thresholds for various property types. The following should be
assessed for each property type:
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -I.htm Page 8 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
1. Inherent characteristics of a property type that either
contribute to or detract from its physical preservation.
For example, a property type commonly constructed of
fragile materials is more likely to be deteriorated than a
property type constructed of durable materials;
structures whose historic function or design limits the
potential for alternative uses (water towers) are less
likely to be reused than structures whose design allows
a wider variety of other uses (commercial buildings or
warehouses).
2. Aspects of the social and natural environment that may
affect the preservation or visibility of the property type.
For example, community values placed on certain
types of properties (churches, historic cemeteries) may
result in their maintenance while the need to reuse
valuable materials may stimulate the disappearance of
properties like abandoned houses and barns.
It may be most efficient to estimate the condition of
property types based on professional knowledge of
existing properties and field test these estimates using
a small sample of properties representative of each
type.
5. Identify information needs
Filling gaps in information is an important element of the
preservation plan designed for each historic context. Statements of
the information needed should be as specific as possible, focusing
on the information needed, the historic context and property types it
applies to, and why the information is needed to perform
identification, evaluation, or treatment activities.
Developing Goals for a Historic Context
Developing Goals
A goal is a statement of preferred preservation activities, which is
generally stated in terms of property types.
The purpose of establishing preservation goals is to set forth a "best
case" version of how properties in the historic context should be
identified, evaluated, registered and treated.
Preservation goals should be oriented toward the greatest possible
protection of properties in the historic context and should be based
on the principle that properties should be preserved in place if
possible, through affirmative treatments like rehabilitation,
stabilization or restoration. Generally, goals will be specific to the
historic context and will often be phrased in terms of property types.
Some of these goals will be related to information needs previously
identified for the historic context. Collectively, the goals for a historic
context should be a coherent statement of program direction
covering all aspects of the context.
For each goal, a statement should be prepared identifying:
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch- stnds_1.htm Page 9 of 13
Secretary's Standards -- Preservation Planning 12/22/08 2:28 PM
I. The goal, including the context and property types to which
the goal applies and the geographical area in which they are
located;
2. The activities required to achieve the goal;
3. The most appropriate methods or strategies for carrying out
the activities;
4. A schedule within which the activities should be completed;
and
5. The amount of effort required to accomplish the goal, as well
as a way to evaluate progress toward its accomplishment.
Setting priorities for goals
Once goals have been developed they need to be ranked in
importance. Ranking involves examining each goal in light of a
number of factors.
1. General social, economic, political and environmental
conditions and trends affecting (positively and negatively) the
identification, evaluation, registration and treatment of property
types in the historic context.
Some property types in the historic context may be more
directly threatened by deterioration, land development
patterns, contemporary use patterns, or public perceptions of
their value, and such property types should be given priority
consideration.
2. Major cost or technical considerations affecting the
identification, evaluation and treatment of property types in
the historic context.
The identification or treatment of some property types may be
technically possible but the cost prohibitive; or techniques
may not currently be perfected (for example, the identification
of submerged sites or objects, or the evaluation of sites
containing material for which dating techniques are still being
developed).
3. Identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities
previously carried out for property types in the historic
context.
If a number of properties representing one aspect of a historic
context have been recorded or preserved, treatment of
additional members of that property type may receive lower
priority than treatment of a property type for which no
examples have yet been recorded or preserved. This
approach ensures that the focus of recording or preserving all
elements of the historic context is retained, rather than limiting
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -l.htm Page 10 of 13
Secretaris Standards -- Preservation Planning
12/22/08 2:28 PM
activities to preserving properties representing only some
aspects of the context.
The result of considering the goals in light of these concerns
will be a list of refined goals ranked in order of priority.
Integrating Individual Contexts - Creating the
Preservation Plan
When historic contexts overlap geographically, competing goals and
priorities must be integrated for effective preservation planning. The
ranking of goals for each historic context must be reconciled to
ensure that recommendations for one context do not contradict those
for another. This important step results in an overall set of priorities
for several historic contexts and a list of the activities to be
performed to achieve the ranked goals. When applied to a specific
geographical area, this is the preservation plan for that area.
It is expected that in many instances historic contexts will overlap
geographically. Overlapping contexts are likely to occur in two
combinations -those that were defined at the same scale (i.e., textile
development in Smithtown 1850 -1910 and Civil War in Smithtown
1855 -1870) and those defined at different scales (i.e., Civil War in
Smithtown and Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley). The contexts
may share the same property types, although the shared property
types will probably have different levels of importance, or they may
group the same properties into different property types, reflecting
either a different scale of analysis or a different historical
perspective. As previously noted, many of the goals that are
formulated for a historic context will focus on the property types
defined for that context. Thus it is critical that the integration of goals
include the explicit consideration of the potential for shared property
type membership by individual properties. For example, when the
same property types are used by two contexts, reconciling the goals
will require weighing the level of importance assigned to each
property type. The degree to which integration of historic contexts
must involve reconciling property types may be limited by the
coordinated development of historic contexts used at various levels.
Integration with Management Frameworks
Preservation goals and priorities are adapted to land units through
integration with other planning concerns. This integration must
involve the resolution of conflicts that arise when competing
resources occupy the same land base. Successful resolution of
these conflicts can often be achieved through judicious combination
of inventory, evaluation and treatment activities. Since historic
properties are irreplaceable, these activities should be heavily
weighted to discourage the destruction of significant properties and
to be compatible with the primary land use.
Recommended Sources of Technical Information
Top
http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/arch-stnds-1.htm Page 11 of 13
Secretarrjs Standards -- Preservation Planning
12/22/08 2:28 PM
Current Recommendations A Planning Companion: A Guide for State Historic Preservation
Planning. Susan L. Henry Renaud, 1983 (draft).
Describes an approach to preservation planning that uses fully
developed historic contexts as special technical studies necessary to
effective planning and decision - making.
Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning.
(formerly National Register Bulletin 24). Anne Derry, H. Ward Jandl,
Carol D. Shull, and Jan Thorman; revised by Patricia L. Parker,
1985.
Local Historic Preservation Plans: A Selected Annotated
Bibliography. Neil Gagliardi and Stephen Morris, 1993.
Provides an overview of the range of local historic preservation
plans from across the country, including information on how a
number of communities have addressed various issues in their
preservation plans.
The National Historic Landmarks Program Theme Study and
Preservation Planning. Robert S. Grumet. Technical Brief 10,
Archeology & Ethnography Program, National Park Service, 1990,
revised 1992.
National Park Service 1994 Thematic Framework.
Use of the National Park Service Thematic Framework need not be
limited to the federal level, as the conceptualization it provides can
equally inform preservation and interpretation at local, state, and
regional levels.
Preparing a Historic Preservation Plan. Bradford J. White and
Richard J. Roddewig. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 450,
1994.
Describes components that are important in a good preservation
plan and explains how several communities have carried out
preservation planning activities. Available from the American
Planning Association, 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1600,
Chicago, Illinois 60603 -6107; (312) 786 -6344.
Protecting Archeological Sites on Private Lands. Susan L. Henry,
with Geoffrey M. Gyrisco, Thomas H. Veech, Stephen A. Morris,
Patricia L. Parker, and Jonathan P. Rak.
Provides useful information on strategies for protecting
archaeological sites in local communities.
Reaching Out, Reaching In: A Guide to Creating Effective Public
Participation in State Historic Preservation Planning. Barry R.
Lawson, Ellen P. Ryan, and Rebecca Bartlett Hutchison, 1993.
Describes an approach for designing public participation programs
for State Historic Preservation Office preservation planning, with a
mini -case study from the Maryland Historical Trust. May also be
applicable in local community preservation planning settings.
Taking Command of Change: A Practical Guide for Applying the
Strategic Development Process in State Historic Preservation
Offices. Douglas C. Eadie, 1995.
Describes a strategic planning approach designed to provide
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -l.htm Page 12 of 13
Secretatt% s Standards -- Preservation Planning
E
12/22/08 2:28 PM
practical guidance to SHPOs in managing growth and change.
See also Historic Preservation Planning Program
National Register Multiple Property Submission List
State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO)
Each SHPO Office has prepared a list of historic context titles, many,
if not all, of which may have been developed and might be available.
In addition, some SHPO Offices have developed guidelines for
preparing historic contexts for their states.
<< Intro I Identification >>
NPS Laws I Search I E -mail I Links to the Past
Privacy & Disclaimer
Last Modified: Mon, Jun 18 2001 04:18:24 pm EDT
MJB
http: / /www.nps.gov/ history/local -law /arch - stnds -I.htm Page 13 of 13
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: April 15, 2009
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
PREPARED BY: Christopher Riordan, AICP
AGENDA ITEM:
CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson
DIRECTOR: John Livingstone, AICP
SUBJECT: Application # LNDMRK09 -0001: Landmark Designation for 21000 Big Basin
Way (Hakone Gardens)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) recommends the City Council:
(1) Open the public hearing and accept public testimony on the attached Ordinance to designate
the subject property as a historic landmark;
(2) Close the hearing and introduce the attached Ordinance and waive first reading;
(3) Direct staff to place the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance on the consent
calendar for the next regular Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Hakone Gardens was placed on the City of Saratoga Heritage Resources Inventory in 1988.
Article 13- 15.010 of the Saratoga Municipal Code states that designation of a property as a
historic landmark requires recommendation from the Heritage Preservation Commission to the
City Council.
The HPC reviewed this application and background information for a Landmark Designation as
part of a regular meeting on February 10, 2009. The Commission, by 6 -0 vote, approved a
recommendation to the City Council designating the subject property as a landmark.
DISCUSSION:
Hakone Gardens, located at 21000 Big Basin Way, is a traditional Japanese garden considered to
be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the Western Hemisphere. Lz 1916, two San
Francisco arts patrons, Oliver and Isabel Stine, intending to build a summer retreat, purchased the
approximately 15 acre site. Mrs. Stine called the estate Hakone because it lies in the Congress
Springs area and so reminded her of her time spent at Japan's Fuju Hakone National Park and its
mineral springs. It is said to be an authentic replica of a Japanese Samurai or Shogun's estate
garden. The garden was designed and landscaped by Mr. N. Aihara, who was related to the
Court Gardeners of the Emperor of Japan. It is in form, a hill and water garden in the strolling
pond style, typical of the Zen gardens of the middle 17th century.
Based on information obtained from City records, the Upper (Moon Viewing) House, was
constructed in 1917 by Mr. T. Shintani, and built without nails or adhesives of "joinery"
construction, using pegs, mortises and tenons instead of nails in the old Japanese cabinet -maker
Page 1 of 2
style. More buildings with a Japanese architectural style were added in later years by Stine and
subsequent owners.
In 1966, the City of Saratoga purchased Hakone Gardens, then in disrepair, in order to protect it
from the threat of development. The Hakone Foundation, a non - profit organization, was
established in 1984 to authentically restore and enhance the gardens independently of public
funding. The gardens are open to the public and the various community facilities are often used
for cultural events.
Hakone Gardens are accessible via a driveway from Big Basin Way. The garden was developed
within the sloping terrain inherent to the area, with some features cut into the hillside. On -site
facilities include four distinct gardens and several structures, including the lower house (once the
principle residence of the Stine Family) remodeled by the City in 1980 to serve as a community
meeting room, a Cultural Exchange Center completed in 1991, and a recently constructed Visitor
Center near the front entrance. A paved parking lot is located below the gardens.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impacts to the City. Landmark status is necessary for Hakone Gardens to qualify
for reimbursement grants from the County of Santa Clara for costs incurred while repairing and
updating existing buildings on the site.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The site would not be designated as a landmark and the future maintenance and rehabilitation of
Hakone Gardens could be jeopardized without the Landmark Designation.
ALTERNATIVES:
Deny or modify the proposed ordinance.
FOLLOW -UP ACTIONS:
The City Attorney will finalize the ordinance for adoption at the next available meeting,
memorializing the decision of the City Council on this matter;
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance approving the property's landmark status
2. Historic Resources Inventory Information Sheet
3. Affidavit of mailing notices, public notice, and mailing labels
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
HAKONE GARDENS AT 21000 BIG BASIN WAY AS
A HISTORIC LANDMARK
(APN 503 -48- 030,031; 517 -07 -026))
The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1- Findings: After careful review and consideration of the report and
recommendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission concerning Hakone Gardens
located at 21000 Big Basin Way (the "Property ") together with the application and
supporting materials, the City Council hereby determines that:
■ The Property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the
County, the State or the nation in that Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japanese
garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the
Western Hemisphere which is a rich cultural link to Saratoga's history and has
been and will continue to be enjoyed by both countless visitors to and citizens of
Saratoga.
■ The Property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or
method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous
materials in that the garden is in form, a hill and water garden in the strolling
pond style, typical of the Zen gardens of the middle 17`x' century. The Upper
(Moon Viewing) House was constructed without nails or adhesives of "joinery"
construction, using pegs, mortises and tenons, instead of nails and adhesives in
the old Japanese cabinet -maker style.
■ The property is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer,
or architect in that the gardens were designed and landscaped by Mr. N. Aihara, a
well regarded Japanese landscape architect who was related to the Court
Gardeners of the Emperor of Japan. The Upper (Moon Viewing) House was
designed and constructed by Mr. T. Shintani with an authentic "joinery" style of
construction
■ The property embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics
representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or
district within the City in that Hakone Gardens has been owned by the City of
Saratoga since 1966 and recognized as an important contributor to the City's
Historic Resource Inventory since 1988. The Japanese gardens and authentically
designed and constructed Japanese buildings, including the upper (moon viewing)
house, four distinct Japanese gardens, the water garden, and several structures, are
authentic examples of Japanese landscape and architectural design. The lower
house (once the principle residence of the Stine Family) remodeled by the City in
1980 serves as a community meeting room.
■ The Property embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment
constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or
special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value in that the Hakone
Gardens was constructed in 1918 and is a traditional Japanese garden considered
to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the Western Hemisphere.
The garden is constructed in the strolling pond style typical of the Zen garden of
the middle 17'h century.
Section 2 — Designation: The Property is hereby designated as a Historic Landmark
pursuant to section 13- 15.060 of the Saratoga City Code.
Section 3- Publication: This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within
fifteen (15) days after its adoption.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 15th day of April, 2009, and was adopted by
the following vote following a second reading on the (insert date).
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chuck Page, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ann Sullivan, City Clerk
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #15)
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name: Hakone Gardens
2. Historic name: Hakone Gardens
3. Street or rural address: 21000 Big Basin Way
City: Saratoga
Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara
4. Parcel number: 503 -48 -030, 31, 32; 517 -7 -026
5. Present Owner: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Ownership is: Public: X Private:
6. Present Use: City park since 1966 Original Use: Residence & gardens
DESCRIPTION
7a. Architectural style: Japanese
7b. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or
structure and describe any major alterations from its original
condition:
This is a 15 -acre Japanese hill and water garden park. It features several
Japanese structures, including a moon - viewing house and teahouse. The
Upper House was built in 1917 in the authentic Japanese manner by Mr. T.
Shintani. All of the buildings and structures on this site are in
excellent condition. The gardens are situated around the house and there
is a beautiful pond stocked with carp. All of the buildings and garden are
in the authentic Japanese style. Great attention has been paid to making
any changes conform to the authenticity of Hakone's Japanese derivation,
including the planting of a bamboo garden.
8. Construction date:
Estimated:
Factual: 1917 -18
9.
Architect:
T. Shintani/
N. Aihara landscape
architect
10.
Builder: same
11.
Approx. prop. size
Frontage:
Depth:
approx. acreage: 13.548
12.
Date(s) of enclosed
photograph(s) : 1988
13. Condition: Excellent: X Good:
No longer
14. Alterations: Restoration completed
Fair: Deteriorated:
in existence:
by City in April 1981.
15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary)
Open land: Scattered buildings: X Densely built -up:
Residential: X Industrial: Commercial: Other:
16. Threats to site: None known: X Private development:
Vandalism: Public Works project: Other:
17. Is the structure: On its original site? X Moved?
18. Related features:
Zoning:
Unknown?
SIGNIFICANCE
19. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates,
events, and persons associated with the site).
Hakone Gardens was originally owned by Mr. & Mrs. Oliver C. Stine. The name
Hakone comes from the Fuji Hakone National Park which had mineral springs
similar to Saratoga's Congress Springs. The Garden was completed in 1918
by N. Aihara, a relation of the Court gardeners of the Emperor of Japan.
It is a hill and water garden (Tsukiyama- Sansui) in the strolling pond
style typical of the Zen garden of the middle 17th century. Hakone is
considered the only truly authentic Japanese garden in the U.S. because of
Mr. Aihara's attention to detail as governed by the rules of Japanese
garden art. Mrs. Stine also had stables and a tennis court on the
property. Hakone was sold in 1932 to Major & Mrs. Chas. Lee Tilden (Tilden
Park, Berkeley, CA) who spent the next 28 years making changes and
improvements which included the arched wooden trestle bridge. Mr. Aihara
continued on in Mr. Tilden's service. Sold again in 1960, then threatened
by subdivision, Hakone was purchased by the City of Saratoga for a park.
20. Main theme of the historic resource:
(If more than one is checked, number
in order_ of importance.)
Architecture: 1 Arts /Leisure: 2
Economic /Industrial:
Exploration /Settlement:
Government: Military:
Religion: Social /Ed.: 3
21. Sources (List books, documents,
surveys, personal interviews and
their dates).
Hakone pamphlet; Santa Clara County
Heritage Resource Inventory,1975, 1979;
F. Cunningham, Saratoga's First Hundred
Years, 1967.
22. Date form prepared: 4/88
By (name): SHPC
Organization: City of Saratoga
Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Phone: 867 -3438
Locational sketch map (draw and label site and
surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks):
NORTH
w
5
�s
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868 -1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC FEARING
The City of Saratoga's City Council announces the following public hearing on
WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2009, AT 7:00 P.M.
The hearing will be held in the City Theater, located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue in Saratoga, California.
Details regarding the project described below are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICATION NUMBER:
REQUESTED ENTITLEMENT:
21000 Big Basin Way
City of Saratoga
Hakone Foundation
503 -48- 030,031; 517 -07 -026
LNDMRK09 -0001
Historic Landmark Status
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant requests approval to designate Hakone Gardens as a Historic Landmark. Hakone
Gardens is a traditional Japanese garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate
garden in the Western Hemisphere. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed this property
as part of a regular meeting on February 10, 2009 and approved recommendation of designating the
subject property as a Historic Landmark to City Council.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a decision
of the City Council pursuant to a public hearing in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
YOU or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the Saratoga City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the
City Council's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Monday a
week before the meeting (April 6th). If you have questions, Planners are available at the public counter
between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject of
this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor's office annually in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out -of -date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a project.
If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this notice, we
encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone in your
Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: April 15, 2009
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
PREPARED BY: Christopher Riordan, AICP
AGENDA ITEM:
CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson
DIRECTOR: John Livingstone, AICP
SUBJECT: Landmark Designation for 21000 Big Basin Way (Hakone Gardens)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) recommends the City Council:
(1) Open the public hearing and accept public testimony on the attached Ordinance to designate
the subject property as a Historic Landmark;
(2) Close the hearing and introduce the attached Ordinance and waive first reading;
(3) Direct staff to place the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance on the consent
calendar for the next regular Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The .Hakone Foundation filed an application requesting that the Hakone Gardens (owned by the
City and operated by the Hakone Foundation under a long term lease) be designated as a Historic
Landmark. The HPC reviewed this application and background information for a Historic
Landmark Designation as part of a regular meeting on February 10, 2009. The Commission, by
6 -0 vote, approved a recommendation to the City Council designating the subject property as a
Historic Landmark.
Hakone Gardens was placed on the City of Saratoga Heritage Resources hlventory in 1988.
Article 13- 15.010 of the Saratoga Municipal Code states that designation of a property as a
Historic Landmark requires recommendation from the Heritage Preservation Commission to the
City Council.
DISCUSSION:
Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japanese garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian
estate garden in the Wester Hemisphere. In 1916, two San Francisco arts patrons, Oliver and
Isabel Stine, purchased the approximately 15 -acre site with the intention of building a summer
retreat. Mrs. Stine called the estate Hakone because the surrounding area reminded her of time
spent at Japan's Fuju Hakone National Park. The garden was designed and landscaped by Mr. N.
Aihara. He was related to the Court Gardeners of the Emperor of Japan. Hakone is a hill and
water garden in the strolling pond style that is typical of the Zen gardens of the middle 17'x'
century and is an authentic replica of a Japanese Samurai or Shogun's estate garden.
The Upper (Moon Viewing) House was constructed in 1917 by Mr. T. Shintani. This structure
was built without nails or adhesives using "joinery" construction. This method of construction
Page 1 of 2
V
uses pegs, mortises and tenons instead of nails in the old Japanese cabinet -maker style. More
buildings with a Japanese architectural style were added in later years by Stine and subsequent
owners.
In 1966, the City of Saratoga purchased Hakone Gardens, then in disrepair, in order to protect it
from the threat of development. The Hakone Foundation, a non -profit organization, was
established in 1984 to authentically restore and enhance the gardens independently of public
holding. The gardens are open to the public and the various community facilities are often used
for cultural events.
Hakone Gardens are accessible via a driveway from Big Basin Way. The garden was developed
within the sloping terrain inherent to the area, with some features cut into the hillside. On -site
facilities include four distinct gardens and several structures. These include the lower house
(once the principle residence of the Stine Family) remodeled by the City in 1980 to serve as a
community meeting room, a Cultural Exchange Center, and a recently constructed Visitor Center
near the front entrance. A paved parking lot is located below the gardens.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impacts to the City. Historic Landmark status is necessary for Hakone Gardens
to qualify for reimbursement grants from the County of Santa Clara for costs incurred while
maintaining and updating existing buildings on the site.
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The site would not be designated as a Historic Landmark and the future maintenance and
rehabilitation of Hakone Gardens could be jeopardized without the Historic Landmark
Designation.
ALTERNATIVES:
Deny or modify the proposed ordinance.
FOLLOW -UP ACTIONS:
The City Clerk will finalize the ordinance for adoption at the next City Council meeting,
memorializing the decision of the City Council on this matter.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance approving the property's landmark status
2. Historic Resources Inventory Information Sheet
3. Affidavit of mailing notices, public notice, and mailing labels
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
DESIGNATING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
HAKONE GARDENS AT 21000 BIG BASIN WAY AS
A HISTORIC LANDMARK
(APN 503 -48- 030,031; 517 -07 -026))
The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows:
Section 1- Findings: After careful review and consideration of the report and
recommendations of the Heritage Preservation Commission concerning Hakone Gardens
located at 21000 Big Basin Way (the "Property ") together with the application prepared
by the Hakone Foundation and supporting materials provided by the Foundation and
reviewed by staff and the Heritage Preservation Commission, the City Council hereby
detennines that:
■ The Property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social,
economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the
County, the State or the nation in that Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japanese
garden considered to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the
Western Hemisphere which is a rich cultural link to Saratoga's history and has
been and will continue to be enjoyed by both countless visitors to and citizens of
Saratoga.
■ The Property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or
method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous
materials in that the garden is in form, a hill and water garden in the strolling
pond style, typical of the Zen gardens of the middle 17`h century. The Upper
(Moon Viewing) House was constructed without nails or adhesives of "joinery"
constriction, using pegs, mortises and tenons, instead of nails and adhesives in
the old Japanese cabinet -maker style.
■ The property is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer,
or architect in that the gardens were designed and landscaped by Mr. N. Aihara, a
well regarded Japanese landscape architect who was related to the Court
Gardeners of the Emperor of Japan. The Upper (Moon Viewing) House was
designed and constructed by Mr. T. Shintani with an authentic "joinery" style of
construction
■ The property embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics
representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or
district within the City in that Hakone Gardens has been owned by the City of
Saratoga since 1966 and recognized as an important contributor to the City's
Historic Resource Inventory since 1988. The Japanese gardens and authentically
designed and constructed Japanese buildings, including the upper (moon viewing)
house, four distinct Japanese gardens, the water garden, and several structures, are
authentic examples of Japanese landscape and architectural design. The lower
house (once the principle residence of the Stine Family) remodeled by the City in
1980 serves as a community meeting room.
■ The Property embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment
constituting a distinct area or district within the City having special character or
special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value in that the Hakone
Gardens was constructed in 1918 and is a traditional Japanese garden considered
to be the oldest Japanese and Asian estate garden in the Western Hemisphere.
The garden is constructed in the strolling pond style typical of the Zen garden of
the middle 17th century.
Section 2 — Designation: The Property is hereby designated as a Historic Landmark
pursuant to section 13- 15.060 of the Saratoga City Code.
Section 3- Publication: This ordinance or a comprehensive summary thereof shall be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga withui
fifteen (15) days after its adoption.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced and read at the regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 15th day of April, 2009, and was adopted by
the following vote following a second reading on the 6th day of May, 2009.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chuck Page, Mayor
ATTEST:
Ann Sullivan, City Clerk
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: February 10, 2009
TO: Heritage Preservation Commission
FROM: Christopher Riordan, AICP Oft—
SUBJECT: Landmarks Designation Review for 21000 Big Basin Way
Property Location: Hakone Gardens - 21000 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, California
Property APN: 503 -48- 030,31,32 517 -07 -026
Project Applicant: Lon Saavedra
Property Owner: City of Saratoga
Project Description, Background, Analysis and Designation Criteria
The applicant proposes to designate the subject property located at 21000 Big Basin Way and
known as Hakone Gardens as a landmark.
Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japanese garden. Established in 1917 by Oliver and Isabel
Stine and landscaped by an Imperial gardener, the City of Saratoga purchased the property in
1966 to assure preservation for future generations. The Hakone Foundation was created in
1984 in part to insure that preservation and enhancement of the garden would occur in the most
authentic methods feasible.
Hakone Gardens is located in the Saratoga Hills, southwest of the Central Business District and
east of Sanborn - Skyline Park. The 15 acre site features several structures with a Japanese
architectural style. These structures include a moon - viewing house and teahouse. According to
information obtained from City records, the upper house was constructed in 1917 in an
authentic Japanese manner. The site also contains picturesque Japanese gardens and pond.
The property is currently listed on the City's Heritage Resources Inventory.
The gardens are accessible via a driveway of Big Basin Way. The garden was developed within
the sloping terrain inherent to the area, with some features cut into the hillside. On -site facilities
include four distinct gardens and several structures, including the lower house remodeled by the
City in 1980 to serve as a community meeting room, a Cultural Exchange Center completed in
1991, and a recently constructed Visitor Center near the front entrance. A paved parking lot is
located below the gardens.
The property was originally placed on the Heritage Resources Inventory (HRI) in 1988. At the
time of placement on the HRI, it was determined that it met criteria five (5) of the seven criteria
set forth in SMC Article 13- 15.010 (criterion a, c, d, e, g):
Landmark Designation Review of 21000 Big Basin Way
February 10,2009
a) v It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, political,
aesthetic, engineering or architectural history of the City, the County, the State or
the nation;
b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, county, state or national
history;
c) ✓ It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of
construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials;
d) It is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer, or architect;
e) ✓ It embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics representing an
established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or district within the City;
f) It represents a significant concentration or continuity of site, buildings, structures or
objects, unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical or natural
development;
g) It embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment constituting a
distinct area or district within the City having special character or special historical,
architectural or aesthetic interest or value.
Article 13- 15.010 of the Saratoga Municipal Code (SMC) states that designation of a
property as a historic landmark requires recommendation from the Heritage Preservation
Commission (HPC) to the City Council. To make a recommendation for designation, two
(2) or more of the criteria listed above must be met. Additionally, the HPC must
determine that the structure retains a substantial degree of architectural and structural
integrity with respect to the original design. A public hearing is not required, but any
person with an interest in the designation may submit written or verbal comments on the
proposal.
Attachments
(1) Historic Resources Inventory Form, prepared in April 1988.
(2) 1987 article from Sunset magazine.
Memorandum to the Saratoga Historic Preservation Commission Page 2
Shweta Bhatt
From: Shweta Bhatt
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 3:34 PM
To: John Livingstone
Subject: Hakone Gardens State Listing Research
Hi John,
Page 1 of 1
It appears Hakone Gardens is listed on the California Register of Historic Places, but not on the National
Registry of Historical Places. The Historic Resources Inventory from the State lists this property as "252."
According to OHP's website, this code means that the property is eligible for the National Registry and
has been listed on the California Registry.
After talking with the State representative, it appears that some federal funding (from HUD) was
allocated to the project. In order to accept Federal funding on a cultural resource, the resource must
be subject to an evaluation through the Section 106 review process. It was through this process that the
property appears to have been reviewed and added to the California register in 1998.
Attached is a chart summarizing the information on the State Inventory.
Shweta.
11/21/2006
• Hakone Gardens Research for California Register Listing
Hakone Garden
Heading
Information in State
Additional Information
Inventor
Property Number
116438
Property number assigned in OHP database
Primary Number
(Not given)
ID number assigned by California
Historical Resource Information System
(CHRIS)
Street
21000
Street number
Address
Big Basin Way
Street name
Names
Hakone Garden
Name given to resource by OHP or by
entity submitting the resource to OHP
City Name
Saratoga
City name
Owner
M
M = municipal
Year — C
1917
Year of contruction
OHP Program
Hist. Res. Proj. Revw.
The program for which the resource was
submitted for consideration.
Hist. Res. = Historical Resource
Information
Proj. Revw. = Project Review 106
Determination
Prg- Reference
DOE- 43 -98- 0016 -9999
OHP's internal filed tracking
Number
DOE = Determinations of Eleigibility
43 = County Number
98 = Year of Deternination
0016 = Sequential Number
9999 = Contributor Number
HUD980403K
Agency responsible for submitting project
for OHP review
Stat -Date
07/03/98
Date status was determined
NRS
2S2
Individual property determined eligible for
NR by a consensus through Section 106
process. Listed in CR.
Criteria
C
C = embodies distinctive characteristics
(NR)
Page 1
Hakone Gardens Research for California Register Listing
Caretaker's Cottage — Hakone Garden
Heading
Information in State
Additional Information
Inventor
Property Number
116439
Property number assigned in OHP database
Primary Number
(Not given)
ID number assigned by California
Historical Resource Information System
(CHRIS)
Street
21000
Street number
Address
Big Basin Way
Street name
Names
Caretaker's Cottage —
Name given to resource by OHP or by
Hakone Garden
entity submitting the resource to OHP
City Name
Saratoga
City name
Owner
M
M = municipal
Year — C
1917
Year of contruction
OHP Program
Hist. Res. Proj. Revw.
The program for which the resource was
submitted for consideration.
Hist. Res. = Historical Resource
Information
Proj. Revw. = Project Review 106
Determination
Prg- Reference
DOE -43 -98 -0016 -0001
OHP's internal filed tracking
Number
HUD980403K
DOE = Determinations of Eleigibility
43 = County Number
98 = Year of Determination
0016 = Sequential Number
0001 = Contributor Number
Stat -Date
07/03/98
Date status was determined
NRS
2D2
Contributor to a district determined eligible
for NR by consensus through Section 106
process. Listed in CR.
Criteria
C
C = embodies distinctive characteristics
(NR)
Page 2
NOV -21 -2006 TUE 02:51 PM
rum nccni u1l:FR AGENCY
} r A I CVr �nF,wnn,•• __
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVAT10N
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
p.o, sox 942666
SACRAMENTO, CA 94296•CW1
(916)653-662,4 Fax: (916) 653.9824
calshpo@chp,parks.ca.gov
www.obp.parks-ca.gov
FAX NO. P. 02
ARNOLD
ec�
MSTORIC PROPERTY ME SINGLE PROPERTY PRINTOUT 11/21/06
Prop. #: 116438 HAKONE GARDEN
Prim.#:
Address: County: SCL
21000 BIG BASIN IVY X- Street:
SARATOGA 95070 Vicinity:
Parcel #:
Category: DISTRICT # of Props:
Owner Type: MUNICIPAL
Present Use: PUBLIC
Other Recognition:
CHL #:
Dates of Construction: 1917 -
Architect: SA[NTANI, T. Builder: SBINTANI, T.
AIHARA, N.
Historic Attributes: LNDSCP ARCMTR,
Eth: 7A
Previous Determinations on this property:
Pr -ram Proa. Ref Number
tiIST.RES. DOE -43- 980016 -9999
PRD3.REVW. HUI0980403K
TREES- VEGETATION, URB•OPEN SPACE
Eval Crit Eval -date Evaluator
2S2 C 07/0798 LUCINDA WOODWARD
2S2 C 07/03/98 LUCINDA WOODWARD
2S2: Individual property determined eligible to National Register by Section 106 consensus.
Automatically California Register Listed.
This Listing is Complete...
OFFICE OF HIS,oRIC PRESERVATION
• • • Directory of
Properties in the Historic Pr.gerty
Data File for'SANTA CLARA County. Page 87 10 -10 -03
PROPERTY - NUMBER
PRIMARY -#
STREET.ADDRESS .............
NAMES .............................
CITY.NAME........
OWN
YR -C
OHP- PROG..
PRG- REFERENCE - NUMBER
STAT -DAT
NRS
CRII
014079
890
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1920
HIST.SURV.
5052 -0185 -0006
5D
014081
1116
WASHINGTON ST
DR PAULS HOUSE, MAHAN HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1892
HIST.SURV.
5052 -0186 -0000
3S
014082
1155
WASHINGTON ST
SENATOR FRANCK HOUSE SITE
SANTA CLAM
P
1856
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0187 -0000
3S
HIST.RES.
SPHI -SCL -023
08/28/72
7L
014083
1179
WASHINGTON ST
FRANCK HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1905
HIST.SURV.
.5052- 0188 -0000
4S
014084
1184
WASHINGTON ST
RUSSELL /ROBINSON HOUSE, MILLER HOU
SANTA CLARA
P
1861
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0189 -0000
3S
014085
1270
WASHINGTON ST
MULHALL HOUSE, GIUDICI HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1881
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0190 -0000
5S
014086
1367
WASHINGTON ST
MENDONCA HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0191 -0000
5S
014087
1391
WASHINGTON ST
CUNNINGHAM HOUSE
SANTA CLARA
P
1890
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0192 -0000
5S
014088
1475
WASHINGTON ST
BUILDING AT 1475 WASHINGTON STREET
SANTA CLARA
P
1885
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0193 -0000
01/01/82
2S2
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -82- 0002 -0000
05/07/82
2S2
AC
PROJ.REVW.
FHWAS20202A
03/11/82
2S2
014089
1687
WASHINGTON ST
SANTA CLARA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5052- 0194 -0000
5S
112039
4000
LAFAYETTE ST
AGNEWS INSANE ASYLUM - BLDG 213
(VIC) SANTA CLAM
S
1906
HIST.RES.
NPS- 97000829 -0060
08/13/97
1D
073736
SW MONTEREY RD ED
TWENTY ONE MILE HOUSE
(VIC) SANTA CLARA
M
1852
NAT.REG.
43 -0012
08/06/93
6Z2
ABC
NAT.REG.
43 -0012
12/19/91
073733
14650
6TH ST
NARDIE HOME
SARATOGA
P
0
TAX.CERT.
537.9 -43 -0004
09/02/86
6X3
116438
21000
BIG BASIN WY
HAKONE GARDEN
SARATOGA
M
1917
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -98- 0016 -9999
07/03/98
2S2
C
PROJ.REVW.
HUD980403K
07/03/98
2S2
C
116439
21000
BIG BASIN WY
CARETAKER'S COTTAGE - HAKONE GARDE
SARATOGA
M
1917
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -98- 0016
-0001
07/03/98
2D2
C
PROJ.REVW.
HU0980403K
07/03/98
2D2
C
014586
14800
MONTALVO RD
VILLA MONTALVO
SARATOGA
P
1915
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0001 -0000
01/01/78
1S
014592
PIERCE RD
PAUL MASSON MOUNTAIN WINERY
SARATOGA
P
1907
HIST.RES.
NPS- 83001239
-0000
06/09/83
1S
ABC
014587
15800
SANBORN RD
WELCH -HURST HOUSE
SARATOGA
C
1902
HIST.RES.
HIST.SURV*.
SHL- 0733 -0000
5070- 0002 -0000
04/08/60
7L
125769
13659
SARATOGA•AVE
CENTRAL PARK HERITAGE ORCHARD
SARATOGA
M
1841
ST.PT.INT.
43 -0048
01/01/78
1S
085078
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
RANCH HOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0001
09/20/00
7J'
04/01/93
1D
AC
085079
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
GARAGE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0002
04/01/93
085083
12795
SARATOGA-SUNNYVALE RD
AVIARY
SARATOGA
P
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0005
1D
AC
085085
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
MELONE /MILLER RANCH COMPLEX
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070 -0008 -0007
04/01/93
6X1
085081
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
TANKHOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0003
04/01/93
1D
AC
085084
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
CAST IRON LIDDED FUEL OIL CONTAINE
SARATOGA
P
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0006
04/01/93
1D
AC
085082
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
WINDMILL
SARATOGA
P
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0008 -0004
04/01/93
1D
AC
077381
12795
SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE RD
MILLER /MELONE.RANCH /MILLER HOUSE
SARATOGA
P
1911
NAT
04/01/93
1D
AC
-REG.
43 -0015
04/01/93
1S
AC
090278
SR 9
SARATOGA
HIST.SURV.
5070 -0008 -9999
04/01/93
1S
AC
SARATOGA
U.
HIST.RES.
SHL - 0435 -0000
04/11/49
71,
091210
MONTEBELLO RD
MONTEBELLO SCHOOL
(VIC) SARATOGA
D
1892
HIST.RES.
SPHI -SCL -030
091245
SANBORN RD
JUDGE JAMES R. WELCH's REDWOOD LOD
(VIC) SARATOGA
C
1912
HIST.RES.
SPHI - SCL -048
11/19/74
7L
014591
SR 85
BR 37 -86
(VIC) SARATOGA
S
1910
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0006 -0000
05/05/77
7L
014590
SR 9
BR 37 -78
(VIC) SARATOGA
S
1917
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0005 -0000
6
014589
SR 9
BR 37 -75
(VIC) SARATOGA
S
1920
HIST.SURV.
5070 -0004 -0000
6
014588
SR 9
BR 37 -73
(VIC) SARATOGA
S
1924
HIST.SURV.
5070- 0003 -0000
6
114970
SR 9
BRIDGE #37 -74 / SARATOGA CREEK BRI
(VIC) SARATOGA
S
1902
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43-86- 0003 -0000
10/19/66
6
2S2
PROJ.REVW.
FHWA860919Z
10/19/86
2S2
C
C
008744
FREMONT RD
PALO ALTO STOCK FARM HORSE BARN, S
STANFORD
P
1878
HIST.SURV.
4305- 0002 -0000
008743
623
MIRADA RD
LOU HENRY HOOVER HOUSE
STANFORD
P
1919
HIST.SURV.
4305- 0001 -0000
01 /01 /85
1S
01/30/78
1S
091190
OLD PAGE MILL-RD
FRENCHMAN'S TOWER
STANFORD
P
1870
HIST.RES.
HIST.RES.
SHL- 0913 -0000
10/14/77
7L
072845
664
SAN JUAN
SPHI -SCL -002
11/03/69
7L
STANFORD
P
1910
ST.PT.INT.
43 -0011
05/28/91
71
1.23243
BUILDING 465/.EAST WING BUILDING 4
SUNNYVALE
F
1943
HIST.RES.
DOE- 43 -99- 0171 -0000
09/22/99
6Y2
41
—9
4)
-
.p
Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File for Santa Clara County, page 87.
October
10, 2003
Saratoga
Properties Listed
Property /Address
Date Listed
NRS Status
Nardie Home, 14650 61h Street, Saratoga
09/02/86
6X3
Determined ineligible for NR.
1900
Hakone Garden, 21000 Big Basin Way, Saratoga
07/03/98
2S2
Determined eligible for separate
1917
listing by consensus.
Caretaker's Cott= Hakone Garden
07/03/98
2D2
Determined eligible as a
contributor by consensus.
Villa Montalvo. 14800 Montalvo Road, Saratoga
01/01/78
is
Listed NR as separate property
1915
Paul Masson Mountain Winery, Pierce Road, Sar
06/09/83
is
Listed NR as separate property
1907
Welch -Hurst House, 15800 Sanborn Road, Saratoga
01/01/78
1S
Listed NR as separate property
1902
Judge T R Welch's Redwd Lodge. Sanborn Rd., Sar 05105/77
7L
Evaluated for Register other than
1912 State Point of Interest
SPHI- SCL-48
National Register
Central Park Orchard 13659 Saratoga Avenue, Sar
09/20/00
71
Received by OHP for evaluation -
1841
not yet evaluated
Ranch House. 12795 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, Sar
04/01/93
1D
Listed NR as contributor to a
1910
Garage.
disc or multi- resource property
Melon /Millcr Ranch Comply
"
Tankhouse
Cast Iron Lidded Fuel Oil Container
Windmill « «
«
«
« «
Ajjaa `'
6X1
Determined ineligible for NR
Miller/Melone RanchMller House"
04/01193
1S
Listed NR as individual property
1911
Saratoga Hwy 9/big Basin Way, Saratoga
04/11/49
7L
Evaluated for Register other-than
State Historic Landmark (SHL) 0435 -0000
National Register
Monfebello School. Montebello Road, Saratoga
11/19/74
7L
Evluated for Register other than
1892 State Point of Interest
SPHI-SCL 30
National Register
Bridge 37 -86, no address, 1910
n/d
6
Determined ineligible for NR
Bridge 37 -78, no address, 1917
n/d
6
"
Bridge 37 -75, no address, 1920
n/d
6
"
Bridge 37 -73, no address, 1924
n/d
6
`
Bridge 37 -74, Saratoga Creek Bridge, 1902
10/19/86
2S2
Eligible for separate listing
6'
LAW OFFICES
GLENNONT & BURROW
255 NORTH MARKET STREET, SUITE 190
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95110
(40 8) 292-2434
July 10, 1985
Harold S. Toppel, Esq.
Atkinson Farasyn-
P.O. Box 279
Mt. View, Ca. 94042
Re: The Hakone Foundation
Dear Hal:
The Saratoga Heritage Preservation Commission is sug-
gesting that we apply to have Hakone Garden designated as
a Heritage Landmark.
We are amenable to such an action. However, before
agreeing to do so, we would like to know if there are any
disadvantages inherent in such a designation.
Our primary concern is to avoid having to spend time
on hearings, filling out forms, etc. I would hope the
result would be to minimize that sort of impediment. It
would be awful to have to worry about the building code,
for example, if in doing so the authenticity of the
structure would be destroyed.
Your advice would be appreciated.
Very truly yours,
WILLIAM E. GLENNON
WEG:mm
cc: Henry Yamate, CPA
Ms. Barbara Voester
David P. Moyles, Esq.
cq
hI6r (qg�
Central West Travel Guide November events, Outings
Take a holiday r
Japanese garden
Flakone Gardens, sequestered on a steep
hillside above Saratoga, 10 miles south-
west of San Jose, offers ideal sanctuary
for gathering your reserves before plung-
ing into the holiday whirl. Faithfully pat-
terned after a typical 17th- century Zen
garden, it has been called one of the most
authentically Japanese gardens in this
country, though redwoods and other na-
tive flora contribute to its serene beauty.
In 1918, an Imperial gardener landscaped
I-lakone for Isabel Stine, a San Francisco
arts patron. Mrs. Stine also hired a Japa-
nese architect to design two houses on the
estate for weekend stays and entertaining.
The upper house was built in the tradi-
tional Japanese manner, using mortise -
and -tenon joints and wooden pegs instead
of nails. A few years ago, Western fix-
tures were removed from the lower house
(the Stines' residence), and two tea cere-
mony rooms were added. The lower house
and gardens can be reserved for recep-
tions or weddings; call (408) 867 -3438.
Garden paths wind around sculptured
shrubs and Japanese maples, over a koi
pond, and under a wisteria- covered trellis.
Pavilions with benches provide views of
the Santa Clara Valley, or offer places
simply to sit quietly and enjoy the sooth-
ing sound of falling water.
A newly completed 2 -acre bamboo garden
represents the first phase of expansion
plans at I-lakone. Designed by landscape
architects from Muko -shi (Saratoga's sis-
ter city in Japan), the garden displays
many varieties of bamboo —some import-
ed from Japan — ranging in size from
ground cover to tree height. Ornate bam-
boo fences and stone lanterns, also im-
ported, will grace the garden, too.
Hakone Gardens, now maintained by the
City o1' Saratoga, is open from 10 to 5
weekdays, I I to 5 weekends (closed on
legal holidays). Look for the sign marking
the road up to the gardens near the west-
ern edge of Saratoga on Big Basin Way
(State Highway 9). Admission is 25 cents.
Pond -Side pavilion offers a rejIectirc outlook on tlakone Gardetns'sctdptured shrubbery
and upper house. Known as the Moon- Viesving !louse, it's laid out in the traditional
Japanese modular style, using tatami orals as the basic units of measurement
Central West Travel Guide
Register of Historic Places in 1985, it now
houses it design center for architects, inte-
rior designers, and space planners.
Inside its polychrome brick walls, massive
piers and beams supporting high ceilings
have been painted to match new marble
floors; giant locker doors remain as re-
minders of its former function.
Though it's usually closed to the public,
you can visit the building November 12,
13, and 14 to see "Christmas at the Ice
House," a display of holiday table settings
and designer showrooms sponsored by the
Garden Club of Denver. Attend cooking
and floral arrangement demonstrations
and workshops, field at noon, or browse
for unusual holiday gifts, on sale through-
out the building. This year, "Table by
Tiffany," featuring circa 1837 china,
crystal, linen, and flatware, will be on
display.
The Ice House, at 1801 Wynkoop Street
(a block northeast of Union Station), will
be open 11 to 4 Thursday, I I to 7 Friday,
and I I to 3 Saturday. Admission is $5 in
advance, $6 at the door, $1 for ages 12
and under. A preview reception will be
held Wednesday, November II, from
5:30 to 7:30; tickets are $35. For more
information, call (303) 298 -9191.
Sundays are for science at
Davis discovery center
The small but ambitious Davis Science
Center offers Sacramento Valley resi-
dents it close -to -home alternative to bet-
ter -known discovery museums, such as
Sacramento's Science Center or San
Francisco's Exploratorium. The Davis
NICOLETTE PSY
6
Fr y.
r'
Colorful kites fly high on the dependable breeze at North Waterfront Park;
breakwaters in background shield entrance to adjacent Berkeley Marina
center's free weekly drop -in programs, de-
signed for all ages, shed light on it wide
range of science - related subjects.
From 2 to 4 each Sunday, it different
topic is covered using hands -on activities,
models, and exhibits. Here are this
month's programs:
November 1. Burning Questions: learn
about fuels and how to reduce air pollution.
November 8 and 15. Managing Our
Excesses: participants will be surprised at
how many common household items they
can recycle.
November 22. Indian Lore: medicines,
games, and crafts of California's Indians
will be explored.
At the center, you may want to pick up it
copy of On the Science Beat ($6). It de-
scribes 91 science museums, planetar-
iums, research labs, and industrial facili-
ties in the Bay Area and north - central
California, all open to the public.
To get to the center from Interstate 80,
take the State Highway 113 exit north.
Continue about 2 miles to the Covell
Boulevard exit. Turn east (right) onto
Covell for 2 blocks, then right onto Syca-
more Lane. The Science Center, part of
West Davis Intermediate School, is at
1207 Sycamore. For more information,
call (916) 756 -0191.
flair - raising experience at Davis Science
Center shows effects of static electricity
Waterfront park in Berkeley:
new life for a former dump
Just it few years ago, the site of Berkeley's
North Waterfront Park was a typically
malodorous, unsightly landfill. Now, the
sea breezes carry the pleasant scent of
sage, and thriving greenery covers undu-
lating hills. The panoramic view across
the bay, ranging from Mount Tamalpais
to the northwest and the Oakland docks
on the south, has the surreal quality of an
old movie backdrop.
The ongoing reclamation project now en-
compasses close to 20. acres of the former
dump. Paved paths meander through a
lush, green ground cover of lawn -'like clo-
ver. Yarrow, coyote brush, purple sage,
and other salt- and drought - resistant per-
ennials, shrubs, and trees have been plant-
ed on one hillside. The rest of the 90 -acre
site is being topped with a clay cap; 20
acres are currently being landscaped as a
park addition.
r� t c u1 Ct
Travel Central West 3
VT,itM'iS,.
Take a holiday respite at a
Japanese garden hideaway
Hakone Gardens. sequestered on a steep
I- . le above Saratoga, 10 miles south -
%N,, -. of San .lose.. offers ideal sanctuary
for gathering your reserves before plung-
ing into the holiday whirl. Faithfully pat-
terned after a typical 17th- century Zen
garden, it has been called one of the most
authentically Japanese gardens in this
country, though redwoods and other na-
tive flora contribute to its serene beauty.
In 1918. an Iniperial gardener landscaped
Hakone for Isabel Stine, a San Francisco
arts patron. Mrs. Stine also hired ..lapa
nese architect to design two houses on the
estate for weekend stays and entertaining.
The upper house was built in the tradi-
tional Japanese manner, using mortise -
and -tenon joints and wooden pegs instead
of nails. A few years ago, Western fix-
tures were removed from the lower house
(the Stines' residence). and two tea cere-
mony rooms were added. The lower house
and gardens can be reserved for recep-
tions or weddings; call (408) 867 -3438.
Garden paths wind around sculptured
shrubs and Japanese maples, over a koi
pond, and under a wisteria- covered trellis.
Pavilions with benches provide views of
the Santa Clara Valley, or offer places
simply to sit quietly and enjoy the sooth-
ing sound of falling water.
A newly completed 2 -acre bamboo garden
represents the first phase of expansion
plans at Hakone. Designed by landscape
architects from Muko -shi (Saratoga's sis-
ter city in Japan), the garden displays
many varieties of bamboo —some import-
ed from Japan— ranging in size from
ground cover to tree height. Ornate bam-
boo fences and stone lanterns, also im-
ported, will grace the garden, too.
Hakone Gardens, now maintained by the
City of Saratoga, is open from 10 to
weekdays, 11 to 5 weekends (closed on
legal holidays). Look for the sign marking
the road up to the gardens near the west-
ern edge of Saratoga on Big Basin WaN
(State Highway 9). Admission is 25 cents.
Pond -side pariliun i g, i s u rryir,n„ ;,rtl_A —: J.lal..a;r ( udrt;.,'.,: irlirturrd ahrubbera'
and upper house. Krru wt us th, Aluutt I %ir, rn, lluu.,r, it'., laid uut in thr nuditiunal
Japanese mudulur.,irle, using tmturrri mats a, the ba.iie units of me,i ilemeut
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #15)
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name: Hakone Gardens
2. Historic name: Hakone Gardens
3. Street or rural address: 21000 Big Basin Way
City: Saratoga
Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara
4. Parcel number: 503 -48 -030, 31, 32; 517 -7 -026
5. Present Owner: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
City: Saratoga
Zip: 95070
Ownership is: Public: X Private:
6. Present Use: City park since 1966 Original Use: Residence & gardens
DESCRIPTION
7a. Architectural style: Japanese
7b. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or
structure and describe any major alterations from its original
condition:
This is a 15 -acre Japanese hill and water garden park. It features several
Japanese structures, including a moon - viewing house and teahouse. The
Upper House was built in 1917 in the authentic Japanese manner by Mr. T.
Shintani. All of the buildings and structures on th4s site are in
excellent condition. The gardens are situated around the _ouse and there
is a beautiful pond stocked with carp. All of the buildings and garden are
in the authentic Japanese style. Great attention has been paid to making
any changes conform to the authenticity of Hakone's Japanese derivation,
including the planting of a bamboo garden.
8. Construction date:
Estimated:
Factual: 1917 -18
9. Architect:
T. Shintani/
N. Aihara landscape
architect
10. Builder: same
11. Approx. prop. size
Frontage:
Depth:
approx. acreage: 13.548
12. Date(s) of enclosed
photograph(s): 1968
13. Condition: Excellent: X Good: Fair: Deteriorated:
No longer in existence:
14. Alterations: Restoration completed by City in April 1981.
15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary)
Open land: Scattered buildings: X Densely built -up:
Residential: X Industrial: Commercial: Other:
16. Threats to site: None known: X Private development:
Vandalism: Public Works project: Other:
17. Is the structure: On its original site? X Moved?
18. Related features:
Zoning:
Unknown?
SIGNIFICANCE
19. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates,
events, and persons associated with the site).
Hakone Gardens was originally owned by Mr. & Mrs. Oliver C. Stine. The name
Hakone comes from the Fuji Hakone National Park which had mineral springs
similar to Saratoga's Congress Springs. The Garden was completed in 1918
by N. Aihara, a relation of the Court gardeners of the Emperor of Japan.
It is a hill and water garden (Tsukiyama- Sansui) in the strolling pond
style typical of the Zen garden of the middle 17th century. Hakone is
considered the only truly authentic Japanese garden in the U.S. because of
Mr. Aihara's attention to detail as governed by the rules of Japanese
garden art. Mrs. Stine also had stables and a tennis court on the
property. Hakone was sold in 1932 to Major & Mrs. Chas. Lee Tilden .ilden
Park, Berkeley, CA) who spent the next 28 years making changes and
improvements which included the arched wooden trestle bridge. Mr. Aihara
continued on in Mr. Tilden's service. Sold again in 1960, then threatened
by subdivision, Hakone was purchased by the City of Saratoga for a park.
20. Main theme of the historic resource:
(If more than one is checked, number
in order of importance.)
Architecture: 1 Arts /Leisure: 2
Economic /Industrial:
Exploration /Settlement:
Government: Military:
Religion: Social /Ed.: 3
21. Sources (List books, documents,
surveys, personal interviews and
their dates).
Hakone pamphlet; Santa Clara County
Heritage Resource Inventory,1975, 1979;
F. Cunningham, Saratoga's First Hundred
Years, 1967.
22. Date form prepared: 4/88
By (name): SHPC
Organization: City of Saratoga
Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Phone: 867 -3438
vocational sketch map (draw and label site and
surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks):
NORTH
w
5
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: November 15, 2006
ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works
7
PREPARED BY:
John Cherbone
AGENDA ITEM:
CITY MANAGER:
DEPT HEAD: %,C�
-��-�
Yohn Cherbone
SUBJECT: Approval of Hakone Gardens Master Plan
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Approve Hakone Master Plan.
REPORT SUMMARY:
One of the stipulations of the lease agreement between the City and Hakone Foundation is the
submission of a Master Plan to City Council laying out major improvements to Hakone Gardens.
Recently the Hakone Foundation completed a Master Plan to build a visitor center and garden
near the main gate entrance to the park (Attachment 1).
Lon Savedra will be present at the Council Meeting to present the Master Plan to the City
Council.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
N/A
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
The Master Plan would not be approved and the stipulation in the lease agreement with Hakone
Hakone Foundation would not be fulfilled.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
City Council could ask for changes to the Master Plan and subsequent resubmission to the City
Council for approval.
ff
FOLLOW UP ACTION(S):
The approval of the Master Plan would be recorded in City records with reference that the
condition was fulfilled.
ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT:
Nothing additional.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Master Plan.
Visitor Center and Garden in Front of Main Gate
Hakone Gardens decided to construct a Visitor Center by utilizing existing garden and parking space, in reflection
of the change to entrance fee collection initiated from 2006.
This Visitor Center is for a multiple purpose uses as shown below:
(1) To collect entrance fee and for the office,
(2) To create a history corner instructing the history of Hakone Gardens
(3) To instruct the what, where and how to see the Gardens
(4) To sell Japanese goods, books and other goods suit for Hakone Gardens
(5) To serve tea and foods with original menu at the Cafe and terrace garden
(6) To create a tea and flower corner to teach Ikebana and sell tea, bonsai and plants
(7) To create a Bonsai Corner
(8) To create a Bamboo Corner to teach how to use bamboo
The Visitor Center is small (about 113 m2, or 1130 Sq ft), but with a deep eaves and about 2m wide walking space
surrounding the building, it gives a feeling of quite a large size building. It is possible to rest and get tea and food
service with a Shogi (chairs). The building is basically a traditional one and simulating a downtown Kyoto with
Kousi and Kousi Demado designs, which may give an impression of being in Kyoto. The building is designed in
such a way that the only one path in the building is wide, one can see through whole building with no fences used
and easily access to the shop and Cafe terrace. Caf6 can utilize a wide terrace with a facility to cook at the kitchen.
Also, a mezzanine is made for a storage. Tea, flowers, plants and bonsai can be sold and displayed at the open
terrace.
The visitors can get in to the Visitor Center through an entrance and, after purchasing a ticket, move toward the
Gardens with two different paths. The one path is to the Main Gate through a wide road to the north. We will place
a large Tohro on which donors names are inscribed to commemorate the construction of the Visitor Center. The
other route is for a wheel chair and directed to the south passing through the terrace gardens (ADA).
We have evaluated the following points to design the building, which are reflected in the plan:
1. Selection of efficient location and easily accessible entrance
2. Setting of a booth for ticket sales and reception
3. Securing a path for handicapped (ADA)
4. Introduction of dignified approach from the Visitor Center to the Main Gate
5. Increase a profit by reinforcing shop activities and serving tea and foods
6. Design of space to uplift a visitor's expectation of the Gardens and establishment of Hakone's main entrance
7. Selection of the space to reserve the culture value of Hakone and clear separation from the existing Gardens
8. Securing a vehicle's path in case of fire and emergencies
Garden Drawing
Master Plan vol.2 Main Gate Garden. Visitor Center.
Lower House Garden
4
jAOA.N. E�E AR E,
AK N. E
Master Plan vol.2 Main Gate Garden.Visitor Center.Lower House Garden
Master Plan vo1.2.1:Visiter Center
Two - dimensional Drawing
p
C4
0
4/
- - - -- -
-----------
--
- -e. --
N,
TJR."
«%en
IT"DEA
FtZ
. 9 C)
Master Plan vol.2-2:Visitor Center
Three-dimensional Drawing
11�!�I■�fN�ll
i10
fig.l. ..(Syougi) fig.2 ...(Koren) fig.3 ...(kyou-Goushi)
Master Plan vol.2.3:Visitor Center
A Skech
i10
fig.l. ..(Syougi) fig.2 ...(Koren) fig.3 ...(kyou-Goushi)
Master Plan vol.2.3:Visitor Center
A Skech
j.
iF
L4
Kiyoshi Yasui
❑ ❑0❑0❑❑❑ ❑0
detail 1. niwa-mon(lower house)
'Al
3. Main Gate Garden and Visitor Center
Proposed plan emphasises and focuses:
i. Appropriate positioning of the entry and exit gate and the addition of a ticketing booth
ii. Providing a safe and enjoyable rout that meet both ADA requirements and garden aesthetics
iii. Introducing a graceful and stately approach to the existing main gate
iv. Providing financial opportunities to increase revenue by means of the addition of a new visitor
center /gift shop and the relocation/utilization of the existing tea house; and
v. Developing a design that will both enhance visitors' experience and boost the profile of the
Ilakone Gardens.
This plan proposes improvements of specific and limited areas within and outside of the garden that
should not contribute to any loss or degradation of the Garden's of the cultural and historical values.
Fig.l FACILITY USE DIAGRAM
�G�DEN
Main Cultural; Exchange F
Occasional use
Cultural Ex ange
�l.
Day use:
;VIs or Center
�fonthlSe on/tI� nnual
Upper House
Ev few years us —
Ja Fair ,' : Traditional ,Performincr
t
Fig,2 Overview of The Hakone Garden Facilities ,functions and Activities
WE
M
,f
F
A
C
I
L
T
Y
P
A
L
N
Facd 'es unctior s Events
❑Fine art isplay ❑Antiq e, Contemporary
nt OLight meal,L ncheon,Snack
❑Various party ❑Business party, Home party
❑Ove night ❑ ultural exchange
❑Tea eremony ❑ yu -rei( ea ceremony using
to les 0 chairs)
- iNlain Exchange .Facility
0 Ticl et sale
❑His ory information
❑R ute information
Visitor Center a room ❑Dining,
and Terrace 0H rticultural Tarts
❑Crafts
❑Meet ng
❑ Va ious party
House ❑
❑Various hobby
GaANL--
❑Strolling
❑Bull tin Orientation
❑Int rpr tive display
❑I ter retive display
❑J ese tea with snack
OE ons i school, Bonsai display, sale
❑Cy -bar a school Cya -bana display, sale
❑Vario s b imboo fence school
OR cep ions(evening only)
n ❑I terp etive Zen teachings
hobby group ❑Ts kimi oon viewing),Haiku,
TVa-cefemony ❑Tea c re ny(Early morning, Midnight)
grou 0Tea ceremony schoo , Ki mono school,
❑Tea ceremony dishes
ration
Self guided tour
❑Group tour
❑Thr ugh OWedding photo
❑Art (painth ig ❑photo)
❑ Classes
3 -1 Main Gate Garden (Front Garden)
With the implementation of a new single -payer admission system, a garden is proposed to be created
in the area front of the existing Main Gate, incorporating part of the existing parking site. This front
garden consists primarily of three area: the main (processional /formal) pathway flanked both sides
by a line of stone lanterns; the Visitor Center; and the multi - purpose terrace /open space to the south
of the Visitor Center. A new entrance gate is located at the existing turn-style location (area between
the existing restroom and the caretaker house)
Accessible route is provided through: the Gate — Visitor Center — the pathway leading south and then
west leading clockwise around the perimeter of the Visitor Center terrace.
3 -2 Visitor Center
Guests enter the Visitor Center through the gate located at the. side of the existing restroom.
The Visitor Center (see attached Visitor Center plans) includes the following facilities and
functions:
Inside the building:
Ticket booth for entrance fee and administration space
The Hakone Gardens history display
Interpretation and orientation booth that highlight primary/unique garden elements and features and tour routes
Gift shop
Tea restaurant with kitchen space that can prepare and serve tea and light meals, and the adjacent terrace space for
open dinning and other uses
The Terrace space can accommodate:
Display of Cha -bana (tea - ceremony flower) plants and their arrangement for the tea ceremony
Display space for miniature Bon - sai(dwarfed trees), which can be sold
Display and demonstration space for various types and applications of bamboo fence
The Visitor Center design is intended to evoke an atmosphere of peace and of the expression of traditional Kyoto
townhouse or machiya with lattice windows and doors. Although the building floor (120 square meters or 1,290 sq.
ft.) is small in American standards, its wide eaves and generous width of passage way under the eave and around
the building perimeter provides shelter and walking and seating space without interfering the use of the interior
space. Folding benches, shyogi (picture attached) on the side of the building provide necessary seating space when
needed.
The building in a traditional Japanese form has the atmosphere of Machi -ya and thus incorporate old - fashoned
Kyoto -style antique features such as Kyoto grid (Kyo- gooshi) and a grid oriel(De- mado). Instead of doors, the shop
curtains or noren hang down over /at building's entrances and exits.
A wide and generous open space, the Terrace, is provided adjacent and as an integral part of the Visitor Center. The
Terrace provides not only open dinning and gathering spaces but also accommodate an open -air exhibition and
display space. Various kinds of Cha -bana (tea ceremony) plants are displayed for viewing and for sale and a nearby
booth explains and teaches the way of arranging Cha -bana. Similarly, another booth displays and sells miniature
Bon -sai (called `palm -size' bonsai).
Updated: 6/88, 11/90, 7/91, 4/93, 4/98, 5/99, 3/00
City of Saratoga
Exhibit A
HERITAGE RESOURCES INVENTORY
1
Oripinal
HPC Resolution/
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Stvle
Criteria
#
CC Ordinance
1
1
HP -88 -01
13361 Argonne Dr.
Johnson -Kerr House (c. 1900)
Craftsman
a,c
2
2
HP -88 -01
20021 Bella Vista
Rancho Bella Vista ( 1917)
Italian Villa
a,b,c,d
3
3
HP -88 -01
14413 -14415 Big
Kerr Building/Hogg Building
False -front
a,b,e
Basin Way
(1910)
4*
4
HP -88 -01
14421 Big Basin Wy.
Saratoga Bank Building (1913)
Classic Revival
a,c,e
HP -18
5
5
HP -88 -01
14495 Big Basin Wy.
Hutchinson Building (18 84)
Pioneer
a,e
6
6
HP -88 -01
14501 -14503 Big
Cloud -Smith Building (1884,
Decorative Pioneer/
a,b,e
Basin Way
1896)
Neo Classical
7
7
HP -88 -01
14510 -14540 Big
J.E. Foster House (c. 1882)
Pioneer Cottage
a,e
Basin Way
8
8
HP -88 -01
14519 Big Basin Wy.
Green Store Building (c. 1890)
False -front Pioneer
a,e
9
9
HP -88 -01
14521 Big Basin Wy.
Grover House (c. 1895)
Pioneer Cottage
a,e
10
10
HP -88 -01
14605 Big Basin Wy.
Pettis Livery (c. 1898)
Pioneer
a,c,e
11
11
HP -88 -01
14605 Big Basin Wy.
Erwin T. King House (c. 1875)
Colonial/Salt Box
a,b,c,e
12
12
HP -88 -01
14630 Big Basin Wy.
John Henry House (1869)
Pioneer Cottage
a,b,e
13
13
HP -88 -01
14669 Big Basin Wy.
Fabretti House (188 1)
Pioneer Cottage
a,e
14
14
HP -88 -01
20900 Big Basin Wy.
Maclay Cottage (c. 1890)
Queen Anne
a,c
15
15
HP -88 -01
21000 Big Basin Wy.
Hakone Gardens (1917 -1918)
Japanese
a,c,d,e,g
16
16
HP -88 -01
20150 Bonnie Brae
James Richards House (c. 1910)
Craftsman Bungalow
a,b,c
17
17
HP -88 -01
20601 Brookwood
F.B. Willard House (1916)
California Craftsman
a,c
Lane
18
18
HP -88 -01
20611 Brookwood
Henry Jarboe House (1858)
Pioneer
a
Lane
19 **
19
HP -88 -01
19474 Burgundy
Cherrymount (origins 1860)
Farmhouse
a,f
Way
20
HP -99 -01
19050 Camino Barco
Colonel Barco Residence (1925)
Pioneer Farmhouse
c, e
1
N
Orijinal
HPC Resolution/
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Style
Criteria
#
CC Ordinance
i
108*
HP -98 -01
14288 Chester
El Tesoro - Dr. Clemmer Peck
Adobe
b,c,e
Avenue (formerly
Residence (1935 & 1967)
19101 Via Tesoro
Court)
21
20
HP -88 -01
19161 Cox Avenue
Joseph Cox House (1915)
Craftsman
a,b,c
22
21
HP -88 -01
14445 Donna Lane
Webster -Sutro House (1916)
Dutch Colonial
a,c
23
22
HP -88 -01
14315 Douglass Lane
Hayfield Caretaker/
English Country
a,c,d
Garage Buildings (1920)
24
23
HP -88 -01
19855 Douglass Ln.
Crowell House (c. 1880's)
Pioneer
a,c
25*
24
HP -88 -01
Fruitvale /Saratoga
Central Park Orchard
n/a
a,g
HP -3
Ave.
26
25
HP -88 -01
13616 Fruitvale Ave.
Reynolds Ranch (c.1870)
Pioneer
a,b,g
27
26
HP -88 -01
14251 Fruitvale Ave.
Novakovich Ranch (c. 1890)
Queen Anne
a,c,g
28
27
HP -88 -01
14500 Fruitvale Ave.
Odd Fellows Home
Mission Revival
a,b,c,d
(1912)
29
HP -91 -01
14625 Fruitvale Ave.
Saso Herb Gardens (1906 -1910)
Craftsman
a,g
30
28
HP -88 -01
14711 Fruitvale Ave.
Ellis House (1885)
Folk Victorian
a,e
31
HP -91 -01
14901 Fruitvale Ave.
Sunshine Williams (pre 1900)
Pioneer Cottage
a,b
32
29
HP -88 -01
15095 Fruitvale Ave.
Fair Oaks (1905)
Prairie /Classic Revival
a,b,c
33
30
HP -88 -01
19490 Glen Una Dr.
Carter House (1925)
Spanish Colonial
a,c
34
HP -99 -02
20201 Hill Avenue
Frederick Wessels Residence
1920's Eclectic
c,e
(1926)
35
31
HP -88 -01
20252 Hill Avenue
La Mirada - Hale Estate (1930)
Mediterranean
a,b
36
32
HP -88 -01
20235 La Paloma
Hayfield House (1920 -1921)
English Country
a,c,d
Av.
37
HP -91 -01
20250 La Paloma
Fontaine or Heid Residence
Tudor/Normandy
b,e
Av.
(1924)
38
HP -97 -02
20271 La Paloma
Un -named (1916)
Craftsman
c,d
Av.
39
33
HP -88 -01
20600 Lomita
Hannah McCarty House
Pioneer /Greek Revival
a,b,c
HP -16
Avenue
(c. 1890)
40
HP -91 -01
Madrone Hill Road
Madrone Hill - Scannavino
Mediterranean Gardens
c,g
Residence
41
HP -91 -01
20570 Marion Road
Stamper House (1892)
Pioneer Cottage
a,c
42
34
HP -88 -01
20731 Marion Road
Pollard House (c. 1892)
Queen Anne
a,b
43
HP -91 -01
18500 Marshall Lane
Bellicitti Ranch (c. 1870)
Pioneer
a,c,e,f,g
N
3
Original
HPC Resolution/
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Style
Criteria
#
CC Ordinance
44
35
HP -88 -01
20271 Merrick Drive
Rev. Pollard Ranch House
Pioneer
a,b
(c. 1880)
45*
36
HP -88 -01
15400 Montalvo
Villa Montalvo (1912)
Italian Villa
a,b,c,d
HP -2
Road
46*
37
HP -88 -01
14475 Oak Place
Almond Hill (1910 -1912)
Shingle Craftsman
a,b
HP -23
47*
38
HP -88 -01
14410 Oak Street
Village Library (1927)
Mission Revival
a,b,c
HP -9
48*
39
HP -88 -01
14488 Oak Street
Saratoga Volunteer Fire Bell
n/a
a,b
HP -12
(1903)
49
HP -91 -01
14524 Oak Street
Hanchett House (c. 1886)
Pioneer Cottage
c,e
50
40
HP -88 -01
14534 Oak Street
Lundblad's Lodge (1905)
Craftsman Shingle
a,c,e
51
41
HP -88 -01
14592 Oak Street
Saratoga Grammar School
Spanish Colonial
a,e,f
(1923 -1924)
Revivial
52
42
HP -88 -01
14666 Oak Street
Congregational Church
Pioneer /Greek Revival
a,b
Parsonage (c. 1886)
53*
43
HP -88 -01
14672 Oak Street
William King House (c. 1877)
Pioneer /Colonial
a,b
HP -5
Revival
54*
44
HP -88 -01
14683 Oak Street
Missionary Settlement House
Queen Anne
a,b,c,e
HP -13
(c.1897)
55
45
HP -88 -01
14690 Oak Street
Van Arsdale House (c. 1900)
Queen Anne
a,c
56
HP -91 -01
14701 Oak Street
Hainich Residence (c. 1900)
Pioneer Cottage
e,g
57
HP -91 -01
14739 Oak Street
Hayes House (c. 1906)
Pioneer Cottage
e,g
58
46
HP -88 -01
14766 Oak Street
Madronia Cemetery (c. 1850)
n/a
a,b,g
59
47
HP -88 -01
20390 Park Place
Saratoga Federated Church
Mission Revival
a,b,c,d,e
(1923 w /add)
60
HP -97 -01
20391 Park Place
Winslow House (1920)
Craftsman
b,d,g
61 *
48
HP -88 -01
20399 Park Place
Saratoga Foothill Club (1915-
Bay Region/Craftsman
a,b,c,d,e
HP -1
1916)
62
49
HP -88 -01
15320 Peach Hill
Carey House (1929)
Monterey Colonial
a,c,d
Road
63
50
HP -88 -01
14574 Pierce Road
Paul Masson Lodge (1936)
French Chateau
a,b,c
64
HP -91 -01
13089 Quito Road
Mitchell Residence (1909)
Craftsman
a,c,f,g
65
HP -91 -01
13939 Quito Road
Brandenburg House (1890)
Colonial Revival
a,c
66*
51
HP -88 -01
15231 Quito Road
Casa Tierra (1941 -1943)
Southwest
a,b,c
HP -14
3
Oriflinal HPC Resolution/ Address Historic or Common Name Architectural Style Criteria
# CC Ordinance �f i
67 52 HP -88 -01 20105 Rancho Bella Sterne- Andres House (c. 1880's) Pioneer /Classic Revival a,c
Vista
68* 53
69
70
71
72
73 **
74
75
76
77
78
79*
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
HP -88 -01
HP -15
HP -19
HP -91 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -20
HP -88 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -88 -01
HP -91 -01
HP -91 -01
89 63 HP -88 -01
18490 Ravenwood
Brandenburg House (1888)
Decorative Pioneer
Dr.
Saratoga Avenue
Heritage Lane
n/a
(Fruitvale to Hwy. 9)
13150 Saratoga Ave.
Jose Moya Del Pino Mosaic
n/a
(1959)
13631 Saratoga Ave.
Rawdon Dell Ranch (1916)
California Bungalow
13741 Saratoga Ave.
Rowen House (c. 1903)
Craftsman
13850 Saratoga Ave.
Professor Fred Smith Residence
California Bungalow
(c. 19 10)
13855 Saratoga Ave.
Lanphear House (c. 19 10)
Craftsman
13915 Saratoga Ave.
McGrew - Atkinson House (18 80)
Pioneer
13935 Saratoga Ave.
Great Lakes Nursery (c. 1904)
Bungalow
13991 Saratoga Ave.
Meason House (c. 1880's)
Pioneer
14024 Saratoga Ave.
Dr. Hogg Residence (1905)
14065 Saratoga Ave.
Florence Cunningham Residence
Craftsman Bungalow
(c.1930)
14075 Saratoga Ave.
E.M. Cunningham House (18 82)
Decorative Pioneer
14120 Saratoga Ave.
J.C. Cunningham House (1889)
Decorative Pioneer
14189 Saratoga Ave.
Thomy House (c. 1870)
Pioneer
14199 Saratoga Ave.
Four Pines (c. 1890)
Pioneer Bungalow
14275 Saratoga Ave.
Higinbotham House (1920)
California Craftsman
14280 Saratoga Ave.
Luther Cunningham Stone
Period Revival
House (1924-1926)
14300 Saratoga Ave.
Francis Dresser House (1870)
Neoclassic
20851 Saratoga Hills
Nelson Gardens /Shumer
n/a
Ranch/Shady Oaks Glen
(c. 1880's)
21060 Saratoga Hills
Bonney- Abernathy House
Craftsman
(c. 1913 -1920)
Saratoga -Los Gatos
Memorial Arch and Landmark
Spanish Colonial
Rd./ Saratoga Ave.
Plaque (1919)
Revival
4
a,c
a,e,f,g
a,d
a,c
c,e,f
a,e
c,e
a,c
a,e
a,c
b,c
b,c,e
a,b,c,e
a,b
a,c
c,e
a,c
a,b,c,e
a,c
e,g
a,c
a,b,c,d,e
G
Original
HPC Resolution/
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Style
Criteria
+ `
#
CC Ordinance
90
HP -91 -01
19220 Saratoga -Los
Spinaza Ranch (c. 1890)
Craftsman Shingle
c,f
Gatos Road
91
64
HP -88 -01
19221 Saratoga -Los
Tibbett House (1910)
Craftsman Bungalow
a,c
Gatos Road
92
HP -91 -01
20280 Saratoga -Los
Seven Oaks (c. 1920)
Mediterranean
c,e
Gatos Road
w /Craftsman details
93*
65
HP -88 -01
20330 Saratoga -Los
The Deodars (1912)
Mediterranean. Villa
a,c
HP -17
Gatos Road
94
66
HP -88 -01
20360 Saratoga -Los
Bellgrove (1904)
Spanish Colonial
a,c
Gatos Road
95
67
HP -88 -01
20375 Saratoga -Los
Woodleigh (1911)
Greek Revival
a,c,e
Gatos Road
96
68
HP -88 -01
20400 Saratoga -Los
T.S. Montgomery Stone Wall (c.
n/a
a,b,d
Gatos Road
1913)
97*
69
HP -88 -01
20450 Saratoga -Los
Saratoga Historical Museum
False -front Pioneer
a,c,e
HP -7
Gatos Road
(c. 1904 -1905)
98*
70
HP -88 -01
20460 Saratoga -Los
McWlliams House (1850's)
Pioneer Cottage
a,c,e
HP -10
Gatos Road
99
71
HP -88 -01
20490 Saratoga -Los
Methodist - Episcopal Church
Pioneer
a,b,e
Gatos Road
(1896)
100
HP -92 -01
12795 Saratoga-
Miller House (1909 -1911)
Craftsman
a,c,f
Sunnyvale Road
101*
72
HP -88 -01
14051 Saratoga-
Neil Carmichael House (1914)
Neoclassic
a,b
HP -22
Sunnyvale Road
102
73
HP -88 -01
14421 Saratoga-
B. Grant Taylor House (c. 1906-
California Craftsman
a.b,c,d
Sunnyvale Road
1907)
103*
74
HP -88 -01
14650 Sixth Street
Nardie House (c. 1895)
Queen Anne
a,c
HP -11
104
75
HP -88 -01
14700 Sixth Street
St. John's Episcopal Church (c.
Pioneer
a,b
1896)
105*
76
HP -88 -01
13495 Sousa Lane
Warner Hutton House (c. 1896)
Queen Anne
a,c
HP -21
Moved to:
13777 Fruitvale Ave.
106
77
HP -88 -01
20640 Third Street
Sam Cloud Hay & Feed
Pioneer
a,b,c,e
Warehouse (c.1890)
107
78
HP -88 -01
12239 Titus Avenue
Andersen House (c. late 1880's)
Pioneer
a,c
109
79
HP -88 -01
11995 Walbrook Dr.
Hyde House (1895)
Craftsman Bungalow
a,c
HP -24
110
HP -91 -01
21120 Wardell Road
Anna Bee House (c. 1902)
Traditional "Pyramid"
c,e
or Princess Anne
G
Original HPC Resolution/ Address Historic or Common Name Architectural Stvle Criteria a
# CC Ordinance t
111 80 HP -88 -01 20770 Wildwood Springer House (c. 1851) Pioneer a,b
Wy.
* Properties marked with an asterisk are also Designated Heritage Landmarks.
* *Former Historic Site indicates a structure of historic significance which was demolished and no longer exists.
Documentation of the site historical background is kept in the City's files.
SELECTION CRITERIA
a) The property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic,
engineering or architectural history of the City, the County, the State or the nation; or
b) The property is identified with persons or events significant in local, county, state or national history; or
c) The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a
valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or
d) The property is representative of the notable design or craft of a builder, designer, or architect; or
e) The property embodies or contributes to unique physical characteristics representing an established and
familiar visual feature of a neighborhood or district within the City; or
f) The property represents a significant concentration or continuity of site, buildings, structures or objects,
unified by past events or aesthetically by plan or physical or natural development; or
g) The property embodies or contributes to a unique natural setting or environment constituting a distinct area
or district within the City having special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or
value.
City of Saratoga - Exhibit B
Designated Landmark Structures
V/
Original #
Resolution
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Stvle
Criteria
1
4
HP -88 -01
14421 Big Basin Wy.
Saratoga Bank Building (1913)
Classic Revival
a,c,e
HP -18
2
24
HP -88 -01
Fruitvale /Saratoga
Central Park Orchard
n/a
a,g
HP -3
Ave.
3
36
HP -88 -01
15400 Montalvo Road
Villa Montalvo
Italian Villa
a,b,c,d
HP -02
4
37
HP -88 -01
14475 Oak Place
Almond Hill (1910 -1912)
Shingle Craftsman
a,b
HP-,23
5
38
HP -88 -01
14410 Oak Street
Village Library (1927)
Mission Revival
a,b,c
HP -9
6
39
HP -88 -01
14488 Oak Street
Saratoga Volunteer Fire Bell
n/a
a,b
HP -12
(1903)
7
43
HP -88 -01
14672 Oak Street
William King House (c. 1877)
Pioneer /Colonial
a,b
HP -5
Revival
8
44
HP -88 -01
14683 Oak Street
Missionary Settlement House
Queen Anne
a,b,c,e
HP -13
(c.1897)
9
48
HP -88 -01
20399 Park Place
Saratoga Foothill Club (1915-
Bay Region/Craftsman
a,b,c,d,e
HP -1
1916)
10
51
HP -88 -01
15231 Quito Road
Casa Tierra (1941 -1943)
Southwest
a,b,c
HP -14
11
53
HP -88 -01
18490 Ravenwood Dr.
Brandenburg House (1888)
Decorative Pioneer
a,c
HP -15
12
HP -91 -01
14065 Saratoga Ave.
Florence Cunningham
Craftsman Bungalow
b,c,e
HP -20
Residence (c.1930)
13
65
HP -88 -01
20330 Saratoga -Los
The Deodars (1912)
Mediterranean Villa
a,c
HP -17
Gatos Road
14
69
HP -88 -01
20450 Saratoga -Los
Saratoga Historical Museum
False -front Pioneer
a,c,e
HP -7
Gatos Road
(c. 1904 -1905)
15
70
HP -88 -01
20460 Saratoga -Los
McWlliams House (1850's)
Pioneer Cottage
a,c,e
HP -10
Gatos Road
16
74
HP -88 -01
14650 Sixth Street
Nardie House (c. 1895)
Queen Anne
a,c
HP -11
V/
0
Orieinal #
Resolution
Address
Historic or Common Name
Architectural Stvle
Criteria
17
76
HP -88 -01
13495 Sousa Lane
Warner Hutton House
Queen Anne
a,c
HP -21
Moved to:
(c. 1896)
13777 Fruitvale Ave.
18
72
HP -88 -01
14051 Saratoga-
Neil Carmichael House (1914)
Neoclassic
a,b
HP -22
Sunnyvale Road
19
79
HP -88 -01
11995 Walbrook Dr.
Hyde House (1895)
Craftsman Bungalow
a,c
HP -24
20
108
14288 Chester Avenue
El Tesoro - Dr. Clemmer Peck
Adobe
b, c, e
HP -98 -01
(formerly 19101 Via
Residence (1935 & 1967)
Tesoro Court)
0
Hakone Gardens Public Access Improvements
Final Draft Report
November 27, 2002
Prepared by:
David Evans & Associates, Inc.
5000 Executive Parkway, Suite 125.
San Ramon, CA 94583
Submitted to:
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
Hakone Foundation
21000 Big Basin Way
Saratoga, CA 95070
Table of Contents
Tableof Contents ...............................................................:................ ..............................2
Introduction and Project Approach
Background........................................................................................... ............................... 3
ProjectScope ......................................................................................... ..............................3
Project Alternatives
ProposedImprovements ...................................................................... ............................... 4
ProjectAlternatives .............................................................................. ............................... 6
Selection.of Materials .............................................................................. .............................. 7
DefiningProject Priorities ..................................................................... ..............................7
Identification of Priorities ....................................................... ..............................7
ImprovementCosts ................................................................ ............................... 8
Project Phasing
ProposedProject Phasing ................................................................... .............................12
AlternativePhasing Plan ..................................................................... .............................13
Recommendations................................................................ ............................... 13
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report z David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
Preliminary Hakone Gardens Public Access
Improvement Report
Introduction and Project Approach
Background Hakone Gardens is a traditional Japanese garden
established in 1917 by Oliver and Isabel Stine. The City of Saratoga purchased
the site in 1966 to assure preservation of the gardens for future generations. The
Hakone Foundation was created in 1984, in part to ensure that preservation and
enhancement of the garden would occur in the most authentic ways feasible.. In
2000, the Hakone Foundation and the City of Saratoga agreed to a 55 -year lease
that charged the Hakone Foundation with the operation, maintenance, and future
development of Hakone Gardens.
Hakone Gardens is located in the foothills of the City of Saratoga, southwest of
the business district and east of Sanborn - Skyline County Park. The facilities are
accessible via a driveway off Big Basin Way, with vehicles taking the access
drive to approach the garden encountering a significant incline. The garden was
developed within the sloping terrain inherent to the area, with some features cut
into the hillside. On -site facilities include four distinct gardens and several
structures, including the Lower House, which the City of Saratoga remodeled in
1980 to serve as a community facility, and the Cultural Exchange Center (CEC),
which was completed in 1991. A paved parking lot is located below the gardens.
The gardens and buildings are accessed via paths made from stepping stones,
some small wooden bridges, and a labyrinth of unpaved paths. A number of the
paths are narrow and have significant, slopes and /or cross slopes. Almost all the
paths are composed of loose pea gravel, which can hinder mobility for visitors
that are wheelchair bound or wearing high - heeled shoes. In addition, gravel
ends up inside many of the buildings where it causes damage to the wood floors.
Most of the paths do not conform with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
standards, and in some cases are viewed as a safety liability.
Project Scope: In April 2002, the Hakone Foundation and the City of
Saratoga commissioned David Evans & Associates (DEA) to prepare this report
analyzing alternative methods for improving access throughout the facility, in
particular for guests that may be disabled. This report is intended to build on the
1994 report by the Center for Independence of the Disabled, in which areas of
concern and non - compliance with ADA standards within Hakone Gardens were
cited. The key issues DEA will address in this report are:
1) Pathway widths and slopes,
2) Path and railing materials,
3) Improvement costs, and
4) Project phasing.
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 3 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
This report is funded by a Community Development Block Grant, with additional
funding anticipated over the next 4 -5 years for project implementation.
During discussions with City Staff and Masako Hall, the Hakone Foundation
Director of Administration, DEA was instructed to focus on key areas of the
Gardens to improve accessibility, facility function and pedestrian safety. These
include:
The gathering area inside the Main Gate;
Paths leading to the CEC, the Madrone Mound and Lower House, and;
The path from the parking area to the Wisteria Pavilion and along the koi
pond.
DEA was also asked to analyze the methods and costs for providing improved
access to other portions of the site, such as the Bamboo Garden, to ascertain if
handicap access to these areas would be functionally and economically feasible.
Discussion of this and other areas is included in this report.
Our study was to also consider the special nature of the site and propose
constructing the improvements with materials that would be appropriate and
compatible with the facility. DEA was further requested to recommend a phasing
plan for constructing the various improvements, based on the anticipated
available funding via an annual CDBG grant of $50,000 for each of the next four
years.
Proiect Alternatives
Proposed Improvements: DEA met with staff from the City of Saratoga
and Masako Hall from Hakone Gardens to discuss the goals and objectives of
this project, and to assist us in determining how to prioritize the various
improvements being considered. The project alternatives and selected
improvements were prioritized based on information gathered during our
discussions, feasibility and cost - effectiveness. For this report, the areas of
improvement have been divided into four groups (see Exhibit A). Each group is
briefly discussed below:
L Access from the parking area to the gathering area inside the Main Gate,
the Madrone Mound, CEC and Lower House. These improvements would
improve visitor safety and general utility of the gathering area, and provide
enhanced access to the CEC and Lower House. Included is constructing
improvements to the path from the informal entrance gate located near the
residence to the gathering area, and a combination of ramping and steps
in two locations. Also, replacement of the railroad tie steps at the Main.
Gate, fine grading to decrease the cross -slope present at the gathering
area, and replacement of the pea gravel finished surface at the main gate
and the gathering area with compacted decomposed granite (DG).
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report q David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
Il. Access from the parking area to the Wisteria Pavilion and koi pond. This
path provides the best opportunity for providing cost - effective, direct
access to the facility from the parking area that would conform to the
standards of the ADA. By placing the required handicap parking spaces in
the vicinity of the current office building, a level path from the parking lot to
the gate at the terminus of this path can be created. Necessary
improvements would include path widening and resurfacing,
reconstruction of the Wisteria Pavilion, and implementation of the
proposed parking lot improvements to create the necessary handicap
spaces near the access gate. In combination with these improvements,
the proposed parking lot improvements (by others), and the improvements
described in paragraph I above, ADA - compliant access would be provided
into Hakone Gardens. Access would commence from the future handicap
parking spaces, with an entrance into the facility located at the access
gate near the office, and would proceed through the Wisteria Pavilion,
along the koi pond, and up to the CEC and Lower House. ADA - compliarit
access along the koi pond would terminate where the path intersects with
the base of the steps leading to the Upper House.
Ill. Access improvements to the Madrone Mound and Lower House. These
improvements would enhance visitor access and safety at the Madrone
Mound and enable wheelchair access to the Lower House. Included is
constructing a redwood ramp accessing a wood deck level with the main
floor and in the rear of the Lower House. ADA- compliant access into the
Lower House would be provided from this deck via a new door, likely
located in the existing kitchen. It is anticipated that additional
improvements will be necessary within the Lower House to facilitate
access into the facility from the new rear entry door. Also included would
be replacement of the pea gravel finished surface at the Madrone Mound
with DG.
IV. Access to the Upper House, Restrooms and Bamboo Garden. DEA has
considered the requirements to provide ADA - compliant access to these
areas, which are situated in steeper, and thus more challenging, locations
within the facility. Providing, wheelchair access to these areas would
require building a series of switchback ramps and landings, similar to
those proposed -as part of the improvements described in paragraph I.
However; these ramps would be constructed into the planted slopes,
requiring the removal of a substantial amount of established landscaping
and would replace the existing paths and steps currently in use. The
sheer size of the ramping system necessary to provide access in these
locations would visually dominate the surroundings, and would be
extremely difficult to construct in an authentic, aesthetically pleasing
manner. Access ramps in these locations could result in a significant
visual impact to the facility and would not be cost effective. Thus, the
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 5 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
construction of ADA- compliant access to these facilities has been
eliminated from further consideration.
Project Alternatives
In addition to the recommended improvements, other alternatives for providing
improved accessibility and safety were considered (see Exhibit B). These
alternatives are briefly summarized and discussed below:
I. Providing ADA - compliant access to the CEC by constructing a path from
below the Main Gate to the CEC and the installation of a wheelchair lift.
Under this alternative, ADA - compliant access to the CEC would be .
provided by creating a dedicated path ascending from the pathway below
the Main Gate up the west - facing slope to a wheelchair lift located on the
west side of the CEC. Advantages to this alternative included the ability to
construct the path and install the wheelchair ramp in locations that would
be minimally visible and not disrupt the facilities aesthetics.
Disadvantages included the isolated and segregated nature of this path
location; this path would likely only be used by handicapped visitors, with
others visitors continuing to access the CEC from the Madrone Mound.
Additionally, a wheelchair lift is an expensive solution, and could require
significant financial resources to maintain. The proposed ramping system
with steps is viewed as a more practical and cost effective solution for
providing ADA - compliant access to the CEC.
II. Providing access along the koi pond from the path commencing at the
gate near the office and continuing above the pond. Under this alternative
the existing path currently providing direct access from the office gate to
the Upper House would be improved to permit ADA- compliant access
along the koi pond. Advantages include; the path is existing, and the
initial 100 -foot segment is fairly level so constructing ramps, curbs, railing,
etc. in this segment would not be required. Also, this alternative would not
require rebuilding the Wisteria Pavilion as required under the
recommended alternative. Disadvantages include; the path includes a
steeply sloped, curving segment as the path ascends the slope below the
Upper House. Improvements necessary to make this segment ADA -
compliant would either entail a series of ramps and switchbacks, or
significant grading and removal of established vegetation to straighten and
level the path. A system of ramps in this location would also be extremely
difficult to construct in an authentic and aesthetically pleasing manner.
The proposed path improvements, described under Proposed
Improvements paragraph II above, would provide direct access to most of
the koi pond with less grading and without the ramping necessary under
this alternative. Additionally, a significantly greater portion of the koi pond
shore would be accessible under the recommended alternative than this
alternative, permitting increased pond access and views from more
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 6 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
vantage points. Thus, this alternative for providing access to the koi pond
was rejected in favor of the recommended alternative. However, the
Hakone Foundation may consider constructing these improvements in the
future in order to complete a circular pattern of ADA- compliant access
around the entire koi pond, particularly if the Hakone Foundation would be
making significant landscaping improvements in the area below and left of
the Upper House.
Selection of Materials
To ensure Hakone Foundation objectives regarding developing Hakone Gardens
in the most authentic ways feasible are observed,. DEA considered the feasibility
of an array of building materials to construct the various improvements. The
materials selected are a combination of materials standard to the industry for the
proposed improvements and those which DEA and Hakone. Foundation staff felt
would result in the most authentic appearance.
It was determined that the most appropriate material for replacing the existing
gravel and constructing the ramps and landings would be grey - colored
compacted decomposed granite. Like asphalt paving, compacted DG provides a
firm surface necessary for supporting wheelchairs, while maintaining much of the
aesthetics of gravel. Also, granite is an authentic material used in Japanese
Gardens, commonly used for constructing steps, columns, etc. It was
determined that metal railing would be incompatible with the surroundings, so
more natural materials were considered. Simulated bamboo railing were
selected over actual bamboo due to their availability, superior strength and
durability. Redwood was also deemed an acceptable railing material, and would
initially be more cost - effective than the simulated bamboo railings. However, it
was decided that if the simulated bamboo railings were readily available and not
excessively expensive that they would be preferred due to their appearance and
lower maintenance costs.
Identification of Priorities
Improvements were prioritized based upon various factors, including feasibility,
cost - effectiveness, and overall benefit to the facilities (i.e. the ability to provide
improved access to a greater portion of Hakone Gardens). The specific
improvements included within each priority grouping were determined after
considering issues such as how the isolation of construction activities would
occur, ability to limit the areas where access to the gardens would be disrupted,
and ensuring costs for each phase would not exceed $50,000, whenever
feasible. It is assumed that funds not allocated for specific improvements within
a 12 -month period can be held over for the following fiscal year. This would
permit the Hakone Foundation to implement other improvements with non -.
allocated funds, such as the installation of safety railings and stone steps, in
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 7 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
other'portions of the gardens not considered in this report, and would facilitate a
more flexible approach to project phasing. The improvements proposed in
Phases II and III are considered both most significant and most feasible, the
Phase IV improvements are considered to be a lower priority, and the
improvements discussed in Project Alternatives, Proposed Improvements,
Section IV above were determined to be the lowest priority and due to the limited
budget these improvements were not considered further.
Improvement Costs
The following tables provide engineers estimates for constructing the
recommended improvements incorporating approved materials as discussed.
PRIORITY #1
Improvements to the Madrone Mound for access to the CEC,
including replacing gravel with compacted DG
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Grading and stockpiling of gravel;
Lump sum
Surface finish;
Compacted decomposed granite
Notes:
$4,800
It is anticipated that the proposed grading would balance, so that no material would need to be imported on -site
or exported off -site to achieve the proposed finished grade, and the removed pea gravel would be stockpiled
on -site.
PRIORITY #2
Improvements to the path from the informal entrance gate near
the residence to the Gathering Area
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Path finished surface; $6,400
Compacted decomposed granite
Path edge treatment;
Redwood header (both sides)
Guard railing;
Synthetic bamboo over metal (both sides)
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report g David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
Notes:
1. Estimate includes costs for trail widening, necessary fine grading and base material.
2. Includes installation of synthetic bamboo over the railings with materials purchased as part of Phase I.
3. No steps or retaining walls are required for this path segment to achieve ADA- compliance.
4. Estimate does not include improvements to the access gate.
5. Redwood header could be hidden with stones or vegetative cover, if desired.
PRIORITY #3
Construction in the Gathering Area; including the access steps behind the
Main Gate (15 -foot wide steps replacing the existing railroad ties),
Grading and improvements including removing the pea gravel and
replacing the finished surface, stone steps and retaining walls.
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Main Gate steps
Tread/riser material; unpolished granite $14,000
Cheeks material; CIP concrete w/ aggregate finish
Railings; synthetic bamboo over metal railing
Finish surface improvements
Performing the required grading (lump sum) $10,000
Retaining walls; redwood post & board
Finished surface; compacted decomposed granite
Steps from Lower House and to koi pond path
Tread/riser material; unpolished granite $7,500
Cheeks material; CIP concrete w/ aggregate finish
Railings; synthetic bamboo over metal railing
TOTAL $31,500
Notes:
i • Does not include the addition of abrasive inserts or other materials into the edging of step treads.
2. Includes installation of synthetic bamboo over the railings with materials purchased as part of Phase I.
3. It is anticipated that the proposed grading would balance, so that no material would need to be imported on -site
or exported off -site to achieve the proposed finished grade, and the removed pea gravel would be stockpiled
_ _ — -- on_site.
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report q David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
PRIORITY #4
Constructing the access ramps /steps system between the gathering area
and the Madrone Mound, and connecting with the path along koi pond.
(two systems required)
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Ramp surface; compacted decomposed granite $8,500 /ea = $17,000
Steps; unpolished granite
Retaining walls; redwood
Railings; synthetic bamboo over metal
Notes:
1. Does not include steps accessing the gathering area from the Main Gate and the Lower House; these are budgeted separately.
2. Includes installation of synthetic bamboo over the railings with materials purchased as part of Phase I.
3. Does not include the addition of abrasive inserts or other materials at the edge of step treads.
PRIORITY #5
Constructing improvements to the path from the entrance gate at the office
to the Wisteria Pavilion and along the koi pond.
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Trail Improvements:
Path finished surface; $12,600
Compacted decomposed granite
Path edge treatment;
Redwood header (both sides)
Guard Railings;
Synthetic bamboo over metal railing
TOTAL $12,600
Notes:
1. Estimate includes costs for trail widening, necessary fine grading and base material.
2. No steps or retaining walls would be required for this path segment to achieve ADA- compliance.
3. Includes installation of synthetic bamboo over railings with materials purchased as part of Phase I.
4. Estimate does not include improvements to the Wisteria Pavilion which are necessary for achieving ADA- compliance; the cost for this
work is expected to range from $7,000 to $10,000 and is included in Priority #7.
5. Redwood header could be covered with stones or vegetation, if desired.
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 10 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, Califomia November 27, 2002
PRIORITY #6
Cost estimate for constructing improvements permitting
ADA- Compliant access to the Lower House
Description of Improvement(s): Estimated Cost
Decking and ramp; $7,000
Redwood decking and railings
Notes:
i. Estimate does not include costs for necessary interior improvements to the Lower House, such as a new door, reconfiguration of the
Kitchen, etc.
Project Phasinq
The following table provides a scenario for project phasing, based on the
allocation of funds at $50,000/ annually for five years. Included are estimated
costs based on the materials proposed, costs for engineering and design for
future phases, project management during construction, and also includes
anticipated available funding for subsequent phases.
The first phase includes the preparation of this report and preparing construction
documents for Phase II. This phase also includes purchasing 2,000 linear feet of
the simulated bamboo sleeves and accessories for future use. This was viewed
as a creative way to allocate grant monies from fiscal year 2001 -2002 toward the
necessary improvements at this time.
The cost for the improvements described in Phases I, II, III, and IV are estimated
to be $157,100. There are several tasks and improvements related to improving
access that are excluded; some which the Hakone Foundation is completing with
separate funding and others which could be considered in the future based on
importance, feasibility, and cost: This would include constructing handrails along
existing paths, replacing additional existing gravel paths with compacted
decomposed granite, etc.
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report t f David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, California November 27, 2002
Proposed Project Phasing With Associated Costs
Fiscal Work Description of Work Estimated Remaining FY
Year Priority Cost Funding
Phase I N/A Previously commissioned
2001- ADA Compliance Study $9,700
2002
Design level survey of
entire site $5,000
Purchase/ store synthetic
bamboo railing materials $10,600
for future use
Design fees for
construction documents $12,500
for Phase II
Subtotal
$37,800 $12,200
Phase 11 Priority #1 Madrone Mound Impvmts.
$4,800
2002- Priority #2 Entrance path Impvmts.
$6,400
2003 Priority #3 Gathering Area Impvmts.
$31,500
Phase III Design costs $12,500
PM costs $5,000
Subtotal $60,200 $2,000
Phase III Priority #4 Access ramps $17,000
2003- Priority #5 Path at koi pond $12,600
2004 Rebuilding Wisteria $8,500
Pavilion
Phase IV Design costs $9,000
PM costs $5,000
Subtotal $52,100 <$100>
Phase IV Priority #6 Does not include: Costs $7,000
2004- for making necessary
2005 interior improvements to
the Lower House for ADA
access, and associated
design and PM fees
Subtotal $7,000 $42,900
Notes:
1. Supplier of simulated bamboo railing material priced in this report is Safari Thatch & Bamboo, Fl. Lauderdale, FL.
2. Future items not prioritized or included in phasing could include replacing additional existing gravel paths with compacted
decomposed granite and installing stone steps and handrails in various locations.
Hakone Foundation Public Access improvements Report 12 David Evans & Associates
Saratoga, Califomia November 27, 2002
I
Alternative Phasing Plan
One alternative to the proposed project phasing would be constructing the
improvements in the vicinity of the Main Gate (listed as Priority #3 and #4) first.
The drawbacks to this approach include: the combined cost of these
improvements exceeds the annual budget allocation of $50,000, separating the
improvements within priority #3 and #4 will reduce the amount of time the
gathering area would be inaccessible to the public, and because the Madrone
Mound would become inaccessible for a bobcat or similar equipment once the
ramping systems are constructed. However, the Hakone Foundation could
decide to "bank" a grant allocation for one fiscal year and wait for the next
allocation, thus doubling the project budget, before commencing work like that
described above.
Another phasing option worth considering would be to perform all of the gravel
removal at one time. Under this scenario, Priorities #1, 2, 3, 5 would be
rearranged so that portions of these tasks would be included under Phase II.
However, the necessary improvements to all the affected areas could not be
performed during the same phase, thus some paths and congregating areas in
the facility would be- without gravel or any other hardscaping until the following
phase is implemented. Because gravel removal is not expensive, -can be
accomplished quickly, and could be completed by Hakone Gardens staff in
sections, we did not deem this option to be a determining factor when
considering the project phasing.
Recommendations
DEA recommended that Hakone Gardens implement the finding of this report for
funding, planning and constructing the selected access improvements as
indicated herein.
Hakone Foundation Public Access Improvements Report 13
Saratoga, California
David Evans & Associates
November 27, 2002
Cult -,r-at Center
DETAIL A
MAIN ENTRY GRADING SECTION
SCALE: 1 /10" = V- a'
. 9i '0.759 PROPOSED GRADE 198 198
.598 CO X74 196 1.96 196
- 97.801 � y 194 194
t
.595 192 192
190 190
Path 188
J- 1 5% C�e�et -., `°"~ . ,�, 188
DRY STONE {200.3) ���` �ON"- 186 186
RETAINING WALL �.� + 2011.130 13 ' P 9 ' � X96 184 184 � 0
18" TALL MAX. t " - - _ 182 182 Q N
TO BE IN CENTER a -;�G --, '"^ ON CK > C)
OF EXISTING 8 M220 2x'3.199 ��
PLANTING AREA, ` G 1 � 504 20D 195.858 Z CT
CRUSHED GRANITE 200 43
GATHERING AREA t t!1 Q
TO EXTEND UP 1-- 1J
TO WALL 0 0 1 %6' EP m ..
+G I `" + 9}.173 _ Q
201, .615 1q. BRICK 1.79,761 � Q
G 196.541
g 34 (200.6) G G �` � , 454 19�. •�2 197. � OF - �
2011.497 -4-11- 2133 x"' 194. f 2 O
BRICK � 0
1" OF 3/8" GREY CRUSHED GRANITE Path 198.93 G C:
(PROVIDED BY AROMAS QUARY) 01.042 139° 7,44 Q
f .0.
t � �
G ON 4" OF CLASS 2 BASE ROCK, 19 ) N t,/�
19 238 P° Au 1 90% COMPACTION
°20 8 � ASSUMED NORTH
G
E G ! -r192.32
t 211.4 00.96 2C 19 .761 ` !! EP
P t STAGE DECKING TO BE MADE OF IPE WOOD, 1" X 4" LEGEND
1 19'v322 ath G G 6' ST UP D" :k b/ 18 1.712
19 , `' ♦ '
''-201.386 201.266 T TAGE RAILING FOR STAGE TO BE CON. HEART
Pct ♦♦ NEW ! / G r - GAS LINE
�� DECK ST E / ! ! Y}g3.0.� REDWOOD TO MATCH EXISTING RAILING �°
s 9 1 $89 ! ! ! AROUND CULTURAL CENTER BUILDING
! %% 1* .. (2 .5} ! ! � � (SEE DETAIL F ON PAGE 2)
_ at0 g ♦'� (200) WATER LINE
ir06 EP
--------------*-
�at ` �� 580 ! �4 �$,� ,.�... {93 14 DRAINAGE FROM CATCH BASINS TO BE CARRIED IN �a� X1.818 ..,...� E �«.�, ELECTRICAL
19P t G (199.88) �` `, ,� + 9 , t 6' PVC DRAIN PIPE, DRAINAGE TO OUTLET IN AREA
199.1 , `� �" at + / 1 192 ADJACENT TO ENTRY ROAD NORTH OF DOUBLE GATE
19 < ?73 106 99 -V ( ) IN PLANTING BETWEEN GRAVEL GATE ENTRY AND ROAD °--
G
196.538
CL 511' C . C I CON / 1 ! 193.5�115T �. EY � PS PULL BOX
199. G 1 / 181.927
1' �"20C.33 ! ! 1 (191) _GATEPOST
SL I ?G 150 L1 / 1 ! 1 1 SUBSURFACE DRAIN 183.606 r
! + G I 1 / AS SPECIFIED BY , ELECTROLIER
199.2 �.53% Path 1 4 SEE DETAIL B PAGE 2
199.699 MOO. 1 1 ! (190 ENGINEER � GRADING .w..■ w
R 3xO �t 197. 21 t t 4 1 1 ) (18 y GRADING 'S'E
200.44 E C s- i 1 ' 9.8 198,9 1' .672 196. 1 t t EXISTING PEA GRAVEL •. _ _ �♦ SC � _ -r �-�- -X ---- -X FENCE
N 199.706 1 - 1 TO BE RETAINED IN �8
C � 5.. G�aIE Path, n 1 1 35 1 (184) 183. 4a � ICI OC C. - .«--.- .. .®
,, r93 835 i 189 ENTRY PATH AFTER , �� ��° 18?.5' LB_DG "OR
Ci1I dE -r O -198.521 11 94.97` t 1 { ) W I t .°* QLm
'�. -... 186.,2.41 wh
It - 1 I GRADING ` G IRIS IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX
CL 199.2) 1 t (185. 184.357 ♦ t €
9 .31 `�`*, G `- G 1 183.397 v 1 4.28
d z I. 355 + 95.81 f t (186 ,
4" BROOM FINISHED 199. C I i9 I 187 '' ). "°" � �♦ ..�.�
CONCRETE BASE 154.31. 3 3
4 +1 ~1398 C.O. 1 38 (188) { "�- ..�` �♦ �� ♦ ` . rs C FIRE DEPT. CONNECTION
FOR PATH i
4.740 9.18 ath 1 `� WF 1 ♦�18b \(l 85) Lm
'399.2 " 97.523 1 ♦ Y ♦. �♦ ) t t ,� 333 WATER METER .
x..968 1 X192. �'8\ €3.52. ♦♦ � y t � °�» � rinks <r� 1 � �-. �'m
C) 3 19fs >I �t r tvrscs ` G t 1 • Re.,trc=i_ is?.. U uj
9.98 :3< 1 19 6 _.� (187) 185.582\ ` 1..e `1TN
L 51N Cfltd i P ath I ErI e ' a ` �, ..� a FIRE HYDRANT
1 ;i. 8 t -� t sty / GATEPOST � 1 : EPOST
99,2.'/ HALL ' � � 1 W 1 ! �52. --
. 4
198.6 i .:� G 1.3. "' �1 . ;� a � � t ♦° � { 188) t � ��^`
1 19 .375 19 .: 97 f `] t . • °' I j 1 184.319 WATER VALVE BOX 0
t m �
1
i
Path /._ ,:_. __ • : �P. L 18.
1 / °° FL FLOW LINE Q
1.51 & i .- � . ° + 1 2.65 1(1 0) ,. ti " , � I '- {185} " - ..- .'"'` .- �Si_DG COR.
€�}'/ 891 � 1 ' 1 � A � 2X4 WOOD EDGER 1x4.284
0
1 + 3 , 1 ! 3, PATH BORDER
197.4) 1 1 r .3 ,4 1 2.75 , 1 CONC TOP OF CONCRETE
t (19 .4) 3
♦ ' j i 184,182
BLDG COR '1 196.824 �` �Y 9! # X186) GND GROUND
199.353 SEE GRADING SECTIOP! / Ca t � , „ #� • ! � � � � .057
DETAIL A AT TOP OF THIS PAG/ ath / x"195 317 Grave i . r • a �" � (187) -
1 S A« "a %�" w•'� '� `d (
5.958 ! t TC TOP OF CURB
i7.5b 88) DESIGN
Asst:rned Benchma: , YEA - •' ° / d 2 + 19fl - - - SEE DETAILS B,C, €x D- v =
{ ) # P TOP OF PAVEMENT
372 WF ON PAGE 2 FOR STAIR P.O. BOX 605
Top of Fire Hydrant W . �/` 1° OF 3/8" GREY CRUS ED GRANITE ;, 1.4b 1£39.256 CONSTRUCTEO{v SARATOGA, CA 95071
1 1 1 (PROVIDED BY AROMAS QUARY / DESIGN CONCEPT FOR (408) 867-3747
Elevation 200.00 i I �, ` • 1 ) / G 5ECT1{3N5 ANG PLAN
I 1 ON 4' OF CLASS 2 BA ROCK, ! 13 5 ` AF SST _
1 90% COMPACT1 ! "�'i ADA ACCESSIBILITY
197,605 I G h 191-029 F
G F1 T 088 1 - `135. 6 � / ! •258 EXISTING 'MON' GATES AND ENTRY - - - -- PROPOSED GRADING
FENCE TO BE RAISED AND PLACED
198.913 1 t � ! )� t'� ON NEWLY CONSTRUCTED RETAINING SMOOTH
EXISTING GARDEN. MATCH - µ a -
i .0. WALL AT NEW ELEVATION. GATE SECTION DETAILS
SPECIFICATION OF BOULDERS
RAISING AND PLACEMENT TO BE
(197.0) SC' ! 1 (193) "COORDINATED BETWEEN GATE AND QUANTITIES REQUIRED TO
196,790 ! 1 1 1 MOVER AND CONTRACTOR BE SUBMITTED TO LANDSCAPE EXIST NG SITE ELEMENTS �
2000.5: 7 1,1 98.E X210% 1 / Pa, i 1 t ARCHITECT AND CITY OF n
2- I; r vatve 1 ".4 ` / 19 5' 4 t SARATOGA PUBLIC WORKS FOR
o Pat #�
TO 2 - BES CONCRETE V24 REVIEW. PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR
3/ TO 97.2 IV ! "r
nth 19 196.747 1 CATCH BASIN OR OTHER A5 E o0
� 19�e cf X85.:379 ADA ACCESS
2Gti.�° Path ,:- -�", ath
19 0 .��� °. I,A3 -��b 8.1 (195.5) 9 i ♦♦ DETERMINED BY ENGINEER BOULDER LOCATIONS SHOWN W �
{ 1�8 _ 1 1 ARE APPROXIMATE. EXACT FIELD 0
TOE Step t
20 �1 r �'atve398. d6a,86 95.03 t t TR -11 -8 1 ♦♦ LOCATIONS TO BE DIRECTED s v
Path °I �' TOP `� ° Pa_ t 11 "Tree ♦
0J, 7n 199.3 19 .8 6 196 391 OE ,tep � , ♦ IN FIELD BY LANDSCAPE
198 2 X13,,,7 ARCHITECT. n
Pa.. 20:,326 T �8. a TOE196 8' {ire � ♦♦ o
X01 • 8 20 12.7 t . �` r3 ♦,�� `� *. �` ♦♦ 1" OF 3/8" GREY CRUSHED GRANITE NOTES: � � e�
G149' 191.15 G / (PROVIDED BY AROMAS QUARY) � V t`
iOPt98.63 TO, 1.7.20 19b.356 ♦ ♦ ON 4" OF CLASS 2 BASE ROCK, } caretaker `D
OP19 .8. ��� `� 90% COMPACTION I THIS IS NOT AN ENGINEERED PLAN. 1;
T 191.:7 C�
T01= 399.62. � .i '3 ♦♦ � House _% (r%� � p
Jt" Path wC � .K � � 920.544 ALL ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO ENSURE THE 6•• p
G% to r 194. 4 ♦ EIS 91, 0
�19' 1 ` Pat '.079 EP ACCURACY OF THIS BASE PLAN, HOWEVER, Q a
9..1.17.
r3 •1.063 .0 , `" , '� „197.628 CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ce u-
+ 9 3 ""
N CHECKING SURVEYED INFORMATION AS IT RELATES z ,
4:'T ? R-66 -3.5 20fl,875 Ln
Path_ + 02,397 ath �"" "v g �`t P Std OP � � � CURRENT ACCESS IS DESIGNED TO PROPOSED DESIGN. V i Q 0
°� 202,1,2. ..•° -'"° 201.424 e' ` °,, - FOR DROP OFF ONLY. ALLOWANCE. W
4• l3 ~ill Path r r 0 3 - 588 FOR PARKING IS NOT IN THE SCOPE--'t- A REVIEW OF THE FUNCTIONALITY OF EXISTING X
24. X01 574` P t,, X00 3' MAX RETAINING �� OF THIS PROJECT. GRADING FOR Fr� DRAINAGE AS WELL AS A REVIEW OF PROPOSED
�3 P03I3:1 I °0'38 WALL TO MATCH # 192.42
�, RIDE OR PARKING COULD BE DETERMINED SITE DRAINAGE BY AN ENGINEER IS RECOMMENDED. °.
Path 202.514 1.284 (3 r97 . 72 EXISTING STONE th �5.17{� WITH ADDITIONAL SURVEY
"02.9,49 �a 3 3s?CY C RETAINING WALLS r EI' INFORMATION OF ADJACENT ,
2i3 :04 . E CO 98: 5,3 3 5.15, BLDG CC33? 1x6 co
193.556 ASPHALT PARKING. 193,937
G CO 194, 21 .3 EXISTING PIPE AND UTILITIES SHOULD BE LOCATED
Pfl {�dD 193 °° �-w �°°�""" EP AND CONSIDERED IN GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION.
�;�
X3.450 SUCH ITEMS SHOULD BE REVISED WHERE NECESSARY.
203.560 Pond Fa'. EP SLDG COI;
art ` `. 's c�; 0 19;.477 193.314 F Date: 12 /10/03
4 '.r 1 = EP ;,..� ALL FINISHED ELEVATIONS SHOULD BE VERIFIED IN
G5'3 Pond A 195.788 .3 �3' .19 ;.693 THE FIELD AFTER GRADING PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. Drawn by: N.S.
C ND! - GATEPOS
0;0.sr30 ' 1� 3� 195.07 1 "4. 32 94.03" �.�A 194 � -� �' � Design by: R.J.D. Et H.H. LP
Pat BRIDGE ' �, P th� - 195.708 �P 52 -° �- �, � LAYOUT DISTANCES FOR ENTRY AREA TO BE BASED ON
Path 213.58 2t?'I•f�4' IRII�GE,.COR ''4' 0{3.'93 ` °2 . 144'5'` NEW ACCESS PATH „ "I'P THE DISTANCE BETWEEN MON GATE POSTS REMAINING "
EJ3.981 201.325 Os ILA BS TEPO.'3`I" t 4.238 1043114- -,.. - i Scate: 1 10' - 0'
X00,55 � ) 1 32 TO FLUSH WITH r � 194.263
PCB {� - '�` n ,- X EXISTING PAVING 6 EP THE SAME AFTER RELOCATION). THE PROPOSED
20`.3.;11 ' 190 °215 r I E 599 � CENTER OF THE POSTS SHOULD FIRST BE LOCATED Revised: 10/26/04
t� 2 TP FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER ELEMENTS
ties ,. f n 144.911 194.691 °.�'' s., Sheet #.
-, G ,,,. 1'6,. 0 TO BE DIMENSIONED OFF OF THESE PARTS.
qw, 204.191 „ z �°� NEW DOUBLE GATE TO 4. �� Ef t" 195 � 5. 6t �� 'il3�? C R
NEW STONE FACED STEPS CONFORM TO NEW PATHB'E, 5 r�,0 3 499 PATH AND GATHERING AREA SURFACING TO BE 1/3
2 .4�; WIDTH NOT PART OF ~I 195.1 4 ,r � .. .. „
`TO MATCH OTHER EXISTING ( � �"� �� F , �� L -yI .� 3/8 CRUSHED GRANITE 1 DEEP ON 4 DEEP
P th (NOT PART OF CONTRACT,' CONTRACT, TO BE DONE EP 2" �`" BASE ROCK
Path ��,� 623 � TO BE DONE BY OTHER � BY OTHER A I �,�x � ,, 6 I ,
) 8 19.x,1
183.606
+ 195.231
OON STONE
197.022
Path
V)
198.67- 196.97
SCS
+ 19 .55 183.14.
194.97 F C)
ti 184.357 G Q I--..
G CD
G +183.397 Ln
5.81 184.825 z 0".
193.98
fry
G t m u
+ 195, 8 WF 183.43 FD(
E 0
191-638
W 183. 4
Lu ro 0
187.870 C:)
WF TR-10-10 C)
10" Tree 0
<
WF 183.330 C%4 V)
G
Path +192.568 190.522 'R- d-36-16 185.54 D
A, +
G F
196.731 36" Re wood, 186.33
189.88 D
WE
1 7
d
R
6.)
Re ,
73Y ZL
189.88
6 + 185-582
185.05
18
Edge avel
187.28 G
GATEPOST
O " IN
g-
184.552
Elp
193.5'90 9T= 184.1
1 .94
A 184.319
G
+195.31 Gravel
G
+195,346
m
Im
G
196.356
.260
G ;
+193.
WF END
[IBM
G
+193.579
04
A�
YL 7
at,
192.1
Path
189.47
4�01
49.76 �.30
GATEPOST
190-96
COR
191.029
TR-11-8
11 " Tree
193.987
185.05
G
188.005
Y. 185.95
ji
186.82
187.79
Co
WF
. . . . . . 186.057
WF DESIGN
_ _
189.256 P.O. BOX 605
SARATOGA, CA 95071
(408) 867-3747
FOCUS
EXAMPLE OF BOULDER CHARACTER FOR ENTRY
r-
iz
Ln
-00
WO-0
0
Lo rn
LEGEND ULM
V <%o
00
00
C)
fo-
W LL
BOULDER �<
z
Ln
........... BOULDER TONAGE
uj x
aim
C;
a:
LOW PROFILE
BOULDER
Date: 8/4/04
Drawn by: N.S.
NOTES: Design by: R.J.D. Et H.H.
Scale: 1 /4" = 1' - 0"
16 - 1 TON BOULDERS FOR ADDITIONAL LAYERING Revised: 10/26/04
AMONGST OTHER BOULDERS (SEE PHOTO EXAMPLES
ON PAGE 1). Sheet #:
BOULDERS TO BE OAKDALE FIELDSTONE. 3/3
N
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #15)
IDENTIFICATION
1. _ Common Name: Hakone, Estate, Gardens and Retreat
2: Historic name: Hakone
3. Street: 21000 Big Basin Way
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara
4. Parcel number: 503-48-030,31,32; 517 -7 -026
5. Present Owner: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Ownership: Public
6. Present Use: Forum for international cultural gatherings, retreat, event center, classes
Original use: Private estate, retreat and residence
DESCRIPTION
7a. Architectural style: Japanese
7b. Present physical appearance of the site and major alterations
Mrs. Isabel Stine and Mr. Oliver Stine, founders of Hakone in 1915, hired landscape
architect and gardener Naoharu Aihara, born to a family of Imperial gardeners in
Koyobashi, Tokyo, to design the gardens at Hakone.
The garden began on a logged out hillside with a dramatic view of the "Valley of the
Heart's Delight ", what Silicon Valley was then known as. During Japan's late Edo Period
(early 19th century) hillside sansos, or country villas, were popular throughout Japan
where the pond is set on the slope from which a waterfall can drop into the lake below.
All the classic elements of a hill and pond garden can be found at Hakone where there is
a master stone, a worshipping stone, guest Isle, meandering pathways with centuries old
lanterns, and residential style architecture popular with samurai
There are a number of historic . Japanese buildings and remarkable horticultural and
botanical features located on Hakone's l8 -acre site. They include the Moon Viewing
House which was built in 1917 by Japanese Architect Mr. Tsunematsu Shintani, a native
of Wakayama Prefecture in Japan, and includes a study space, a tokonoma or alcove, and
a sliding door shelf. The architecture was developed by the tea masters and is
characterized by lightness of design and use of natural materials, and minimal
ornamentation; similar to the imperial villas in Kyoto where the tea houses are placed
throughout the elaborate pond garden. Of similar architectural design, the Lower House,
or Zen Garden House, was built in 1922. This building features quality redwood
craftsmanship, unpainted wood siding and beautiful Japanese -style architecture. Stine
retained the finest Japanese builders and garden designers available. The pride of
craftsmen trained during the Meiji era can be seen in their work.
Also located at Hakone is the Cultural Exchange Center (CEC) which was designed and
built by renowned architect and builder Mr. Kiyoshi Yasui. Mr. Yasui is the 14`x'
generation architect to the imperial family. The CEC is an authentic reproduction of a
19th century Kyoto tea - merchant's house and shop. It was completed in 1991. The
timbers were cut using traditional tools and methods. The team of Japanese master
carpenters who had built the Japanese Exhibition Room at the Metropolitan MUSeLUlI of
Arcs in New York in the mid -1980 was also employed at Hakone.
8. Construction date: 1917 -1922
9. Architect: Mr. Tsunematsu Shintani and Mr. Kiyoshi Yasui
Landscape Architect: Mr. Naoharu Aihara
10. Builder: Same as #9
11. Approximate acreage: 18
12: Datt. of enclosed photo: 1988
13. Condition: Excellent
14. Alterations: A) The Bamboo Garden (Kizt►na -en) was built in 1987
B) The Cultural Exchange Center was completed in 1991
15. Surroundings: Scattered buildings and residential.
16. Threats to site: None known
17. is the structure on the original site? Yes
SIGNIFICANCE and related features:
18. 19.
As the oldest Surviving Japanese estate gardens in the Western Hemisphere, Hakone's
tranquility and elegance beautifully express the aesthetics of the Japanese ideal of the
garden as a space in which art and nature merge seamlessly for the observer. The
cultivation of nature in miniature dates back to the introduction of Buddhism to Japan (in
538 AD) when the tradition of transforming a garden into a blissful dwelling place to
experience timeless beauty becomes a central element of .Japanese garden design.
Hakone is made up of a variety of hillside gardens, historic buildings, multi- tiered
waterfalls and koi ponds, strolling gardens, unique lanterns, stonework and many other
elements of Japan's ancient civilization. The harmonious placement of plants, stones,
waterfalls and ponds are the essence of a Japanese garden and offer sublime beauty in all
seasons. The first documented garden plan was made in 618 AD and by 620 AD the first
man -made pond with a small island was introduced.
Some of the main features of Hakone include her four gardens: A) Hill and Pond Garden
B) Zen Garden C) Tea Gardens D) Bamboo Gardens
In 1932, ownership passed to prominent East bay financier Major C.L. Tilden. He added
the Mon, or main gate, to the Gardens. in 1961 Hakone was purchased by a partnership
that included the families of Joseph and Eldon Gresham of Saratoga and three prominent
families in San Francisco headed by George Hall, Jolui Young, and .John Kan and another
prominent family from Palo Alto led by Dan Lee.
This group restored the neglected, overgrown gardens to their beautiful splendor. The
families and their friends enjoyed Hakone as a private retreat. Hakone was well taken
care of by the partnership, especially by the Chinese American families who had a special
reverence for the gardens. In 1966 the partners decided to sell a beautifully restored
Hakone to the City of Saratoga for all to enjoy. The City purchased Hakone at a price of
$145,000 and added the moniker "Gardens" to Hakone. The City then hired Tanso
Ishihara, a Kyoto trained Japanese Garden Specialist, who enhanced the gardens' classical
Japanese design. Other recent noteworthy events include:
* Hakone was featured as one of the premier film sites for the 2006 three -
time Academy Award winning movie Memoirs ofa Geisha.
* In 2004, Hakone received that National Trust for Historic Preservation's
highest commendation as one of the top 12 sites in the country to receive a "Save
America's Treasures" award which was accompanied by a series of major historic
restoration grants. Among some of the other national historic sites also recognized with
Hakone were Eleanor Roosevelt's home at Hyde Park, New York "Val Kil," Thomas
Edison and Henry Ford's Winter Estate in Fort Myers, Florida, and President Andrew
Jackson's home in Tennessee the "First Hermitage."
* In 2004 Hakone was selected by the Japanese Foreign Ministry to be
a designated historic site to host the 150th Anniversary Celebration of the Treaty of Peace
and Amity (Kanagawa Treaty) between the United States and the Empire of Japan which
was negotiated and signed by Commodore Perry. This treaty ended Japan's two- and -a-
half centuries of isolation. Among those present included the 50th Consul General of
Japan in San Francisco (this consulate is one of Japan's oldest foreign diplomatic posts in
the world) and the Great - great -great Grand - daughter of Commodore Perry. The
ceremony included a reenactment of the Cherry Blossom tree planting ceremony
which took place in 1854 in the Kanagawa Prefecture.
* In 2001, Hakone was selected by the Embassy of Japan to host the 50th Anniversary
of the Peace Treaty that ended World War II and some of the distinguished guests
included two former Ambassadors of Japan to the United States and the then current
Ambassador Shunji Yanai.
* In 2000 Hakone hosted the 35th Prime Minister of Japan, the Honorable Morihiro
Hosakawa, for a weekend of cultural events and diplomatic celebrations commemorating
Hakone as the oldest Japanese Estate and Retreat in the Western Hemisphere.
20. Main theme of the historic resource: Architecture, Arts /Leasure,
Social /Educational
21. Sources:
• Hakone Gardens
By Tanso Ishillara and Gloria Wickman
Published by Kawara Shoten, Kyoto, Japan 1974
(limited editions -1,000 copies)
• Wert Coast Garden Walks - Gardens from San Diego to Vancouver
By Alice Joyce
Published by Michael Kesend, New York 2000
• Japanese -Style Gardens of the Pacific West Coast
By Kendall H. Brown
Published by Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., New York 1999
• Ortho Books - Creating Japanese Gardens
By Alvin Horton
Published by Meredith Publishing, Iowa 2003
• Spiritual Gardening - Creating Sacred Space Outdoors
By Peg Streep
Published by Time -Life Inc., Virginia 1999
• Santa Clara County Heritage Resource Inventory, 1975, 1979; F. Cunningham,
Saratoga's First Hundred Years, 1967.
IMPORTANT
Prior to submitting an application for heritage resource designation, the following
should be read carefully:
1, the applicant understand that by applying for designation of the property as a
herr,age resource, that such property will be subject to the provisions of Chapter
13 of the Saratoga Municipal Code. I also agree that provisions will be complied
witl-- as well as any conditions upon which the application is grated.
Project Location: 21000 Big Basin Way
Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 503 -48 -030, 31,32; 517 -7 -026
Project Description: Hakone: Estate, Gardens and Retreat
Applicant Name:The Hakone Foundation, Lon Saavedra, Executive Director & CEO
Applicant Phone: 408 -741 -4954 Fax: 408-741-499' )
E -mail: L,c.�n +�i,.11al:one.com
Property Owner Name: City of Saratoga
Property Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070
Property Owner Phone: ' 408 - 868 -1200
1, the undersigned, under penalty of perjury, hereby declare and agree that 1 am the
applicant for this request, that the owner of the property has approved the filing of
this application and that all the facts, maps, and documents and other information
submitto,d herewith are true, correct, and accurate, to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
If the applicant is granted, the undersigned agrees that the conditions, if any, upon
which the application is grated, will be carefully observed and that the project will
proceed in accordance with all City, State, and Federal laws.
�G12�'�7
gnature of Applicant Date
HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY ( #15)
IDENTIFICATION
1. Common name: Hakone Gardens
2. Historic name: Hakone Gardens
3. Street or rural address: 21000 Big Basin Way
City: Saratoga
Zip: 95070 County: Santa Clara
4. Parcel number: 503 -48 -030, 31, 32; 517 -7 -026
5. Present Owner: City of Saratoga Address: 13777 Fruitvale Ave.
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Ownership is: Public: X Private:
6. Present Use: City park since 1966 Original Use: Residence & gardens
DESCRIPTION
7a. Architectural style: Japanese
7b. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site or
structure and describe any major alterations from its original
condition:
This is a 15 -acre Japanese hill and water garden park. It features several
Japanese structures, including a moon - viewing house and teahouse. The
Upper House was built in 1917 in the authentic Japanese manner by Mr. T.
Shintani. All of the buildings and structures on this site are in
excellent condition. The gardens are situated around the house and there
is a beautiful pond stocked with carp. All of the buildings and garden are
in the authentic Japanese style. Great attention has been paid to making
any changes conform to the authenticity of Hakone's Japanese derivation,
including the planting of a bamboo garden.
8. Construction date:
Estimated:
Factual: 1917 -18
9. Architect:
T. Shintani/
e N. Aihara landscape
P
architect
10. Builder: same
11. Approx. prop. size
-`-r Frontage
Depth:
approx. acreage: 13.548
' 12. Date(s) of enclosed
photograph(s): 1988
Atom-
_'�
13. Condition: Excellent: X Good: Fair: Deteriorated:
No longer in existence:
14. Alterations: Restoration completed by City in April 1981.
15. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary)
Open land: Scattered buildings: X Densely built -up:
Residential: X Industrial: Commercial: Other:
16. Threats to site: None known: X Private development:
Vandalism: Public Works project: Other:
17. Is the structure: On its original site? X Moved?
18. Related features:
Zoning:
Unknown?
SIGNIFICANCE
19. Briefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates,
events, and persons associated with the site).
Hakone Gardens was originally owned by Mr. & Mrs. Oliver C. Stine. The name
Hakone comes from the Fuji Hakone National Park which had mineral springs
similar to Saratoga's Congress Springs. The Garden was completed in 1918
by N. Aihara, a relation of the Court gardeners of the Emperor of Japan.
It is a hill and water garden (Tsukiyama- Sansui) in the strolling pond
style typical of the Zen garden of the middle 17th century. Hakone is
considered the only truly authentic Japanese garden in the U.S. because of
Mr. Aihara's attention to detail as governed by the rules of Japanese
garden art. Mrs. Stine also had stables and a tennis court on the
property. Hakone was sold in 1932 to Major & Mrs. Chas. Lee Tilden (Tilden
Park, Berkeley, CA) who spent the next 28 years making changes and
improvements which included the arched wooden trestle bridge. Mr. Aihara
continued on in Mr. Tilden's service. Sold again in 1960, then threatened
by subdivision, Hakone was purchased by the City of Saratoga for a park.
20. Main theme of the historic resource:
(If more than one is checked, number
in order of importance.)
Architecture: 1 Arts /Leisure: 2
Economic /Industrial:
Exploration /Settlement:
Government:' Military:
Religion: Social /Ed.: 3
21. Sources (List books, documents,
surveys, personal interviews and
their dates).
Hakone pamphlet; Santa Clara County
Heritage Resource Inventory,1975, 1979;
F. Cunningham, Saratoga's First Hundred
Years, 1967.
22. Date form prepared: 4/88
By (name): SHPC
Organization: City of Saratoga
Address: 13777 Fruitvale Avenue
City: Saratoga Zip: 95070
Phone: 867 -3438
Locational sketch map (draw and label site and
surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks):
NORTH
w
5
�. �:$
,�.r , �,.� e.., _ . , a 4- •�t �.. . �t
q Pla Hakone arderis Mas
per J
Cond ed-m page 2 apan,, s.. tartt, ed'to dve lo p f ` a g ar � architect uS tect T Shintan a nd the Im• kon- e Natio- n�, al Pa:k „
msouAth... as✓,
.
den reflecting the design of 17th penal gardener Naohant A1= Honshu,
not disturb the form or +beauty of� ,century„ Zen >:gardens.,in,. Japan, »'.hara ';The. complex.;, was called ' ~; The `city` purchased gar °,:
the exi sting core area of-the'gar• She - employed' ' the Japanese , 'Hakone Gardens after Fuji Ha °' d'ens in 1966.
dens: Visitors will continue to,'.. ;
enter through the Zen Mon r
j , enjoy' the,,",.- g ate) and
beaut of,the pond filled with koi 3
„yb
carp, the Chinese arched bridge, n F
� ...
the ceremo
real tea, rooms;.Jhe 4>
kare sansiu, (sand and rock -
_
den) :.and%other features` for
which. Hakone "Gardens is ”
known:
A large color.rendition of the
masterplan design may be seen a !` ►''^`�,'; ,;' r ' . '"'✓` //
{
-in the Saratoga City Hall lobby:
More:. immediate.,, Problems ,,
i ! v
for: the Hakone` Foundation-are,
raccoons who eat the •koi in the . l
pond and deer who eat bonzai
and bamboo. Cost of a fence to
keep in a territorial dog to chase _
away the predators is estimated,
at $1500.
Glennon has putout a plea for . - .
L.
donations to the Hakone Found - `� � ,,�,, •
ation to 'pay for the fence. He
t
1
said the foundation is in finan-
cial . straits and currently is
$5,751 in debt. ,
qty Maintenance Director
Dan Trinidad is planning to ask
the City Council for $5,000 for
fencing and a pond filtration sys-
tem.
, The Hakone Gardens, now a
city park, date back to 1916,
when Isabel Stine, a San Fran-
ciscan who had travelled in
��'� '"ems `� ti._�.,i �' •�
UL
Sketch shows the Bamboo Research Center, a tects of Japan for the Hakone Foundation. Cost
feature of the Hakone Gardens Master Plan pre- of the center is estimated at $1.5 million, and of
pared by Yasuimoku Komuten landscape archi- the entire plan at $5.25 million.
N '
0
2'
z
Ambitious master plan for-Hakone Garden's'..''
By Mary Barnett
—A .cultural exchange cen-
tion of the parking area have
ter. Adjacent to the existing
been altered. A slight eastward F*
An ambitious Hakone Gar-
main house, it will have lecture
expansion will increase the
'dens master plan prepared -b'••A
demonstration rooms, tea
number of spaces and make a
• Japanese landscape firm,' calls
.and
house and shop,, and guest rooms
room for the future bamboo gar- j
for $5:25 million worth` of im=
" for Japanese artists- iri-resi-
•
dens.
: provements to the city -owned
dente.
— Circulation network. The
gardens on Big Basin "Way.
—A tea flower garden. To be
existing pedestrian paths are ex-
The Hakone Gardens Master.
located on the western peri-
_
tended to the proposed new
Plan is based on design concepts
phery of the garden's seven -acre
structures and garden areas. -
of Japanese" architect Kiyoshi
core area, it will cover approxi-
Vehicular access is provided for i
:Yasui,. director of the firm of
inately half an acre and will be
the proposed bamboo research
Yasuimoku Komuten Co., Ltd.,
• the largest garden of its kind in
center.
m Muko City, Saratoga's Sister
• •.the United States.
The preliminary cost esti -,
qty
Yasui's
—A Shinto shrine. At first,. it
,
mate was:9 million: However,
it has
concepts were
`into
was planned to dismantle a
been revised upward to
elaborated a master plan.
shrine located in a Japanese Val-
$5.25 million.
for the core area of the gardens
ley scheduled for flooding in a
However, Glennon said,
.with the assistance of local con-
reclamation project and ship it
"We're hoping that when we col ;
•sultants Stephen Kay Lafer
to the Hakone-Gardens for reas-
lect sizable amounts of money 'k
-Planning Services ,and Kikuchi
-
sembling south of the tea flower .:
we can reach agreements, with. y,1,1"�I
& Associates, Palo Alto land-
garden, as a focal point and "
people in Japan to supply sizable at
peape architects.
place for resting and medita-
'amounts of materials and ser-
The Japanese architect was
tion. However, on a recent trip
vices." t
employed to develop a master
to Japan Glennon learned that .
This could amount to "half the
plan for the gardens by the Ha.
the shrine was in poor condition..
overall cost, Glennoasaid. c -
kone Foundation, _a non - profit
It is now planned to construct a
Most expensive item on. the-'-
organization organized by for--
new shrine, increasing the esti-
'
construction cost estimate sheet
.mer Saratoga mayor William
`riated cost from $50,000 to
is the Culture Exchange Center;
Glennon. The Saratoga City
$200,000.
a 5496rsquare -foot structure esti f
Council. asked Glennon to form
—A bamboo research center
mated to cost $2.5 million.
the association to supporet the
and gardens, to be the largest fa-
Hakone Gardens because since
cility of its kind in the world. Ha-
Steve Kikuchi of Kikuchi & "
passage of Proposition 13 in
kone Foundation plans to attract
Associates said that the cultural
1978, finding public funds for
leading experts to head the cen-
center will be built with "unique
maintenance of the gardens had
ter and develop it as the world's
woods" and put together with
r
become.increasin 1 difficult.
g y
lea p
ding research and ropaga-
nails — a tedious type of ton -
�-
The City Council approved
lion center for bamboo. The gar
struction.
"the Hakone Master Plan last
dens will also include public
Second most expensive item
;month, with the reservation
viewing and walking areas.
the 5376 square foot. Bamboo ; • " y
-that the cost figures were not m
—New stands of trees and
Research Center, estimated' to r
',eluded in the approval.
garden areas. These, are pro-
cost $1.5 million
In July the council approved
". posed around the periphery -of
Kikuchi explained; ' the fishpond at Hakone Gardens in Saratoga.
a $3506 advance to allow the Ha-
the core area in conjunction with
a dying off of bamtxb to }j'' •:
Bone Foundation to develop the.
Proposed <buildtngsr Trees in
out the world; and they're �D�i ' "• t9[1 of $231.830` is improvements
;master plan,. at Glennon's re-
elude evergreen conifers, broad ,
shown:, would cost an es _
io try to find out the cause ""' for
• leaf and deciduous accent.'
site construction and $363,480' : timated $139,500.
He`Said: all the buildings for' for landscape The
borroweds$20 000 from the city,
Y
trees,
construction .:' plan document empha
the center would 'be imported" 'Boulders alone
which it used to create a bro-
chure in order to attract contri-
—Public area conveniences.
Locations are specified for grav-
• would cost sizes that the improvements will
from Japan. $20,000: The irrigation system " - pleaneturntopageS;
butors.
Glennon told the Council the
el paths,; stone and wooden
steps, benches; trash contain-
Pvbiitmeetiegs :
Foundation seeks to raise
$50,000 hire a fundraiser to
ers, and other conveniences.
Boulders, stepping stones, stone
SARATOGACITYCOUNCIL 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 11, West Valley
"
raise the money needed to im
borders and other visual and
7 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. 5, Saratoga High School cafeteria," "
prove the gardens according to
functional elements of the land -
City Council Chambers, 13777 20300HerrimanAve. Y Outspends' ":.. .
Yasui's design.
Major improvements pro--
scape design are included.
— Parking area improve -.
97FPS vale Ave. SCHOOL I UNION '.
WFSTVALLEY- MISSION SCHOOL DISTRICT income
posed include:
ments..Configuration and loca-
COMMUNITY COLLEGE' 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, Nov. 11,
GOVERNING BOARD Redwood Junior High School; :
{vest Valley Mission Com
7 p.m. Thursday, Nov: 6, 13925 Fruitvale Ave. munity College District has been,
Saratoga News
West Valley College, 14000 Fruit- SARATOGA PLANNING �n�g over $2 million beyond;,
vale Ave. COMMI ION
LOS GATOS SARATOGA 1 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, Nov. ' its .income for the past two
(ISSN) 07454M
s� �,,,n in 10950 N. B A` �, CLpe„s nu 8,
JOINTUNIONHIGH 12. City Council Chambers, 13777 Years., . -
In an ,effort towards "a bal-
SCHOOL DISTRICT FYuitvale Ave, anted budget, Dr. Gustavo Mel -
�s�eroa�
v>nw
o<ta� a,raaoon w+>" S,yerior Court of Santa Clare County; De
C . POST Jure POSTMASTER: Entered as eecotd dean matter: °.
CA. POSTMASTER: Send add ess U-9- SARATOGA NEWS. P.O. Box 368,
LOOK
FOR
THE
lander, college chancellor,
urged at a recent: governing
Cupertino, 6495015.
ro
board meeting that the draw On
Editor — MARY WNETT
�°°�U°°° -
CINDY COOPER
SARATOGA
NEWS
reserves for the 1987-$6 year not
exceed $800,000.
,MILLIEBOBROFF,LOUISEWEBS,
7%p rhnriealln1 RAVt•th.t 1V
t
�VX ��� i 1 „ L 9 �..,r � s 1( r C 7 r l
t
ld 6 t t t
4
� � a? t 11 }7 F t T T y gy. x. € '^sv M y` t "A;' a •,n s s t 4 s
F _'i. � � �K +t � ✓Y i M` k Y' t Y4 i w&
rya r
f r+• :J +9 I r � .fit. �'i r +. � L � : s'. $r ax `a ., _ as i
r V s 1 is ..n.Yt,+.n�®
� 5.5
f
< x
Isis li w 4, '.h
o- 1 '.i k tl r eel. 4g e ✓� s "�,.a . i 4 F �„ k..
V. SIt w 0''.l'
s ;lellF� rdr1A ''; �Y� { i 4 r t Ir �'ix ^S V S.a i,�. 'Y4` t 3 II�F t i aka' ✓ t�. r Y< f v
F n, µit f "'C i �Sl t 7C+ ayl� 1 _ t� t�.;• { ti 4Kfi tj.
y
P , t r•.
•
prou ing
new, icleas ,
,
"
'u
f or Hakone
t
By Jose Steil , +
Mercury' News Staff' Writer
THE SEEDS of a plan to erihance
Hakone Garden crown jewel of
Saratoga's parks system —,. have,,
`begun to germinate.
Traditional Japanese architectural and'
horticultural styles will be followed in the,*
additions to Hakone, which-some call the
' most authentic Japanese garden in the
United States. .;
Lastmonth, the Saratoga City Council
held'an,idea- gathering session with parks
commissioners and residents interestediri
the future of the,garden.
Suggestions included a multipurpose
building, a shrine, a teahouse, and shop,
upper and
lower plazas, : (:
a sightseeing
deck, a bam- The' garden
boo forest was called.",
and an inter
national bam - Hakone
boo - propaga ;4
lion center. beCa ' Se, the
The two i.
principal. Verdant
structures at a' '
Hakone now+ i
are an upper Congress
guesthouse, SpringS area
and a lower
house, built as WaS.
� a temporary ..
cookhouse in reminiscent y
1919:
One sugges W 1
,lion is "to of Fuji -
.
°. . , 'w
kieplace the Hakone IZLl
cookhouse F
with a larger,
building in National
the tradi-
tional Park ins
Japa-
nese arc h itec
tural form It lapin
,• -.:�
`could serve as.,
, a focal point; t
when a city, initiated foundation starts ^, ,
" raising money,
A city- owned'park since 1966, Hakone
was commissioned as a'passive garden
a gardemrn which.visitors stroll, relax-a nd
enjoy nature's'beauty in 1917 by`OliveW
Charles Stine of San Francisco, who owned '
the estate.' ,
The garden was called•Hakorfe because? ' `
the verdant Congress Springs area ;
reminded Mrs. -Stine of Fuji- Hakone -Izu
National Park'andmineral springs in ;
Japan, where she had visited, for six
months. ° ..: ,
Completed in 1918, Hakone follows the 1
form of the hill'and water garden. in the
strolling -pond style, typical, of a mid-17th-
century Zen garden:
The estate was purchased in'1932 by ,
Maj. Charles °Lee Tilden, and,a:consortium
of six families, bought: it from the Tilden
estate in 1960: Threatened by subdivision
and commercialization in 1966,.Hakone
then Was acquired by the city of'Saratoga w;
for $145,000.
Restoration and repair of the structural
portions of the garden first was under- i
taken in 1974. Hakone has been kept up the
past 18 years with city funds augmented
by occasional private donations. Now, with a
the-city council's recent decision to.estab- ' e
lish the. Hakone Foundation to run the,..,,,, n . ;
park, ambitious plans are: being made: t
But they hinge on approval by the Inter -
nal Revenue Service of tax - exempt status
,for the foundation. According to Council
man David Moyles, IRS recognition is
expected by May possibly sooner.
Moyles, the council liaison with the c
A foundation, said development plans , rt
should begin to, pick up momentum
at that point.
,r Continued on next page r
Hakone ?Gardens
■ Location: 21000 .Big Basin Way,
Saratoga,_, half a' mile west'of ;the Vi1
lage of'saratoga on Highway 9
■ Hours: Monday .through, Friday, 10
a.m: to' 5. p.m.,,,Saturday and, Sunday 11 ;
am. to 5 p m. Closed on legal holidays
. 0. "Admission :;'Free. Donations . for..
upkeep ,:accepted in collection boxes ...
Buildings ,and garden available for - rent !
`for,weddings; receptions etc ,, : l
ol Regulations:
✓.Visitors may not stray from garden
paths, steps; bridges or sitting: areas.,
✓" Children under,10 must. be accorn
panie& by an adult
✓ No,food or drinks are permitted:rn
the 'garden area
✓ No pe rsonal stereos
or musical instruments permitted.
✓ All vehicles,. including bicycles, I
are restricted, to� parking "area
For ,information, call Saratoga', city"
offices'at' 867 -3438
1 Saratoga�_
`t x
sprouting,,.
new 1 eas r,
t '
,
f or: Hakone
1
:By. Jose. Steil
Mercury News Staff Writer ,.
HE SEEDS of a plan�to enhance
Hakone Garden — crown jewel of
Saratoga's parks system — have I
:begun to germinate. '
Traditional .Japanese architectural and',-
horticultural styles will be followed in the
additions to Hakone, which some call the
most authentic Japanesegarden in4he
United States.
Last month, the Saratoga City Council
held an',idea- gathering session with parks„
commissioners and residents interested iit r
the future of the garden.
Suggestions included .a multipurpose
building, a shrine, a teahouse, and shop, " •.
upper and
lower plazas, + '
a sightseeing The garden
deck, a bam-
boo forest
and an inter -
was :called' ' ,.
national bam= Hakone
boo-propaga-
tioncenter. because the,,,.,- �
The two '
principal verdant
structures at ' t
are an upper C011gress, -, 11 g °est`' Springs area
and 'a lower
house, built as, .. jf "
a temporary . was _ 1
cookhouse in remin> scent
i919.
One sugges Of .r}L1jL t
lion is'to .
I .,replacethe'
cookhouse Hakone =Iuti
with a larger National
building in r:
the trade- f
tionalJapa- ; Park in 4,
nese architec- Japan
tural form. ,It J
could serve as
a focal point '
when a city- initiated four ion'starts 'n' '
raising money. 1.
A city -owned park since 1966, .Hakone
was commissioned as a passive garden '
a garden in which visltors'stroll, relax and -
enjoy nature's beauty— ,in•1917 by Oliver`"
Charles Stine of San Francisco, who owned. d
the estate. f
The garden was called Hakone because ' A
the verdant Congress Springs area t' 7
reminded Mrs. Stine of Fuji- Hakone•lzu'
National,Park and mineral'springsin
Japan, where she had visited for six
f - months:'
..Completed in 1918, Hakone follows the
i form of the hill and water garden, inthe
strolling- pond,style, typical of a mid -17th
{ century Zen garden.
The estate was purchased in 1932 +.by f* °
Maj. Charles Lee Tilden, and a consortium
of six families taught it from the Tilden
estate:in 1960. Threatened by subdivision
and commercialization in 1966; Hakone r
then was acquired by the city of Saratoga.:" .
for $145,000.
Restoration and.repair of the.structura_l
portions of the garden first was'under-
taken in 1974. Hakone has been kept up the,
past 18 years with city'funds augmented
by, occasional private donations.' Now, with't ,.
the'city�council's recent decision to,estab-
lish the Hakone Foundation to run the Ir
park, ambitious, plans are being made i
But they hinge on approval by the Inter
nal Revenue Service of tax exempt status y'.
for the foundation. According to Council
man David Moyles IRS recognition ' is.
expected by May — possibly sooner:
Moyles ,the.councilliaison.withdhe ;,•' ,r
foundation; said development plans
should begin to pick up:momentum
at that point: ° ,l
q� Continued on nest page s }J
h
Hakone Gaisdens'`
■ Location:'
ocation 21000 Big Basin Way
Saratoga, .half a'mfle west of the, Vi1-
lage of Saratoga on Highway 9.
1 ■Hours:' Monday t wough..Friday 10
a.m.,to'5 p:m:,;Satu, ay and Sunday 11.
'a.m. to 5 p.m: =Closed on 1e &al holidays. ;
N'Admissio& Free: 'Donations for
upkeep ,accepted to Coll eI tion boxes.
Buildin gs. and gardenavailable'for -rent '
'for weddings, "receptionI *C.
a$egulatiotis:;"
✓: tors may not stray.from.garden
pathssteps,'bridges or "sitting areas:: .'
✓'Children under 10 m_ ust accom-
panied , by an adult
✓.No;food,or drinks are.per¢titted.in
the garden.area:_ I
-
,✓ No pets, ,radios, personal stereos
or musical instruments permitted. x
✓.All vehicles, including bicycles,
'are restricted to parking area
For . information, call Saratoga city
' offices'at'867 -3438
cj J NAA C { AO
w.
✓-- - .—. � n t c. v�,y_ «.�, .. U,v.a -caw
JAKE A STROLL
..THROUGH HAKONE
Historical Hakone Gardens in Saratoga, just.
twenty minutes from the high technology center
of Santa Clara Valley, is a journey back to 17th
century Japan without leaving the 20th century
of California. This city -owned park is widely
recognized as one of the best authentic examples
of the traditional Japanese garden outside of
Japan.
Seventy years ago Isabel Stine (Mrs. Charles
Oliver Stine) was captivated by Japanese
architecture after a six- months vacation in
Japan. When she returned to San Francisco, she
was inspired to build an estate in true Nipponese
tradition high on a hilltop above Saratoga with
magnificent scenery and splendid views of the
gardens and orchards that once carpeted the
valley.
Purchasing over 16 acres in 1917, she built a
cluster of buildings in Japanese tradition
fashioned by imported expert Japanese artisans.
'The upper house, or moon viewing house, was
designed and built by Tsunematsu Shintani,
native master craftsman, who fashioned the
house in cabinet maker style without using nails
or adhesives. He also used a carbonization
technique where boards were charred and then
scrubbed with wire brushes leaving uneven
patterns on the wood. This not only preserved the
exterior but gave the house an aged appearance.
To complement the buildings an exquisite
garden, elegant in its simplicity and symbolism
was designed and landscaped by Naoharu
Aihara, a former court gardener to the Emperor
of Japan. An authentic tea house, irreplaceable
dwarf trees and shrubs were brought to the site
from the 1915 Panama Pacific International
Exposition.
Upon completion in 1918, Mrs. Stine named
her estate Hakone, after the celebrated mountain
and hot springs resort in the Fuji - Hakone
National Park in southeast Honshu. Like its
famous counterpart, this location was similar in
scenery and in the fact that the Congress Springs
area was once a,fashionable mineral spa (now
-closed to the public and owned by the San Jose
.Water Company).
Once completed; Hakone was used as a
,weekend vacation retreat.
Widowed in 1921, Mrs. Stine married Francis
W. Leis in 1924 with the ceremony performed at
Hakone.
As one of the founders of the San Francisco
Opera Association and patron of the arts, she
continued to entertain members of the San
Francisco diplomatic corp and literary and
.musical figures.
'When the famed annual Saratoga Blossom
'Festival was held in 1926 she arranged for the
San Francisco Symphony Orchestra and its
world- renowned • conductor, Alfred Hertz, to
present an outdoor concert for the Festival
Program. Later the Symphony members were her
luncheon guests.
.In 1932 Isabel Stine Leis sold Hakone for
$12,000 to Major Charles Lee Tilden of Tilden ,
Park fame in Berkeley who continued to make
changes and improvements. The Til dens secured
the services of James Sasaki, who further
transformed the gardens into a showplace of
Nipponese artistry.
.After Major Tilden passed away in 1950 the
property remained in the Tilden family for
another ten years until it was sold to six couples
in 1960 for $96,500. They used the grounds as a
weekend home and for future investment. By
1.966 subdivision and commercialism threatened
the site. Spurred into action, Saratoga's mayor,
William E. Glennon and the City Council,
inspected the property and approved its
-acquisition as a city park. It was purchased on
May 4, 1966, for $145,000 and the name Gardens
was added to Hakone.
Meanwhile, Saratoga was fortunate in
obtaining the services of Tanso Ishihara, who
received his training as a landscape gardnerin
Kyoto, Japan. He brought his professional
expertise and dedication to Hakone'with further
improvements mniataining the gardens in
authentic Japanese manner.
began nba k in 1i1974 and fwere completed by 1981
including a complete restoration of the main
house, new roof on the upper house and other
necessary repairs.
ry)
worRang an a Saratoga laundry and engaged him to pia'ut the shojis. When completed the commission,
�ane
comp Japanese
artist
returned to his washtubs and anonymity.
Jhe untimely death of Mr. Ishihara in May of
10 left a void but his understudyack
Tomlinson, as appointed Japanese Garden
Specialist by G
w Saratoga's Park Department and+k
he is perpetuating the traditions of true Japaneset
Garden Art established by his predecessors.
Recently a three- centuries -old carved .500.1
pound granite stone ceremonial lantern from
Japan has joined the collection at Hakone I
Gardens, a gift from its Japanese sister city,
Muko -shi. It was donated by Takashi Tamiaki, a
prominent landscape firm executive. When he
learned that the Hakone Gardens tea room
entrance had an authentic ritual wash basin but L
the ceremonial lantern that traditionally
complements it was missing, he gave the lantern 1
from his private garden. Because it was a city -to-
city donation, the stone lantern was shipped
duty -free.
Camellia lovers'cairrejoice with the collection
of over 300 camellia plants on the hill above the t
upper house and to the left of the waterfalls.
Paths with benches for meditation wind
throughout the camellia garden. The plants
came from the estate of the late Richard R.
Roggia, a long -time Saratoga resident, in 1974.
Soon the wisteria will be in full bloom 1
throughout the garden framing several viewing
platforms. One of the spectacular sights is the A
wisteria arbor to the right of the upper house J.
whose gnarled vines bearing soft purple and I
white blossoms create one of the garden's i
loveliest walkways in the spring. Above the o
arbor are the traditional cherry trees best viewed li
during the early spring months.
Photo courtesy of Frances L. Fox.
Government
•
I .oun atic
•
ans lmprovemen
for Saratoga Bard(
And if bamboo is your preference, there is a
magnificent display growing in the bamboo
grove with many species and sizes of bamboo. It
is also used as landscape accents throughout the
garden, on the fences and interior decor.
Through the efforts of the City of Saratoga, the
local Japanese Bamboo Society, a non - profit
organization and its parent organization in
Japan, Hakone Gardens will some day be the
largest bamboo research center in the country
headed by world- renowned experts.
Currently a $2 million development and
expansion plan by the Hakone Foundation is
underway for an authentic Shrine, Bamboo
Institute, cultural exchange buildings, lecture
and demonstration area, and two guest rooms for
Japanese artists in residence.
A refreshment area, sheltered by bamboo, is
provided with tables and benches adjacent to the
Zen Mon, or Main Gate, as you enter the park.
For Japanese Garden enthusiasts, nature
lovers and visitors, this historic community
treasure, Hakone Gardens, is a rewarding
experience, especially during the early spring
months, which is the happiest flower viewing
season both here and in Japan.
A large sign, Hakone Saratoga Japanese
Garden, marks the entrance at 21,000 Congress
Springs Road, around the bend from Big Basin
Way. The park is open daily from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday and from 11 a.m. to 5
p. in. ,Saturday and Sunday and closed on all
legal holidays.
h'ra.nc•es L. Flax
y Jose Stell
ercury News Staff Writer
The foundation created in
ecember to operate Saratoga's
uthentic Japanese garden has
.en recognized by the Internal
evenue Service as an "exempt
rganization," trustee William
Lennon has announced. , ,
Glennon, an attorney and for -
er Saratoga mayor, said the Hak-
ne Foundation now is in place
ad.in a position to accept tax -de-
uetible donations" from people
A organizations wishing to sup -
ort the propoged upgrading of
akone Garden.
Master plan
�: Glennon and fellow trustee
Henry Yamate told the Saratoga
City Council that exemption status
City the Internal Revenue Code is
the starting point of a long- range
master plan for enhancing' the
15Vz -acre city park.
Already regarded as being
among the most authentic Japa-
nese gardens in the-United States,
I Hakone is in store for further
1 development, faithfully adhering
to traditional Japanese architec-
tural and horticultural lines.
The cost of the planned
improvements is estimated at $1.5
million to $2 million, Glennon said.
Fund campaign
He added that a concerted fund
campaign will be mounted. The
sources are the Saratoga commu-
nity at large, Japan -based firms
doing business in Northern Califor-
nia, and other foundations. I
"We certainly don't expect+tto
achieve that goal through random
$50 and $100 donations," he said.
The trustees have met twice
since December with Kiyoshi
Yasui, a director of the landscape
architectural firm of Yasuimoku
Komuten Co. Ltd., to develop the
master plan. Yasui pledged the
services of his firm to oversee
adherence to authenticity in plan-
ning Hakone Garden.
Proposed. features
Already regar
as being amoi
the most ,.
authentic
Japanese garc
in the United
States, Hakoi
will gain furtl
development.
lists in residence to pra
demonstrate centurie:
forms'
The master plan also
established groves of vai
species of bamboo, the fi
of what is intended to be
nationally renowned bam
agation center. Hakonf
already claims one of the
bamboo greenhouses in t
States.
If 'the plan is follow
predicted that the, Hako.
gation center will surpa!
ers, even those in Japan.
Further plans
Further plans call for
ing the existing teahous
assembly area to acco'.
larger groups. A replica c
shrine also is to be built
disassembled, shipped to
and reconstructed at Hal
den.
Glennon said he and
soon will retain a public
firm to prepare a broth
ing Hakone Garden as
and as 'it will appear
master plan is fulfilled. H
brochure will be used to
potential patrons to cont
Glennon said he is lc
about,20 professional s:
living in Saratoga to vo
Commemorating the
Saratoga Barn
circa 1890 -2009
Sam Cloud Hay and Feed
Warehouse circa 1970
i
J III
. I
1,
Sam Cloud in Front of Store
..�' po
Sam Cloud Home & Store
Sam Cloud Home
�I 1
❑ Ze�I :-I iai> >R;__,
B Q 4r-38 615110130 � 011 1' . �
Photos courtesy of the Saratoga
Historical Foundation