cowell lime works hay barn · santa cruz,to . haul lime, passengers, and merchandise between santa...

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDING SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS

WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA OF THE COWELL LIME WORKS HISTORIC DISTRICT

COOPERAGE

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDING SURVEY

COWELL LIME WORKS HISTORIC DISTRICT Cooperage

Location: The Cooperage is located within the Cowell Lime Works Historic District, which encompasses approximately 30 acres on the campus of the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC) near its main entrance at Coolidge Drive in Santa Cruz, California. The Cooperage is located on the west side of Coolidge Drive just north of the Cook House.

USGS Santa Cruz Quadrangle 7.5 minute, 1994 UTM Coordinates: 10.584150.4093044 Present Owner / Occupant: University of California, Santa Cruz

1156 High Street Santa Cruz, California 95064

Present Use: None Significance: The Cooperage is a contributor to the Cowell Lime Works Historic

District, which is listed in the National Register of Historic Places with a period of significance from 1853 to 1920. The historic district is significant under Criterion A at the local level for its importance within the context of quarrying and manufacturing of lime in Santa Cruz County, California. Located immediately adjacent the lime kilns, the Cooperage housed barrel making and lime loading functions that were essential operations of lime production at the site.

Historians: Christopher McMorris, Partner / Architectural Historian Chandra Miller, Research Assistant JRP Historical Consulting, LLC 2850 Spafford Street Davis, California 95618 June 2012 Project Information: The UCSC Physical Planning & Construction Division and Friends of the

Cowell Lime Works are planning a project to stabilize and preserve the Cooperage. This report was prepared as part of documentation to facilitate the project and was funded by Friends of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District and the Community Foundation. William B. Dewey prepared the photographic images for this report.


(Page 2)

Part I. Historical Information

A. Physical History:

1. Date of Erection: 1869.1

2. Architect: Not known.

3. Original and subsequent owners, occupants, uses: The first Cooperage built at the site was constructed between 1853 and 1854 by business partners Isaac E. Davis and Albion P. Jordan. A fire destroyed the initial Cooperage in 1869 and it was rebuilt shortly after under the ownership of Isaac E. Davis and Henry Cowell.2 The Cooperage was where wooden barrels were assembled. These barrels were used to pack the processed quicklime from adjacent kilns. The building also stored extra barrels. The Cooperage operated as part of the lime works into the 1920s and was used for storage into the 1950s after lime operations had ceased at the site. UCSC acquired the property on which this building sits in 1961 and has used the building for storage. Coopers tools, barrels, and other items related to the trade were located inside and around the Cooperage while under the ownership of UCSC.3

4. Original plans and construction: There are no known original plans for the Cooperage. The original Cooperage was in the same location as the current building and was constructed on wood posts raising the building off the ground level. The 1850s Cooperage was also a long, rectangular plan, gable roof building, but the west half of the roof line was taller than the eastern half.4 The Cooperage built after the 1869 fire altered the layout of the south wall from the original design by including a sliding door on the western half of the building while the eastern half included only sliding window openings.

1 Architectural Resources Group, “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Cowell Lime Works Historic District, Santa Cruz County, California,” (March 2007), section 7, 17; “Destructive Fire,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, March 6, 1869. 2 Frank A. Perry, Robert W. Piwarzyk, Michael D. Luther, Alverda Orlando, Allan Molho, and Sierra L. Perry, Lime Kiln Legacies: The History of the Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County (Santa Cruz, California: Museum of Art & History, 2007), 64; “Destructive Fire,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, March 6, 1869. 3 Joseph M. Conde and James L. Lorenzana, Last Years of the Cowell Ranch: An Interview Conducted by Frank Perry (Santa Cruz: Friend of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District, 2012), 12; Sheridan F. Warrick, ed., The Natural History of the UC Santa Cruz Campus (University of California, Santa Cruz: 1982), 23; University of California Real Property Report as of January 4, 2012, http://www.ucop.edu/facil/resg/documents/real_property_portfolio.pdf, page 100 (accessed June 1, 2012). 4 Laurence & Houseworth, “Davis & Cowell’s Lime Works, Santa Cruz,” 1866, Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Online Catalog, http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3a28412 (accessed November 7, 2011).


(Page 3)

5. Alteration and additions: Following the construction of the Cooperage in 1869, additional diagonal bracing was added to the north interior wall on the western end. A secondary door was installed on the north wall east of the bracing that covered the original door. In the mid-1960s the eastern half of the Cooperage was removed in stages for the construction of Coolidge Drive. The exposed east end was boarded over and was later re-sided with plywood in March 1998.5 Three cupolas on the roof ridge have been removed, likely when the roof was replaced before UCSC took ownership of the property. In the early 1950s the roof of the Cooperage collapsed and was replaced with the metal roof. In this period, the east end under the Cooperage was enclosed and used as a garage.6

B. Historical Context:7

1. The Davis & Jordan Period (1853 to 1865)

Isaac E. Davis and Albion P. Jordan first began producing lime near Palo Alto in Santa Clara County in 1851. In 1853 they moved their operation to Santa Cruz County to the present-day site of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District, also referred to as the Bay Street Kilns.8 This site was favorable for lime production because it had high quality limestone, abundant redwood to fuel the kilns (which converted the limestone into lime), and proximity to a sheltered landing where the lime could be loaded onto ships bound for San Francisco and other ports along the California coast. Although there were other smaller lime companies in Santa Cruz County in the 1850s, Davis and Jordan were the first to manufacture lime on a large scale, and they rapidly established themselves as the largest lime producer in the county and in the state, with San Francisco as their primary market. In 1854, for example, the firm produced 35,000 of the 50,000 barrels of lime manufactured in Santa Cruz County.9 From the beginning, Davis and Jordan had a largely self-sufficient operation and site layout. The company cut its own wood for fuel and barrel making, operated a ranch, raised cattle, and had its own ox teams for pulling wagons of rock, cordwood, and

5 Francine Tyler, “Cooperage repairs set stage for future renovation plans,” UC Santa Cruz Currents Vol. 3, No. 29 (March 22-28, 1999), http://www1.ucsc.edu/oncampus/currents/97-98/03-23/cooperage.htm (accessed November 7, 2011). 6 Conde and Lorenzana, Last Years of the Cowell Ranch, 47. 7 The historical narrative is based on, and excerpted from, Architectural Resources Group, “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Cowell Lime Works Historic District, Santa Cruz County, California,” (March 2007). The narrative also includes additional historical information. Citations from the NRHP nomination form are in the footnotes and references are in Part III. 8 Frank A. Perry, Robert W. Piwarzyk, Michael D. Luther, Alverda Orlando, Allan Molho, and Sierra L. Perry, Lime Kiln Legacies: The History of the Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County (Santa Cruz, California: Museum of Art & History, 2007), 64. 9 “The Lime Trade of Santa Cruz,” Monterey Sentinel, June 23, 1855; Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 64; “Lime Business,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 26, 1856.


(Page 4)

lime.10 In 1854 the company acquired the Anthony-Penfield wharf facilities, which had been merely a chute used for loading potatoes onto schooners. Davis and Jordan expanded the site with a 450’ long wharf and later built a new ship, the Santa Cruz, to haul lime, passengers, and merchandise between Santa Cruz and San Francisco.11 As their business expanded, Davis and Jordan acquired a large part of Rancho Rincon, north of the lime works located on the UCSC campus, which provided thousands of acres of forest for fuel, additional limestone outcrops, and a sawmill. The following year, in 1860, they built a tramway to bring limestone and cordwood from the Rancho Rincon property down to the lime works kilns (built in the 1850s-1860s), and in 1861 they cut a road to a sawmill at Rincon. The tramway, which was never mechanized, consisted of a gravity-powered rail line with oxen to pull the ore cars back up the slope. Davis and Jordan built the kilns and adjacent Cooperage at the mouth of Jordan Gulch.12

The Cooperage’s location in the center of the industrial complex illustrates its importance. The quarries were located at a higher elevation, and wagon loads of limestone were gravity assisted down to the kilns next to the Cooperage. The ore cars on the tramway led directly to the top-loading kilns where they were unloaded. After several days of firing and cooling, the finished product, quicklime, was loaded into barrels produced in the Cooperage. The proximity of the Cooperage to the kilns assisted in the quick loading process of quicklime into the barrels to protect the integrity of the finished product. Ox-drawn wagons were loaded with the barrels of lime and were sent downhill to the company-owned wharf and warehouse facilities at the Monterey Bay front terminus of Bay Street.13

2. The Davis & Cowell Period (1865 to 1888)

In July 1865, Jordan sold his half interest in the company to Henry Cowell of San Francisco.14 Cowell, a native of Wrentham, Massachusetts, had traveled to California in 1849 during the Gold Rush. Instead of finding success in the goldfields, Cowell established a thriving warehouse and drayage (hauling) business that expanded quickly to include routes to the gold country, and he invested in various endeavors, including the Davis and Jordan lime company. Cowell relocated his family to Santa Cruz in 1865, taking up residence in the house Jordan constructed on the site in 1864. The

10 William H. Brewer, Up and Down California in 1860-1864 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1930), 153. 11 Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 64 12 “Our Town,” Pacific Sentinel, February 21, 1861; Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 64. 13 Margaret Koch, Santa Cruz County: Parade of the Past (Fresno: Valley Publishers, 1973), 37, 55. 14 Santa Cruz County Deeds, “Albion P. Jordan and Mary E. Jordan to Henry Cowell, 1 July 1865,” Volume 11, 535 and 537, Santa Cruz County Recorder’s Office.


(Page 5)

entire Cowell family lived at the site until 1879, when they moved back to San Francisco, returning to Santa Cruz only periodically thereafter.15 Cowell’s involvement in Davis and Jordan’s lime business dated back to the 1850s when he owned an interest in one of the ships used to ship the lime to San Francisco. Cowell also loaned Davis and Jordan considerable capital. Throughout its years of operation, the firm of Davis and Cowell was the largest lime manufacturer in Santa Cruz County. By 1868 Davis and Cowell were exporting a thousand barrels of lime each week, which required continuous kiln burns to keep pace with the production output.16 During a midnight kiln burn in March 1869, an unattended fire engulfed the adjacent Cooperage including all of its tools, three thousand barrels, seven wagons, and the wood structures covering the kiln arches.17 With the high volume of lime produced at the kilns at this time, it is assumed the current Cooperage was constructed as a replacement for the destroyed structure almost immediately after the fire.

3. The Cowell Period (1889 to 1920)

Isaac Davis died in 1888 and the following year Cowell acquired full ownership of the company, renaming it Henry Cowell & Company. In 1898 the name was changed again to the Henry Cowell Lime and Cement Company. During this period Cowell employed 175 men in his Santa Cruz quarrying and lime-making operations and shipped an average of fifty tons of freight per day from the company wharf, which was also used for general merchandise.18 Henry Cowell dominated the masonry supply business in Northern California during the late 1800s and was a large land owner, owning property in twenty-three counties in California when he died in 1903. Besides businesses in construction materials such as lime manufacturing and a bituminous rock quarry, he owned dairies, raised goats and beef cattle, and traded in seal pelts. He was also involved in banking, real estate, a hotel, railroads, shipping, and warehousing. After Henry Cowell’s death, the Henry Cowell Lime and Cement Company passed to his children, and his son Ernest managed

15 Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 116. 16 Warrick, ed., The Natural History of the UC Santa Cruz Campus, 17. 17 “Destructive Fire,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, March 6, 1869. 18 Articles of Incorporation, Henry Cowell Lime and Cement Company, 21 December 1898, Corporation no. 297, Collection of the Museum of Art & History, Santa Cruz.


(Page 6)

the company on behalf of his surviving siblings. Ernest died in 1911 and his brother Samuel Henry Cowell took over the family business.19 Shipment of lime by sea ceased around 1908, and during the last years of operation, lime from the kilns was shipped exclusively from the Southern Pacific Railroad station at Rincon. The kilns located within what is now the Cowell Lime Works Historic District (the Bay Street kilns or lower kilns) continued to operate until about 1920 according to the State Mining Bureau. S.H. Cowell had three new pot kilns added to the Rincon site in 1915, and the Bay Street kilns were apparently abandoned. Barrel making was also transferred to Rincon at that time.20 Oral histories note that the kilns and Cooperage operated well into the 1920s; however, all lime kiln burning at the Bay Street kilns seems to have ceased by 1946.21

4. Barrel Production and Lime Shipping

Barrel production was an essential element of the lime business, as barrels were an effective means of packing quicklime and shipping it to market. Quicklime degrades with exposure to moisture and barrels were used as a reliable means of transporting the material because they were largely water and air tight, which helped preserve the finished product. Barrels were also sturdy and could be handled in standard “break bulk” cargo handling methods of the period. Long distance shipments of quicklime, or those made by water, were preferably packed in wood barrels for safe delivery of the product, rather than the paper bags more commonly used by the early 1900s.22 Quicklime was utilized in the construction industry for a number of applications including mixing it with water and sand to make mortar for laying brick and stone masonry, plastering walls, added to cement mixtures for plasticity, used in exterior stucco finishes.23

19 MacDougall, The Gold Rush and the Early Years (1850-1865), (S.H. Cowell Foundation, 1989), under “Henry Cowell and His Family (1819-1955),” http://scplweb.santacruzpl.org/history/people/cowell3.shtml (accessed March 2, 2011). 20 Henry G. Hubbard, “Mines and Mineral Resources of Santa Cruz County,” California Journal of Mines and Geology, January 1943, 43-44; “Lime Kilns Will be Centered at Rincon,” Mountain Echo, April 10, 1915, 4. 21 California State Mining Bureau, Report XVII of the State Mineralogist: Mining in California During 1920, January 1921, 238; Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies: The History of the Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County, 185; Adalbert Wolff, “The Cowell Ranch, 1915,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciaono, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, November 20, 1971, 15; Frank Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 4-6; City of Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz City [aerial photograph]. 1:12,000. Photo B11. Long Beach, CA, 1931. 22 “Cement and Lime Barrels,” The Barrel and Box (July 1905): 63. There does not appear to be any evidence that the Cowell Lime Works switched to packing quicklime from barrels into bags. 23 John Butler Johnson, “Limes and Plasters,” in Johnson’s Materials of Construction (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1818), 361-365.


(Page 7)

At the Cowell Lime Works, limestone was transported via tramway from the quarries to the kilns at the center of the facility. The limestone was then burned in the kilns over four to five days to convert it into quicklime, where after lumps of quicklime were shoveled out of the kiln arches facing the Cooperage and packed directly into the wooden barrels made inexpensively on site from the abundant supply of redwood available on company property. The location of the Cooperage directly adjacent to the kilns was essential for the rapid and efficient transfer of quicklime to barrels. Properly packing and storing quicklime was an important step because of the material’s inherent attribute to rapidly deteriorate if not kept dry until needed. The firing process of limestone removes carbon dioxide from the material. In damp climates coastal climates, such as Santa Cruz, when quicklime is exposed to air it soon reabsorbs moisture and carbon dioxide. To preserve the quality of the finished product, the quicklime needed to be quickly packed into barrels. Also, quicklime is highly caustic and when water is applied it quickly reacts by releasing heat, so it was essential that the product be preserved from any exposure to moisture and the barrels be kept in a dry place until they were shipped. Thus it was critical that the Cooperage be available in close proximity to the kilns for packing and storage.24 When the quicklime was ready to pack, barrels were thrown from the Cooperage down to ground level at the kiln arches. The full barrels, which weighed as much as 200 to 250 pounds, were stored underneath the Cooperage until they could be loaded onto wagons for shipment.25 A 1915 federal law later regulated the size of lime barrels as large (280 pounds) and small (180 pounds), with small barrels holding 150 pounds of lime.26 As noted, the wagons hauled the full barrels down to the company wharf and warehouse at the terminus of Bay Street, where they were loaded onto company-owned ships and then delivered to ports up and down the West Coast. By 1896, the Henry Cowell and Company was shipping an average of fifty tons a freight a day from the Santa Cruz Wharf. In later years, with the rise of the railroad, wagon loads of barrels were sent to the railroad station at Rincon for shipment and ocean shipment had been discontinued.27

24 Johnson, “Limes and Plasters,” in Johnson’s Materials of Construction, 361; Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 51-53. 25 Adalbert Wolff, “The Cowell Ranch, 1915,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, November 20, 1971, 11, 14; William H. Brewer, Up and Down California in 1860-1864 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1930), 153; Fred Wagner, “Blacksmithing and Life in the Santa Cruz Area, 1890-1930,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, December 8, 1965, 335-337. 26 Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 53. 27 Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 72; Wolff, “The Cowell Ranch, 1915,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, November 20, 1971, 14-15.


(Page 8)

In addition to constructing new barrels in the Cooperage, the coopers (barrel makers) also repaired and reconditioned empty barrels returned to the lime works for reuse. This appears to have been the practice throughout the Cooperage’s active use. A photograph dated circa 1866 shows a large pile of what appears to be used barrels east of the Cooperage that were presumably sent back for reuse. In later years full barrels sent to San Francisco were returned empty to Santa Cruz by ships and later via railroad. In the early 1900s, the Cowell company paid twenty to thirty cents for the return of barrels for reuse.28 Some returned barrels required reassembly, particularly if they had been hastily made with green wood, to fill a large order for example, and had since cured and shrank. Returned barrels were often dissembled and put back together at the Cooperage before being reused.29 Presumably, this was less costly that constructing only new barrels. Barrel production at the Cooperage was largely a self-sufficient operation. Redwood lumber for the barrel components – staves and heads – was milled with company equipment and then sent to the Cooperage for assembly. Coopers, paid on a piecework basis by the barrel, could make up to 80 barrels a day.30 To make a barrel, sawed staves were placed vertically in a circular frame and then the hoops were worked over the exterior. 31 Barrels located at the Cooperage site have metal hoops on the exterior and hazel hoops on the inside at each end, which supported the barrel heads.32 By the 1920s, the hazel hoops had been replaced with metal, but hazel boughs were still used in the interior of the barrel.33 Hazel boughs were supposedly soaked in the concrete trough that is located approximately 20 feet south at the west end of the Cooperage.34 The barrel heads were cut at a steam-powered mill that was located next to the paymaster’s house, now located east of Coolidge Drive at the campus entrance (see Location Map). This mill could produce up to five to seven thousand barrel heads in a day.35

28 George H. Cardiff, “Santa Cruz and the Cowell Ranch, 1890-1964,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, January 7, 1965, 143; Frank Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 143; Perry, et al., Lime Kiln Legacies, 52. 29 Cardiff, “Santa Cruz and the Cowell Ranch, 1890-1964,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, January 7, 1965, 143; Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 4. 30 Kenneth Jensen, The Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County,, Master’s thesis, San Jose State University, 1976, 6-8. 31 Jensen, The Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County, 6, 8. 32 Sally Morgan, written communication with Christopher McMorris, JRP, February 16, 2012. 33 Cardiff, “Santa Cruz and the Cowell Ranch, 1890-1964,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, January 7, 1965, 141-144; Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 4. 34 Frank Perry, written communication, March 12, 2012. 35 Conde and Lorenzana, Last Years of the Cowell Ranch, 13; Warrick, ed., The Natural History of the UC Santa Cruz Campus, 22.

http://catalog.santacruzpl.org/opac/en-US/skin/default/xml/rresult.xml?rt=keyword&tp=keyword&t=Lime+Industry+Santa+Cruz+County+jensen



(Page 9)

Even into the 1920s, when the kilns next to the Cooperage were supposedly no longer used and the Rincon kilns took over the majority of the lime production, Cowell employed at least one cooper at the ranch site (now Cowell Lime Works Historic District) for production of barrels to be used at Rincon. During the winter months employees concentrated on barrel building, and if there was a need to fill a large order, employees with barrel making experience were called together in a barrel making contest, in which the winner received a bonus.36 The ethnic make-up of the men who worked as coopers at the Cowell site evolved over the years. In 1860, seven coopers lived in the Santa Cruz township and they were from Scotland, Maine, England, and Ireland. It is not known how many of these coopers worked for Cowell and Davis. In 1870 records show that three coopers, Richard Leary from Massachusetts, Henry Howell from Maine, and John Glass from New York, worked at the “Davis & Cowell’s Lower Lime Kiln” (that is, the cooperage at the Bay Street kilns).37 In 1900 three coopers from Denmark, Germany, and Ireland were employed at the “Cowell Lime Kilns.” The men working as lime burners at this time were primarily of Italian and Portuguese decent. Before the use of metal hoops at the Cooperage, Italian laborers are also known to have collected the hazel boughs from the surrounding area to make barrel hoops.38 Into the twentieth century Portuguese laborers made up the majority of the work force at the Cowell kilns and Cooperage.39 The end of operations at the Cooperage occurred sometime during or after the 1920s, when barrel making was last known to have occurred. By 1946 all kiln burning had ceased on Cowell property and the Cowell Lime Works site and adjacent lands were used exclusively for cattle ranching. By the 1960s when the university acquired the property, the Cooperage was used only for storage and was in poor condition.40

36 Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 4. 37 United State Census Bureau, 1870, Santa Cruz Township, San Bernardino County. 38 Cardiff, “Santa Cruz and the Cowell Ranch, 1890-1964,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, January 7, 1965, 142; “Notes of a Trip of the S.F.B.D. Agricultural Visiting Committee,” Daily Alta California, August 29, 1860. 39 United State Census Bureau, 1900, Santa Cruz Township, San Bernardino County; Frank Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 3-4; Fred Wagner, “Blacksmithing and Life in the Santa Cruz Area, 1890-1930,” oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, December 8, 1965, 334. 40 Perry, “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family,” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 3-4; Warrick, ed., The Natural History of the UC Santa Cruz Campus, 28; Photograph of Cooperage, August 1964. Personal collection of Dawn Johnson.


(Page 10)

Part II. Architectural Information A. General Statement:

1. Architectural character: The Cooperage is a vernacular timber-framed rectangular plan

structure with a design similar to New England covered bridges utilizing trusses along the north and south walls. Horizontal members spanning the width of the cooperage are joined by mortise-and-tenon into vertical posts. This truss design allowed for the floor to be supported by a series of stone piers, much like a covered bridge, leaving the span underneath open for storage. The construction of the building demonstrates skill and craftsmanship of timber-frame construction utilizing mortise-and-tenon joints, but the structure appears to have been designed by a person with a lack of engineering knowledge. Multiple attempts to strength the sagging structure after its construction are apparent throughout the building. The original structure measured twice as long, but the eastern section was removed in the mid-1960s to accommodate the widening of Coolidge Drive.

2. Condition of fabric: Fair to poor.

B. Description of Exterior:41 1. Overall dimensions: Existing structures measures approximately 29’ wide x 82’ long x

30’ tall. Historic photographs show that the original structure was nearly twice as long as its present length.

2. Foundations: The primary supports are total of six 8’ tall limestone rubble piers with clay and lime mortar below the north and south walls. The west end of the building sits on an 8’ tall limestone abutment built into the hillside that extends northward and gains in height in the space between the Cooperage and the kilns. A connecting masonry wall at the southwest corner is built at grade into the hillside and increases in height to 8’ tall. A wide limestone pier at the southeast corner was the main support of the building when it was twice the length. A large round redwood post was installed next to the easternmost limestone pier on the south side for additional support some time after the construction of the Cooperage. It is present in a photograph from 1911.42 On the north side, the westernmost limestone pier has been removed and replaced with modern wood posts.

3. Walls: 1” x 8” redwood boards, 1” x 4” battens on the north and south walls. The west

end has vertical wood siding and the east end (where the building was truncated in the 41 Interior and exterior dimensions and general description of the Cooperage are extracted from Randolph Langenbach and John McKelvey, Cowell Ranch Cooperage, University of California, Santa Cruz: Historic Structure Report, 1988. 42 Cowell Lime Works, 1911.” Special Collections, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz.


(Page 11)

1960s) is closed with modern plywood sheets. Remnant whitewashing is visible under the roof eaves on south wall while the north wall is still partially covered in whitewash. Wood supports for the now missing wood gutters are still in place. The supports originally measured approximately 1” x 8” with a cut notch for the gutter, but are in various stages of deterioration. The v-shaped wood gutters would have rested in the cut notch. A similar gutter design can be seen on the Hay Barn located north of the Cooperage. Hanging off the base of the north side of the building there is also a small remnant of a metal roof that once covered the space between the Cooperage and kilns. Exterior horizontal wood board bracing has been nailed to the base of the north and south walls. This was added in 2008 at the same time the cribbing was installed.43 A variety of square, cut, and contemporary wire nails and screws are found throughout the exterior of the walls illustrating repair and replacement work conducted over time, especially on the south wall.

4. Structural system, framing: The frame of the Cooperage was constructed of Douglas fir heavy timber with mortise-and-tenon joinery at principal joints, which is also apparent in the circa 1860s Hay Barn located north of the Cooperage. The use of a truss type design with 10” x 10” timber along the north and south walls allowed the interior of the Cooperage to be clear of any supports or bents. The truss design is not a true truss because its lacks diagonal supports in the center span. This proved to be an inadequate design, as is indicated by the supplemental supports added to the structure over time. The west half of the north wall has undergone a series of retrofits to address the uneven stress applied to the structure as a result of the inadequate truss design. Four diagonal braces, each measuring 6” x 8” connect the top and bottom chords on the west half of the north wall. This bracing was installed after the Cooperage was built. These braces were installed without corresponding piers underneath to support them. This resulted in additional strain applied to the bottom chord and led to the failure of the bottom chord and floor system at these stress points. This is evidenced by the fact that the west end of the truss has been cut at the bottom and spliced into a replacement bottom chord. The stress on the bottom chord, coupled with deterioration of the wood from age and exposure to the elements, has cause a partial collapse of the floor and wall. On the south wall, the truss meets the bottom chord short of the easternmost stone pier, such that the bottom cord was repaired to accommodate all of the accumulated shear stress. To combat this, a redwood pier was installed adjacent to the stone pier at the southeast corner.

In addition to the wood structure system, two vertical iron rods tie the top and bottom chords of the truss on the north and south walls. Two additional vertical rods connect the angled truss beams to the bottom chord at the north wall; the south wall has one rod at the

43 Sally Morgan, written communication with Christopher McMorris, JRP, February 16, 2012.


(Page 12)

east end. Located 10’ on-center and likely part of the original construction, the rods were intended to resist deflections from differential loading. One of rods at the northwest wall was removed when secondary bracing were added. Metal ties located below the floor joist connect the north and south wall bottom chords. Inside the Cooperage, modern cable ties in X-formations across the width of the interior of the structure, tie the 6” x 8” vertical beams along the north and south walls together. These were installed in 2008, at the same time as the shoring and cribbing, to stabilize the structure and prevent collapse. Contemporary shoring and bracing are apparent throughout the underside of the building. Steel I-beams have been installed along the length and width of the building under the floor joists. Three modern cribbage supports are located along the north and south sides. Modern bracing includes six wood posts support the north side while five wood posts on concrete pads support the eastern end of the building. The bottom chord at the northwest corner has been replaced. Shims and supports of various ages and sizes are utilized throughout the foundation to stabilize the structure. The gable roof framing system does not have a center ridge beam. Eight tie beams span the width of the building and are notched into the 6” x 8” vertical wood posts that support the north and south walls. Mortise-and-tenon knee bracing connects the vertical posts to the tie beams. Some of the mortise-and-tenon knee bracing is missing and modern bracing has been attached for additional stability. The 2” x 8” rafters are notched onto the 4” x 8” top chord, which also include mortise-and-tenon connections. Nailed collar ties connect the rafters near the roof peak and 1” x 6” diagonal bracing has been nailed to the rafters. Some vertical wind bracing connecting the tie beam, collar ties, and rafters has been added.

5. Openings

a. Doorways and doors: The south wall near the western end has an approximately 48” wide board-and-batten sliding wood door on a metal track. A double-width sliding barn-type opening centrally located on the south wall appears to have been filled in. Two swinging vertical board doors were located on the north wall. Of the two, the westernmost has failed and only the lower half of the door remains, nailed to an interior truss support. The other vertical board hinged door is missing two boards. This door appears to have been added after the installation of additional interior truss supports which blocked the original doorway. These openings on the north and south sides of the Cooperage were accessed by wood staircases. The west end has an 8’ wide vertical board sliding wood door on a metal track that was installed post-1910s.44 A 1911 dated photograph indicates that there was a window opening at this

44 “Cowell Lime Works, 1911,” UCSC Special Collections, McHenry Library.


(Page 13)

end, but the sliding track is not evident in that photograph.45 The east gable end wall, a temporary wall installed after the structure was truncated in 1962, lacks openings.

b. Windows: Four sliding window openings on located on the south wall; one is located at the west end and the rest at the east half of the wall. The openings measure approximately 24” wide and have deteriorated and are non-operating. The north wall lacks windows.

6. Roof

a. Shape, Covering: Gable roof originally covered with wood shingle. Replacement

corrugated metal sheets date were installed in the early 1950s. Rafters measure 2” x 8” and are connected to the top chord and at the roof peak, which lacks a center ridge beam.

C. Description of Interior:

1. Floor plan: Presently approximately 29 wide’ x 82’ long open floor plan. Original

structure was longer.

2. Flooring: Original Douglas fir floor joists measure 3” x 14.” A major section of the eastern end was replaced with thirteen new 2” x 14” joists 16” on-center. These newer joists are attached with steel hangars. Douglas fir floor boards measure 6” x ¾.” The floor is in poor condition with areas of rot throughout and substantial sagging on the north side.

D. Site: 46

1. Historic landscape design: Situated at the center of the Cowell Lime Works complex, the Cooperage is located on the west side of Coolidge Drive across the road from Barn H and workers cabins and just north of the Cook House (see Location Map). The industrial complex of the Cowell Lime Works centered on Jordan Gulch, a steep-sided natural declivity that ran north-south, downhill through the site. A dirt roadway along the floor of the gulch extended north and northwest uphill, toward the limestone quarries and redwood forests up to a mile away that supplied raw materials for the kilns. A rail line ran along or parallel to this route with gravity-powered ore cars (assisted by horses, mules, or oxen for the return journey uphill). Southward, the wagon road ran down between the Granary and the Stone House to join High Street, the principal route into the City of Santa Cruz, at what is now the southern boundary of the Cowell Lime Works Historic

45 “Cowell Lime Works, 1911,” Special Collections, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz. 46 See Location Map Figure 2 for corresponding building numbers in the following text.


(Page 14)

District (components of which are numbered on the Location Map). A short distance east along High Street from this intersection was the entryway (#14) and drive that led to the Cowell Ranch House (#15). The drive wound uphill through a circle of cypress trees, past the house and associated carriage house, to intersect the road along Jordan Gulch near the Blacksmith Shop (#12). Uphill along the Jordan Gulch road (outside the historic district), another dirt road (Rincon Road) diverged eastward and led to other quarries and kilns. The industrial areas of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District consist of the complex of associated buildings and structures along Jordan Gulch in the stretch between the High Street intersection and the point about 1/4 mile uphill, where the road and rail line wound up the gulch toward the quarries. This stretch, historically, was the heart of the lime works complex, the site of a very extensive complex of historic buildings and structures. These were located both on the sides of the gulch, flanking the roadway, and along the more level terraces that extended east and west from the rims of the gulch. During the kilns' operations, open areas within and adjacent to the gulch near the Cooperage within the historic district were used to stockpile massive piles of redwood cordwood, which was used to fire the kilns.47 Waste from the kilns – incompletely burned limestone rock – also was piled in and along the gulch, probably filling all natural low points. The terraces extending east and west from the upper rims of the gulch were fenced and cultivated and provided grazing and fodder for the working stock and food for Cowell's workers. Historic photos indicate that most of the area around the lime works, which historically was grassland with scattered oaks, buckeyes and chaparral species, was denuded of vegetation during the time that the kilns were operating. Where the Jordan Gulch rail line first emerged from the gulch, at the northern border of the historic district, there was a scattering of support buildings, some related to the quarry operations and others to the farm and ranch activities that supported the working stock and workmen employed in Cowell's operations. In this area near the Hay Barn (#11) were located a powder house (#13) (for storage of explosives used in the quarries), a wood-frame Blacksmith Shop (#12), a smoke house, at least one worker's cabin, and probably additional barns. At greater distance (outside the historic district) were several other barns and a slaughterhouse. Downward along the wider section of the gulch, the rail line continued across the slope on an elevated rock berm, then over a trestle (#10) to the lime kilns (#7 and #8). The kilns were built against the steep west side of the gulch, where the slope provided support for the back walls and also access to top of the kilns, which were loaded from above. During some periods of kiln operations, the rail line carried cars loaded with lime rock along the top of the kilns. Extending from the base of the kilns was a paving of bituminous

47 Other kilns and a complex of quarries lie further up the gulch outside of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District.


(Page 15)

sandstone (a type of natural asphalt) extending southward and under the adjacent Cooperage (#9). A roof over the kilns extended outward toward the Cooperage, to provide a dry work area where lime produced in the kilns was shoveled into the barrels manufactured in the Cooperage. The Cooperage, a long narrow building elevated to second story height on limestone pillars, stands parallel to the face of the kilns. The Cooperage upper story, where barrels were manufactured, was accessed via a doorway in the west end, which stood against the slope of the west side of Jordan Gulch. Other doorways align the north and south sides were reached via stairs. The north side doorway may have opened to allow barrels to be dropped down to the kiln yard. The doorway could be reached by way of a roadway that ran along the slope. Under the Cooperage, the open area between the pillars provided storage for lime barrels. Illustrated in the photographs below, the kilns and Cooperage were the industrial focus of the lime works.

Down the gulch, any open areas not used for stockpiling fire wood or disposal of waste rock were devoted to support facilities. A short distance downhill from the Cooperage on the west side of the bottom of the gulch was a tightly massed complex of barns, sheds and stock pens, and the cook house (#4), where meals for Cowell's workers were prepared and served. Like the kilns, the cook house was built against the west wall of the gulch. On the rim of the gulch behind the cook house was a row of several wood frame workers’ cabins (#16) and, probably, a kitchen garden. East of the gulch, opposite the cook house and cooperage, was another row of worker's cabins (Buildings #5 and #6 and site #18) along the rim of the gulch. Behind these was an extensive complex of large stock barns, which extended over the flat part of the terrace to the north, south and east. The grasslands to the north and south of this complex were cultivated and fenced. At the eastern edge of this barn complex, and somewhat removed from the industrial and ranch activity, was the carriage house, where the owner's vehicles were kept. (Note that the carriage house and several nearby barns lack historic integrity and are not included in the historic district although they clearly area associated with the historic operations). A little further east, along a narrow drive, is the owner's / foreman's ranch house (#15), which also could be accessed by a separate landscaped drive with a formal entry gate (#14) on High Street. Back at Jordan Gulch, downslope of the kilns and cook house there were several small quarry areas, or "pocket quarries", along the east side of the gulch. The gulch broadened out as it neared High Street. Additional support buildings were situated in this wider flat, including the massive timber-framed horse barn (#3) (with one end built against the adjacent slope) and probably some corrals. To the east, the lime works road led out of the industrial area of the site through a narrow opening between the stone masonry and wood frame granary (#1) and the stone masonry paymaster's house (#2), to join High Street. In the area near these buildings, there was at least one more worker's cabin, a barrelhead mill, and probably some additional outbuildings.


(Page 16)

A short distance east along High Street was the entry gate (#14) to the drive to the Cowell ranch house (#15). This area is distinct from the industrial part of the site as a formal, residential setting. The house was built in 1864, used briefly by Albion Jordan and his family, and then taken over by the Cowell family, in 1865. These various features of the historic district were built up over time, beginning with the erection of the first kilns in the 1850s. The entire area was well built up by 1861, and both the lime works and the supporting ranch activities were in full swing. A visitor reported, in 1861, “I visited some limestone quarries and lime kilns near town. Lime is burned for the San Francisco market. All the arrangements are very fine and complete, and about five thousand barrels per month are burned. The proprietor, Mr. Jordan, was very kind and showed me around. These people own a large ranch, raise their own cattle, keep their own teams, cut their own wood, etc.”48

48 Brewer, Up and Down California in 1860-1864, 153.


(Page 17)

Part III. Sources of Information A. Primary and Unpublished Sources:

Architectural Resources Group. “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Cowell Lime Works Historic District, Santa Cruz County, California,” March 2007.

Brewer, William H. Up and Down California in 1860-1864. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1930.

Cardiff, George H. “Santa Cruz and the Cowell Ranch, 1890-1964.” Interview by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano (Santa Cruz, CA, 7 January 1965), McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz.

“Cement and Lime Barrels,” The Barrel and Box (July 1905): 63.

Conde, Joseph M. and James L. Lorenzana. Last Years of the Cowell Ranch: An Interview Conducted by Frank Perry. Santa Cruz: Friend of the Cowell Lime Works Historic District, 2012.

“From the Local Unions: No. 189, Santa Cruz, Cal.,” The Coopers’ International Journal (May 1903): 215.

Johnson, John Butler. “Lime and Plasters,” in Johnson’s Materials of Construction, 359-370. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1918

“Lime Business,” Santa Cruz Sentinel, July 26, 1856.’

“Lime Kilns Will be Centered at Rincon.” Mountain Echo, April 10, 1915, 4.

Monterey Sentinel

“Notes of a Trip of the S.F.B.D. Agricultural Visiting Committee.” Daily Alta California, August 29, 1860.

Pacific Sentinel

Photograph of Cooperage, August 1964. Private collection of Dawn Johnson.

United State Census Bureau, 1860, Santa Cruz Township, San Bernardino County.

. 1870, Santa Cruz Township, San Bernardino County.




(Page 18)

Wagner, Fred. “Blacksmithing and Life in the Santa Cruz Area, 1890-1930.” Oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciano, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, December 8, 1965.

Wolff, Adalbert. “The Cowell Ranch, 1915.” Oral history conducted by Elizabeth Spedding Calciaono, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz, November 20, 1971.

B. Secondary Sources:

Hubbard, Henry G. “Mines and Mineral Resources of Santa Cruz County.” California Journal of Mines and Geology, January 1943, 11-52.

Jensen, Kenneth. "The Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County." Unpublished Manuscript, December 1976. Special Collections, McHenry Library, University of California, Santa Cruz.

Koch, Margaret. Santa Cruz County: Parade of the Past. Valley Publishers: Fresno, 1973.

Langenbach, Richard and John McKelvey. Cowell Ranch Cooperage, University of California, Santa Cruz: Historic Structure Report, 1988.

MacDougall, Laurie. The Gold Rush and the Early Years (1850-1865). S.H. Cowell Foundation, 1989, under “The Santa Cruz Years,” http://scplweb.santacruzpl.org/history/people/cowell1.shtml (accessed March 2, 2011).

. Henry Cowell and His Family (1819-1955). S.H. Cowell Foundation, 1989, under “The Santa Cruz Years,” http://scplweb.santacruzpl.org/history/people/cowell3.shtml (accessed March 2, 2011).

Morgan, Sally. Written communication with Christopher McMorris, JRP, February 6, 2012.

Perry, Frank. “Cowell Ranch Memories: The Silva Family.” Lime Kiln Chronicles, Fall 2008, 3-5.

Perry, Frank A., Robert W. Piwarzyk, Michael D. Luther, Alverda Orlando, Allan Molho, and Sierra L. Perry. Santa Cruz, CA. The Museum of Art and History at the McPherson Center. Lime Kiln Legacies. The History of the Lime Industry in Santa Cruz County. 2007.

Tyler, Francine. “Cooperage repairs set stage for future renovation plans.” UC Santa Cruz Currents Vol. 3, No. 29 (March 22-28, 1999). http://www1.ucsc.edu/oncampus/currents/97-98/03-23/cooperage.htm (accessed November 7, 2011).



(Page 19)

Warrick, Sheridan F., ed. The Natural History of the UC Santa Cruz Campus. University of California, Santa Cruz: 1982.

C. Early Views:

City of Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz City [aerial photograph]. 1:12,000. Photo B11. Long Beach, CA, 1931. UC Santa Cruz Map Collection.

Cooperage photograph circa 1962. Special Collections, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz.

Cooperage photographs circa 1964. Dawn Johnson Personal Photograph Collection.

“Cowell Lime Works, 1911.” Special Collections, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz.

Laurence & Houseworth. “Davis & Cowell’s Lime Works, Santa Cruz,” 1866. Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Online Catalog. http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3a28412 (accessed November 7, 2011).

Santa Cruz Public Library. Local History Photograph Collection.


(Page 20)

LOCATION MAPS

Location of the Cooperage within the

Cowell Lime Works National Historic District


(Page 21)

Building Reference Numbers of the

Cowell Lime Works National Historic District.49

49 Architectural Resources Group, “National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Cowell Lime Works Historic District, Santa Cruz County, California,” March 2007,

COWELL LIME WORKS COOPERAGE (UC SANTA CRUZ) Santa Cruz County California

INDEX TO BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHS William B. Dewey, Photographer, October 2011 1 CONTEXTUAL VIEW OF COOPERAGE AND LIME KILNS, CAMERA FACING

NORTHWEST. 2 CONTEXTUAL VIEW OF COOPERAGE AND LIME KILNS, CAMERA FACING

WEST. 3 OBLIQUE VIEW SHOWING NORTH AND EAST SIDE OF COOPERAGE,

CAMERA FACING SOUTHWEST. 4 VIEW SHOWING SOUTH SIDE OF COOPERAGE, CAMERA FACING NORTH. 5 OBLIQUE VIEW SHOWING SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COOPERAGE RESTING

ON MASONRY FOOTING, CAMERA FACING NORTHEAST. 6 OBLIQUE VIEW OF WEST GABLE END SLIDING DOOR, CAMERA FACING

SOUTHEAST. 7 DETAIL VIEW SHOWING DETERIORATED NORTH SIDE OF COOPERAGE,

CAMERA FACING SOUTHWEST. 8 DETAIL VIEW SHOWING SOUTHEAST CORNER LIMESTONE PIER AND

REDWOOD SUPPORT, CAMERA FACING NORTHEAST. 9 VIEW SHOWING INTERIOR OF COOPERAGE, CAMERA FACING EAST. 10 DETAIL VIEW SHOWING INTERIOR SECONDARY TRUSS SUPPORTS AND

MODERN BRACING INSTALLED AT NORTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA FACING NORTHWEST.

INDEX TO COLOR DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHS

11 INTERIOR VIEW OF WEST END, CAMERA FACING WEST. 12 VIEW OF INTERIOR SOUTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA FACING SOUTH.


INDEX TO PHOTOGRAPHS (Page 2)

13 VIEW OF INTERIOR SOUTH SIDE MIDDLE SECTION, CAMERA FACING SOUTH.

14 VIEW OF EAST HALF OF SOUTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 15 OBLIQUE VIEW OF SOUTH SIDE INTERIOR, CAMERA FACING SOUTHWEST. 16 INTERIOR VIEW OF NORTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA FACING NORTHEAST. 17 INTERIOR VIEW OF NORTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA FACING NORTHWEST. 18 VIEW OF EAST END OF NORTH SIDE INTERIOR, CAMERA FACING

NORTHWEST. 19 INTERIOR VIEW OF NORTHEAST CORNER, CAMERA FACING NORTHEAST. 20 INTERIOR VIEW FROM EAST WALL, NOTE SAGGING FLOOR ON NORTH

SIDE, CAMERA FACING WEST. 21 NORTH SIDE INTERIOR DETAIL VIEW OF TRUSS JOINT AND METAL ROD,

CAMERA FACING NORTH. 22 DETAIL VIEW OF TRUSS JOINT AND MORTISE-AND-TENON TIE BEAM AND

VERTICAL POST JOINT, CAMERA FACING NORTHEAST. 23 DETAIL VIEW OF WOOD PEG IN TOP CHORD ABOVE VERTICAL POST AND

ORIGINAL MORTISE-AND-TENON KNEE BRACE ON NORTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING NORTH.

24 DETAIL VIEW OF TWO WINDOW OPENINGS AT EASTERNMOST END OF

SOUTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 25 DETAIL VIEW OF WINDOW OPENING AT WESTERNMOST END OF SOUTH

SIDE, CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 26 DETAIL VIEW OF ROOF SYSTEM, CAMERA FACING WEST. 27 CONTEXTUAL VIEW OF COOPERAGE, CAMERA FACING SOUTHWEST, 28 OBLIQUE VIEW OF NORTHEAST CORNER AND PIERS, CAMERA FACING

EAST.



29 VIEW OF KILNS IN RELATION TO COOPERAGE, CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 30 OBLIQUE VIEW OF SOUTH SIDE AND WEST END, CAMERA FACING

SOUTHEAST. 31 DETAIL VIEW OF GUTTER SUPPORT REMNANT ON NORTH SIDE, CAMERA

FACING SOUTHEAST. 32 DETAIL VIEW OF METAL SHED ROOF REMNANT ATTACHED TO

COOPERAGE, CAMERA FACING EAST. 33 DETAIL VIEW OF MAIN MASONRY PIER ON SOUTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING

SOUTH. 34 OBLIQUE VIEW OF MASONRY PIERS AND MODERN SHORING SUPPORTING

SOUTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING WEST. 35 DETAIL VIEW OF STONE FOOTING AT SOUTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA

FACING NORTH. 36 DETAIL VIEW OF STONE FOOTING AT SOUTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA

FACING EAST. 37 BELOW GRADE VIEW OF STONE FOOTING AT SOUTHWEST CORNER,

CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 38 BELOW GRADE VIEW OF STONE FOOTING AND FLOOR JOISTS AT

NORTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA FACING WEST. 39 VIEW OF MODERN SHORING AND MASONRY PIER SUPPORTS, CAMERA

FACING WEST. 40 DETAIL VIEW OF METAL TIE BELOW FLOOR JOISTS CONNECTING BOTTOM

CHORDS ON NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES, CAMERA FACING SOUTHEAST. 41 DETAIL VIEW OF BOLT THROUGH BOTTOM CHORD CONNECTING TO TOP

CHORD WITH METAL ROD, CAMERA FACING SOUTH. 42 DETAIL VIEW OF METAL HOOK INSTALLED IN SOUTH SIDE BOTTOM

CHORD, CAMERA FACING NORTH.



43 DETAIL VIEW OF BOTTOM CHORD AND BOLT ON NORTH SIDE, CAMERA FACING SOUTH.

44 DETAIL VIEW OF NORTH SIDE OPENING AND FAILED BOTTOM CHORD,

NOTE INSTALLED INTERIOR STUD WALL TO SUPPORT ROOF SYSTEM, CAMERA FACING SOUTH.

45 DETAIL VIEW OF WEST END SLIDING WOOD DOOR ON METAL TRACK,

CAMERA FACING SOUTHEAST. 46 DETAIL VIEW OF SOUTH SIDE SLIDING WOOD DOOR ON METAL TRACK,

CAMERA FACING NORTH. 47 DETAIL VIEW OF WINDOW OPENING AT SOUTHWEST CORNER, CAMERA

FACING NORTH. 48 DETAIL VIEW OF CENTRALLY LOCATED WINDOW OPENING ON SOUTH

SIDE, CAMERA FACING NORTH. 49 DETAIL VIEW OF WINDOW OPENING NEAR SOUTHEAST CORNER, CAMERA

FACING NORTH. 50 DETAIL VIEW OF WINDOW OPENING AT EASTERNMOST END OF THE SOUTH

SIDE, CAMERA FACING NORTH.



PHOTOGRAPHIC KEYS


SEE INDEX TO PHOTOGRAPHS FOR CAPTIONS Photograph-1


SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL (Page 1)

1866 view of the original Cooperage facing northeast.50

50 Lawrence & Houseworth, “Davis & Cowell's Lime Works, Santa Cruz,” 1866, Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. (accessed November 22, 2011) http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3a28412.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/related/?fi=name&q=Lawrence%20%26%20Houseworth



1931 aerial, Cooperage indicated with black arrow. UC Santa Cruz Map Collection.51

51 City of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz City [aerial photograph], 1:12,000. Photo B11. Long Beach, CA, 1931, UC Santa Cruz Map Collection.



Circa 1962 view of the Cooperage facing southwest.

Special Collections, McHenry Library, UC Santa Cruz.



View of Cooperage east end, circa 1964.

Dawn Johnson Personal Photograph Collection.



View of Cooperage south wall, east half, circa 1964.




View of Cooperage south wall, west half, circa 1964.




Comparative view facing east, circa 1911 and October 2011.52

52 “Cowell Lime Works, 1911,” UCSC Special Collections, McHenry Library; JRP site visit October 2011.

cowell lime works hay barn · santa cruz,to . haul lime, passengers, and merchandise between santa...

Documents