Dolores Park HRER Draft 2011-08-12

Mission Dolores Park
Historic resource evaluation

San FranciSco, caliFornia [11073]
Prepared for
San FranciSco recreation and Park dePartment
Page & Turnbull
auguSt 12, 2011
imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology
DraFt
Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision
Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1
PURP OSE OF THE PROJEC T................................................................................................................ 1 METH OD OL O G Y ................................................................................................................................ 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 2
II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS ............................................................................ 4

NA TI ONAL REGISTER OF HIST ORIC PLACES .................................................................................... 4 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HIST ORICAL RESOURCES ...................................................................... 4 SAN FRANCISC O CIT Y LANDMARKS ................................................................................................. 4 CALIFORNIA HIST ORICAL RES OURCE STA TUS C O DE ..................................................................... 5 SAN FRANCISC O ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE ................................................................................ 5 1976 DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING ARCHITEC TURAL QUALITY SURVEY ............................. 5 O THER SURVEYS ................................................................................................................................. 6
III. DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 7

O VERALL SITE ...................................................................................................................................... 7 LAND USE ............................................................................................................................................ 7 T OP O GRAPHY ..................................................................................................................................... 7 VEGETATI ON ....................................................................................................................................... 8 CIRCULATI ON ................................................................................................................................... 12 INFRASTRUC TURE ............................................................................................................................ 14 FURNISHINGS .................................................................................................................................... 17 BUILDINGS AND STRUC TURES ....................................................................................................... 19 VIEWS AND VISTAS ............................................................................................................................ 21
IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT........................................................................................ 23

MISSI ON DISTRIC T NEIGHBO RH O O D HIST OR Y ........................................................................... 23 SAN FRANCISC O PLAYGR O UND AND PARKS HIST OR Y ................................................................ 27
V. MISSION DOLORES PARK CULTURAL LANDSCAPE HISTORY...................... 36

EARLY HIST OR Y (1776 - 1859) .......................................................................................................... 36 JEWISH CEMETERIES T O MISSI ON PARK (1860 - 1904) ................................................................... 39 MISSI ON PARKS FIRST DECADE (1905 - 1915)................................................................................. 46 STREETCARS AND PLAYGR O UNDS (1916 1946).......................................................................... 61 POS T-WAR REN OVA TI ONS AND ADDITI ONS (1947-1966) ........................................................... 75 MODERN PARK USES (1967 - 2011).................................................................................................. 81
V. EVALUATION...................................................................................................... 86
August 12, 2011
Page & Turnbull, Inc.
NA TI ONAL REGISTER OF HIST ORIC PLACES .................................................................................. 86 C O N TRIBUTING FEATURES ............................................................................................................. 89 INTEGRIT Y ......................................................................................................................................... 89
VI. CONTEXT & RELATIONSHIP........................................................................... 92 VII. CEQA FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS.......... 93
A. CALIFORNIA ENVIR ONMENT QUALITY AC T (CEQA)................................................................ 93 B. CIT Y AND C OUN T Y OF SAN FRANCISC O PLANNING DEPARTMENT CEQA REVIEW PRO CEDURES FOR HIST ORIC RESOURCES .................................................................................... 94 D. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIORS STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HIST ORIC PROPERTIES ....................................................................................................................................... 95
IX. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 97 X. REFERENCES CITED............................................................................................ 98

REPOSIT ORIES ................................................................................................................................... 98 PUBLISHED WORKS .......................................................................................................................... 98 PUBLIC REC ORDS ............................................................................................................................. 99 NEWSPAPERS AND PERI ODICALS .................................................................................................. 100 UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPTS AND DRAWINGS ......................................................................... 101 INTERNET S OURCES....................................................................................................................... 102
XI. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 103

APPENDIX A: THEN AND NO W FIGURE C OMPARISON S ......................................................... 103 APPENDIX B: TIME PERIODS AND C O N TRIBUTING FEATURES MAP.......................................... 120 APPENDIX C: HIST ORIC MAPS AND AERIAL VIEWS ...................................................................... 121 APPENDIX D: C ONVENIENCE STATI ON/CLUBHOUSE DRAWINGS ........................................... 128 APPENDIX E: MUNI J-LINE TRACK AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DRAWINGS ............................... 132
August 12, 2011
I. INTRODUCTION
This Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) has been prepared at the request of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department to evaluate the potential historic significance of cultural landscape features at Mission Dolores Park (APN 3586-001). The 291,198 square foot park is located in San Franciscos Mission Dolores neighborhood (Figure 1). It encompasses a variety of passive and organized uses, including picnic areas, a sports field, tennis and basketball courts, walking paths, and a playground (currently undergoing reconstruction).
Figure 1: Location of Mission Dolores Park, Mission District, San Francisco. (Source: AND, NAVTEQ, Microsoft Corporation. Image courtesy of USGS).
PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT The proposed project at Mission Dolores Park is a rehabilitation and improvement project designed to accommodate the programmatic needs of the site as a community recreational facility. The project is in the schematic phase and will not be analyzed for CEQA compliance in this report. Ultimately, however, the proposed work at Mission Dolores Park is intended to meet the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation (Secretarys Standards) and retain the parks character-defining features and overall historic character. The purpose of this report is to identify character-defining features and evaluate the propertys eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources. This report does not include an evaluation of a proposed project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. METHODOLOGY This report follows the outline provided by the San Francisco Planning Department for Historic Resource Evaluation Reports, in combination with guidelines for cultural landscape evaluation from
August 12, 2011 -1Page & Turnbull, Inc.
A Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports: Contents, Process, and Techniques (Robert R. Page, Cathy A. Gilbert & Susan A. Dolan, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington D.C., 1998) and National Register Bulletin No. 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes (J. Timothy Keller and Genevieve P. Keller, Land and Community Associates for the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, n.d.). The report provides a physical description and historic context for Mission Dolores Park, as well as an examination of the existing historical status of the property. This material informs the identification of contributing features and evaluation of the parks potential eligibility for state and national historic registers. Page & Turnbull staff conducted a site visit in July 2011, where they recorded notes about the parks features, drew diagrams, and took digital photographs. Page & Turnbull prepared this report using research collected at various repositories, including the San Francisco Public Library; San Francisco Department of Public Works; City of San Francisco Recreation and Parks Archive; Online Archive of California; and the University of California Calisphere Photographic Collection. Other materials collected for this report were accessed via online sources, including Library of Congress Historic American Newspapers collection; San Francisco Park & Recreation Commission minutes via Internet Archive; various historic articles accessed via the San Francisco Public Librarys online databases, as well as the Google Books and News Archive features. The identification of tree species within the park is primarily based on Tree Assessment, Mission Dolores Park (N. Side), prepared by HortScience, Inc. for the San Francisco Recreation & Park Department in July 2011. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS This Historic Resource Evaluation finds that Mission Dolores Park is individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in the area of local significance as a designed historic landscape under Criterion A (Event). It was identified primarily for its association with Progressive Era ideals in park planning which led directly to the acquisition and development of numerous small neighborhood parks and playgrounds in San Francisco around the turn of the twentieth century. Several other historically significant trends are also associated with the development of the park, including the parks association with relief efforts following the 1906 Earthquake and Fire, as well as the arrival of the Mission District as a forceful entity in San Francisco politics. During the midtwentieth century, the park was also strongly identified with the evolution of the Mission District as a largely Hispanic neighborhood. In addition, this study finds that the park is eligible under Criterion C (Design/Construction) as an excellent example of San Franciscos reform or rational parks. Such parks were developed in accordance with Progressive Era and City Beautiful ideals, which dominated San Franciscos political and social landscape during the early twentieth century. The park is also significant under this criterion as an example of the work of master gardener John McLaren, Superintendant of Golden Gate Park for nearly six decades. McLaren completed the initial design of Mission Dolores Park in 1905, and was responsible for supervising the crews that landscaped the park. He also designed the convenience station (now called the clubhouse) installed in the park circa 1913, and almost certainly was consulted on the design of other park amenities. Despite the accretion of various new features and landscape plantings over the years, McLarens initial design for the park remains readily identifiable. The period of significance for Mission Dolores Park begins in 1905, the year that it was formally acquired by the City and County of San Francisco for use as a park. The period of significance ends in 1966, the year the Mexican Liberty Bell was installed in recognition of the Mission Districts prominent Hispanic identity. On the whole, Mission Dolores Park retains integrity of location,
August 12, 2011 -2-
design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association to convey its significance throughout the entire period of significance from 1905 to 1966. The following landscape characteristics were identified as crucial to defining the overall character of the designed historic landscape: land use, topography, vegetation, circulation, infrastructure, furnishings, buildings and structures, and views and vistas. These characteristics help identify and articulate the propertys historic significance, and are based upon accepted National Park Service methodology for the assessment of designed historic landscapes. Based on the information included in this study, the defining landscape characteristics for Mission Dolores Park include its open space, circulation systems, buildings and structures, landscaping, and small-scale furnishings which contribute to the overall historic character of the property. Those features that were installed during the period of significance are considered contributing features to the historic landscape.
August 12, 2011 -3-
II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS

The following section examines the national, state, and local historical ratings currently assigned to Mission Dolores Park: NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nations most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. Mission Dolores Park is not currently listed in the National Register, but it has it been previously evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District (see Other Surveys below). CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historic resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places. Mission Dolores Park is not currently listed in the California Register, but it has it been previously evaluated for eligibility for listing in the California Register as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District (see Other Surveys below). SAN FRANCISCO CITY LANDMARKS San Francisco City Landmarks are buildings, properties, structures, sites, districts and objects of special character or special historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value and are an important part of the Citys historical and architectural heritage.1 Adopted in 1967 as Article 10 of the City Planning Code, the San Francisco City Landmark program protects listed buildings from inappropriate alterations and demolitions through review by the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission. These properties are important to the citys history and help to provide significant and unique examples of the past that are irreplaceable. In addition, these landmarks help to protect the surrounding neighborhood from inappropriate development and enhance the educational and cultural dimension of the city. Mission Dolores Park is not currently designated as a San Francisco City Landmark or a Structure of Merit.
San Francisco Planning Department, Preservation Bulletin No. 9 Landmarks. (San Francisco, CA: January 2003) Page & Turnbull, Inc. -4-
August 12, 2011
CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL RESOURCE STATUS CODE Properties listed or under review by the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code (Status Code) of 1 to 7 to establish their historical significance in relation to the National Register of Historic Places or California Register of Historical Resources. These assigned Status Codes are inventoried in the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) database. Properties with a Status Code of 1 or 2 are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of 3 or 4 appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of 5 have typically been determined to be locally significant or to have contextual importance. Properties with a Status Code of 6 are not eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of 7 means that the resource has not been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation. As of the October 2010 listing of the CHRIS database, Mission Dolores Park had not been assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code. SAN FRANCISCO ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE San Francisco Architectural Heritage (Heritage) is the citys oldest not-for-profit organization dedicated to increasing awareness and preservation of San Franciscos unique architectural heritage. Heritage has completed several major architectural surveys in San Francisco, the most important of which was the 1977-1978 Downtown Survey. This survey, published as Splendid Survivors in 1978, forms the basis of San Franciscos Downtown Plan. Heritage ratings, which range from D (minor or no importance) to A (highest importance), are analogous to Categories V through I of Article 11 of the San Francisco Planning Code. In 1984, the original survey area was expanded from the Downtown to include the South of Market area in a survey called Splendid Extended. Mission Dolores Park is located outside the boundaries of the area surveyed and therefore was not given a Heritage rating as part of the Downtown Plan/Survey. 1976 DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING ARCHITECTURAL QUALITY SURVEY The 1976 Department of City Planning Architectural Quality Survey (1976 DCP Survey) is what is referred to in preservation parlance as a reconnaissance or windshield survey. The survey looked at the entire City and County of San Francisco to identify and rate architecturally significant buildings and structures on a scale of -2 (detrimental) to +5 (extraordinary). No research was performed and the potential historical significance of a resource was not considered when a rating was assigned. Buildings rated 3 or higher in the survey represent approximately the top two percent of San Franciscos building stock in terms of architectural significance. However, it should be noted here that the 1976 DCP Survey has come under increasing scrutiny over the past decade due to the fact that it has not been updated in over twenty-five years. As a result, the 1976 DCP Survey has not been officially recognized by the San Francisco Planning Department as a valid local register of historic resources for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mission Dolores Park is not listed in the 1976 DCP Survey.
August 12, 2011 -5-
OTHER SURVEYS In February 2009, Carey & Co. conducted a field survey of 183 previously undocumented parcels, including Mission Dolores Park, in the Mission Dolores neighborhood. The results of this survey were presented in the Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volumes 1 & 2, completed in November 2009. Carey & Co. found that Mission Dolores Park was eligible as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District, described as encapsulating the settlement and development of San Francisco from 1791 to 1918.2 The findings of this survey (with modifications) were adopted by the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) during a hearing held on March 17, 2010. The HPC provided further clarification on January 19, 2011 by adopting additional findings explicitly stating that Mission Dolores Park, as well as the Dolores Street Median between Market Street and 20th Street, were included as contributors to the identified historic district. As a result of these actions, the San Francisco Planning Department considers the historic district (which includes Mission Dolores Park as a contributing element) a historic resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, CA: Carey & Co., 2009), 4. Page & Turnbull, Inc. -6-
August 12, 2011
III. DESCRIPTION
OVERALL SITE Mission Dolores Park is an approximately 13.7 acre city park located on a rectangular plot of land in San Franciscos Mission Dolores neighborhood. The property encompasses 291,198 square feet and is bounded by 18th Street to the north, Dolores Street to the east, 20th Street to the south, and Church Street to the west. Two- to four-story single-family residences, flats, and apartment buildings in a variety of styles face the park on the east, south, and west. Prominent buildings located opposite the park include Mission High School located on the north side of 18th Street, as well as the Second Church of Christ Scientist and a former Lutheran church on the east side of Dolores Street. LAND USE Mission Dolores Park is used as a city park and playground. Features for passive recreation include a playground, walking paths, picnic areas, wide expanses of lawn, and a dog play area. Features for organized recreation include tennis and basketball courts at the northern end of the park, as well as a field at the northwestern end occasionally used for soccer. A pedestrian boulevard bisects the park at its center, running east-to-west along the line of 19th Street. Near the center of this boulevard is a circular roundabout, with a clubhouse building located immediately southeast. The clubhouse building includes restrooms at its base, and a portion of this building is also used by Recreation & Park employees for storage. The Municipal Railroad J-Line runs north-south through the west side of the park. It includes a prominent pedestrian bridge crossing the tracks along the line of 19th Street, as well as an abandoned MUNI stop adjacent to the tracks below the bridge. Two other active MUNI stops are located at the northwestern and southwestern corners of the park. TOPOGRAPHY The topography of Mission Dolores Park is dominated by a prominent slope from southwest to northeast. The highest point in the park is located at the southwest corner near the intersection of Church and 20th streets, while the lowest point is located near the intersection of Dolores and 18th streets. The overall slope of the park is interrupted in several areas by graded terraces and fields. This includes two terraces located at the south end of the park which wrap around and merge into a sloping hill on the southwest side of the park (Figure 2). The terracing creates a bowl toward the south end of the park which contains a playground currently under reconstruction. Three other terraces are located immediately north of the bisecting pedestrian boulevard, paralleling the boulevard and curving along the west side of the park into two tiers (Figure 3). This creates a second bowl that flattens out into a sports field. The north end of the park is generally flat, and features tennis and basketball courts that are slightly elevated above 18th Street. The MUNI J-Line tracks at the west end of the park are located in a sunken man-made viaduct. The west side of the tracks is paralleled by a paved pedestrian walkway and a vegetated slope that rises up to Church Street. On the eastern side of the tracks, the land slopes upward to meet another paved pedestrian walkway.
August 12, 2011 -7-
Figure 2. Terracing at the south end of the park parallel to 20th Street, looking west. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 3. Terracing and field at the northwest end of the park, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
VEGETATION Lawns occupy the majority of the property, interspersed with other plantings which tend to be concentrated in discrete areas. Only one tree species, the California bay, is native to the area. Southern magnolia trees (Magnolia grandiflora) are placed at regular intervals along the borders at 18th, and 20th streets (Figure 4). These magnolias are interspersed with a New Zealand Christmas tree (Metrosideros excelsa) and red-flowering gum trees (Corymbia ficifolia) on 18th Street. Dolores Street is lined with an assortment of trees, including Southern magnolias, Blackwood acacias (Acacia melanoxylon), Turkish sweetgums (Liquidambar orientalis), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Canary Island Date Palm (Phoenix canariensisis), and fig trees (Ficus carica). There is a small line of Victorian box trees (Pittosporum undulatum) and New Zealand Christmas trees south of the tennis and basketball courts at the northwest end of the park (Figure 5). A cluster of Tikoti (Alectryon excelsus) and Japanese Privet trees (Ligustrum japonicum) is located south of the northeast tennis courts. A fig tree and Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) are located north of the plaza at the east end of the pedestrian boulevard.
Figure 4. Magnolia trees on 18th Street, looking west. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 5. Row of trees north of northwest tennis and basketball courts. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 -8-
Among the prominent trees within the park are Canary Island Date Palms. Two of these palms flank the plaza, while a tall Canary Island Date Palm is located at the center of the pedestrian boulevard roundabout (Figure 6). A cluster of six Canary Island Date palms are planted northeast of this roundabout (Figure 7), while another cluster of six palms borders the west side of the clubhouse.
Figure 6. Canary Island Date Palm in the center of the pedestrian boulevard, looking west. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 7. Canary Island Date Palms on the edge of the north lawn, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Eight blackwood acacias are planted near the east end of the pedestrian bridge, and eight Victorian box trees are located north of the pedestrian boulevard nearby. The two paved picnic table areas (known as card table areas on earlier plans) southwest of the pedestrian boulevard were originally surrounded by hedges; tall olive trees (Olea europaea) now exist in the west area, which is currently occupied by storage containers. At the time of field survey in July 2011, twenty-three Guadalupe palm (Brahea edulis) trees were planted in the bowl toward the southwest end of the park, next to the playground area (Figures 8 and 9). However, grading activities associated with reconstruction of the playground have subsequently removed six of these trees. Another cluster of five Guadalupe palms flank the paved walkway toward the northwest end of the park (Figure 10). Three Mexican fan palms (Mexican fan robusta) are located south of this cluster. Four more Guadalupe palms are located at the southern edge of the north field, along with two Mexican fan palms (Figure 11).
Figure 8. Guadalupe Palms west of the playground, looking north.

August 12, 2011 -9-
Figure 9. Guadalupe Palms southwest of the playground, looking east.

(Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
(Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 10. Guadalupe Palms flanking walkway at northwest side of park, looking east. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 11. Guadalupe and Mexican Fan palms north of the pedestrian boulevard, looking east. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Three small magnolia trees are located south of the plaza at 19th and Dolores streets. A group of nine Mexican fan palms are located farther south at the east edge of the park by Dolores Street, halfway between 19th and 20th streets (Figure 12). A thick, closely planted circle of Canary Island Date Palms are situated south of the Mexican fan palms near Dolores Street (Figure 13).
August 12, 2011 - 10 -
Figure 12. Small magnolia trees with cluster of Mexican fan palms beyond, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 13. Cluster of Canary Island Date palms at southeast corner of park, view east. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
A group of California bay trees (Umbellularia californica) are located at the east side of the playground, and two clusters with five and six magnolia trees each border the north edge of the playground. Three Montezuma cypress trees (Taxodium mucronatum) are located on the north side of the curving driveway, between the playground and Dolores Street. On the west side of the park by the MUNI tracks, a cluster of three California pepper trees (Schinus molle) and three Mexican fan palms are planted along the walkway east of the MUNI tracks between 19th and 20th streets. Rosemary bushes, agapanthus bushes, rose bushes, Monterey pine, a palm tree, and anise are among the variety of plants and trees planted along the west walkway between the tracks and Church Street (Figures 14 - 16). A garden containing a variety of plants and flowers and enclosed by a low vine fence is located at the southwest corner at Church and 20th streets (Figure 17), and four avocado trees (Persea americana) are situated near the corner, immediately east of the southwest MUNI station.
Figure 14. Rose bush toward the north end of the west walkway, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 15. Various trees along the west walkway, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 - 11 -
Figure 16. Various trees and bushes toward the south end of the west walkway, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 17. Garden at the southwest corner of the park, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
CIRCULATION The most prominent circulation feature is a broad paved pedestrian boulevard (originally called the Nineteenth Street Boulevard when it was designed) that runs east-west and bisects the park into northern and southern sections. The trajectory of the pedestrian boulevard corresponds with 19th Street on either side of the park. The pedestrian boulevard features two paved walkways bordered by concrete sidewalks and gutters (Figure 18). The walkways are divided by center islands of planted grass and a circular roundabout near the clubhouse. The west end terminates in a statue of Miguel Guadalupe Hidalgo y Costilla and concrete stairs that lead to a pedestrian bridge over the MUNI tracks (Figure 19). A plaza is situated at the east end of the pedestrian boulevard, adjacent to Dolores Street. The paved plaza was built as part of the installation of the Mexican Liberty Bell. It features concrete steps from Dolores Street, concrete aggregate paving, concrete curbs/walls on the north and south sides, and is bordered by large metal chain-link ropes.
Figure 18. Pedestrian walkway, looking east toward Dolores and 19th streets. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 19. West end of the pedestrian walkway, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
At the north end of the park, a paved walking path runs east-west on the south side of the northeast cluster of tennis courts. A concrete gutter also skirts the south edge of the courts. A paved path runs
August 12, 2011 - 12 Page & Turnbull, Inc.
north-south between the clustered tennis courts and the basketball court to the west (Figure 20). It features a ramp north to 18th Street and connects to the east-west walkway via concrete stairs (Figure 21).
Figure 20. Paved walkway between tennis and basketball courts, looking south from 18th Street. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 21. Paved paths around the northeast cluster of tennis courts, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
A curving paved driveway originates at Dolores Street between 19th and 20th streets and loops past the south and west sides of the playground before heading north to the clubhouse (Figure 22). Another new paved driveway begins at Dolores Street, just south of the Mexican Liberty Bell plaza, and arcs northwest to the pedestrian boulevard (Figure 23). Both of these driveways are accessed from Dolores Street through swinging metal gates. A paved walking path also parallels 20th Street at the south end of the park.
Figure 22. Paved driveway that curves around playground, looking west from Dolores Street. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 23. Paved driveway to pedestrian boulevard, looking west from Dolores Street. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Paved walkways also run parallel to the MUNI streetcar tracks. The western-most walkway is bordered by concrete curbs with beveled corners (Figure 24). Concrete stairs connect Church Street to the western walkway at three locations: a center access point at the intersection of 19th and Church streets to the pedestrian bridge, and two at half-way points between 18th and 19th streets and 19th and 20th streets (Figure 25). The east walkway originates at the corner of 18th and Church streets by the
MUNI stop. A concrete retaining wall supports the grassy hill next to the tennis courts on the east side of the walkway entrance.
Figure 24. West walkway bordered by concrete curbs, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 25. Stairs from west walkway to Church Street between 19th & 20th streets, looking west. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
The MUNI streetcar line is a public transportation circulation path that runs roughly parallel to Church Street between 18th and 20th streets. INFRASTRUCTURE
Walls and Fences
Chain-link fences surround the tennis and basketball courts at the north end of the park, and a Vshaped chain-link fence covers the pedestrian bridge to the west (Figure 26). A low concrete wall with pylons and metal poles lines the west border of the park at Church Street (Figure 27). The plaza for the Mexican Liberty Bell features concrete curbs/walls on the north and south sides, and is bordered by large metal chain-link ropes.
Figure 26. V-shaped fence over the pedestrian bridge, looking east. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 27. Low concrete wall with pylons along west boundary at Church Street, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 - 14 -
Lights
Five metal street lights illuminate the MUNI stop and street corner at 18th and Church streets. The entrance from Church Street to the pedestrian bridge is flanked by two original fluted metal electroliers, or light standards, which exist today without the lanterns on top (Figure 28). One tall metal street light illuminates the south MUNI stop platform, while seven fluted metal light standards line the paved walkway on the east side of the MUNI tracks (Figure 29). The original MUNI stop, at the base of the bridge and stairs, does not have any lights. Three light standards border the curving path between the playground and clubhouse (Figure 30). One light standard is located at the intersection of paths between the northeast tennis courts and the basketball court, and new light standards with two to three lamps each illuminate the courts (Figure 31).
Figure 28. Electroliers without globes at the stairs at Church and 19th streets, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 29. Fluted lights by the walkway that parallels the east side of the MUNI tracks, looking southeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 - 15 -
Figure 30. Light standard by curving path, looking north. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) MUNI Infrastructure
Figure 31. Light standard by tennis courts, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
The MUNI tracks includes T-shaped metal electrical poles for the lines above the tracks (Figure 32), as well as concrete gutters and curbs along the length of the tracks (Figure 33). The platforms on both sides of the tracks at 18th and Church streets are accessed by concrete steps and concrete ADAaccessible ramps (Figure 34). The south MUNI stop at 20th and Church streets features newer square concrete pavers (Figure 35).
Figure 32. MUNI tracks and T-shaped electrical pole, looking southeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 33. Concrete curbs and gutters flanking MUNI tracks, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 - 16 -
Figure 34. ADA-accessible ramp at west side of MUNI J-line stop at 18th and Church streets, looking north. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 35. MUNI J-line stop at 20th and Church streets, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
FURNISHINGS
Benches
Most benches are concentrated in the southern half of the park. Two wood benches are located next to the walkway that flanks the east side of the MUNI tracks (Figure 36). Another three are located along the paved path that curves to the southwest from the clubhouse. Four wooden benches line 20th Street at the south edge of the park. Three of these benches do not have backs (Figure 37). Another wooden bench with a back is located at the southwest corner of the park near the MUNI stop.
Figure 36. Wood benches next to walkway on east side of MUNI tracks, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) Sculptural Objects
Figure 37. Wood bench along 20th Street, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
A statue of Mexican War of Independence leader Miguel Guadalupe Hidalgo y Costillo is located at the west end of the pedestrian boulevard before the bridge (Figure 38). The pedestal is square and made of granite, while the statue is bronze. A replica of the Mexican Liberty Bell is located in a plaza at the east end of the pedestrian boulevard, near Dolores Street (Figure 39).
August 12, 2011 - 17 -
Figure 38. Statue of Miguel Guadalupe Hidalgo y Costillo, looking west. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) Sports Facilities
Figure 39. Replica of Mexican Liberty Bell, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
A cluster of five tennis courts is located at the northeast corner of the park, by 18th and Dolores streets (Figure 40). The courts are oriented so that players face north and south. A basketball court and another tennis court are located to the northwest; these courts are oriented so that players face east and west (Figure 41). A rectangular sports field, 270 feet long by 190 feet wide, is leveled out on the north lawn.
Figure 40. Northeast cluster of tennis courts, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) Picnic Areas
Figure 41. Northwest tennis court and basketball court, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
There are two paved picnic areas west of the clubhouse. One contains two wood picnic tables, and the other is occupied by metal storage containers (Figures 42 and 43).
August 12, 2011 - 18 -
Figure 42. Paved picnic area with wood tables, looking southeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 43. Paved picnic area with storage containers, looking southeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES

Clubhouse
The clubhouse is a two-story, rectangular-plan, wood frame building with stucco siding. The building is capped by a hipped roof. It features projecting piers clad in scored stucco at the northeast and southeast corners. The ground floor is capped by a paneled frieze and cornices. The north faade features two doors and steel-sash windows at the ground floor level and six aluminum-sash awning windows with wire glass, separated into groups of three, at the second story (Figure 44). The doors lead to the mens restroom and storage. The east faade has three vents at the ground floor and six aluminum-sash windows at the second floor (Figure 45). The south faade is similar to the north faade, but contains one door, which leads to the womens restroom (Figure 46). The west faade features concrete steps with metal railings that lead to paired doors flanked by aluminum-sash windows (Figure 47). This entrance accesses the clubhouse space.
Figure 44. East and north facades of clubhouse, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 45. Second story of east faade, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
August 12, 2011 - 19 -
Figure 46. South and east facades of clubhouse, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) Pedestrian Bridge
Figure 47. North faade of clubhouse, looking southeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
A concrete pedestrian bridge crosses in an east-west direction over the MUNI Church Street streetcar line at 19th Street, connecting the street with the parks pedestrian boulevard (Figure 48). The bridge features an entablature at the level of the walkway, paneled piers at the ends, and molding around the arched opening. An upside-down V-shaped chain-link fence caps the bridge and is bolted into the sides. Double quarter-turn concrete stairs descend from both sides to concrete platforms south of the bridge. The platforms are curved at the ends and have built-in concrete benches (Figure 49). Other features around the MUNI stop are concrete curbs that flank the tracks and concrete retaining walls.
Figure 48. South side of the pedestrian bridge, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 49. West side of original MUNI stop with built-in benches and retaining wall, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Playground
The playground occupies an irregular amoeba shaped area at the base of the southern terracing. Until recently, it contained sand, swings, and a climbing structure. The playground is currently under renovation, and all previous equipment has been removed (Figures 50 and 51).
August 12, 2011 - 20 -
Figure 50. Playground area under renovation, looking northwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011) MUNI Stop Shelters
Figure 51. Playground area under renovation, looking northeast. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Small MUNI J-Line stop shelters are located at the east side of the tracks at 18th and Church streets and 20th and Church streets (Figures 52 and 53). They are composed of metal structures with clear plastic sheathing and barrel roofs.
Figure 52. North MUNI J-Line stop with shelter near 18th and Church streets, looking southwest. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
Figure 53. South MUNI J-Line stop shelter near 20th and Church streets, looking south. (Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)
VIEWS AND VISTAS The park has an unobstructed northeast-looking view of downtown San Francisco. The best vantage point can be found at the southwest corner of the park near Church and 20th streets, which is the highest elevation (Figure 54). The Churrigueresque-style tower of Mission High School, on the north side of 18th Street, is prominent in the view shed, while City Halls dome and the Financial District skyscrapers pierce the more distant skyline. The San Francisco Bay is visible to the east, seen over the South of Market District and Mission Bay, and the hills of the East Bay lay beyond.
August 12, 2011 - 21 -
Figure 54. Panoramic view from 20th and Church streets toward downtown San Francisco. (Source: William Mercer McLeod, The Bold Italic. Website accessed on 21 July 2011 from: http://thebolditalic.com/wmmcleod/stories/1032-fenced-out)
August 12, 2011 - 22 -
IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT

MISSION DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORY The following information is largely adapted from the City San Francisco Planning Departments City Within a City: Historic Context Statement for San Franciscos Mission District (November 2007). In addition, a detailed history of the Mission Dolores neighborhood can be found in Carey & Co.s Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volumes 1 and 2 (San Francisco, CA, 11 November 2009). It is important to note that this historic context is a general discussion of the Mission District and Mission Dolores neighborhoods. A specific discussion of Mission Dolores Parks history is presented in Section V. In 1776, Spanish Franciscan priests Francisco Palou and Pedro Cambon founded Mission San Francisco de Asistoday known as Mission Doloresat a location believed to be in the vicinity of the present-day chapel. This area was most likely chosen because of its access to fresh water via a spring located near present-day Duboce Park, as well as a creek (later known as Mission Creek) running down from Twin Peaks to Mission Bay roughly along the line of 18th Street.3 Within a decade, the Franciscans had converted over 1,000 Native American neophytes who lived at the Mission and provided a ready source of labor (Figure 55). This included farming and the construction of the present adobe church, completed between 1782 and 1791 as part of a larger mission complex. Ranching was the primary economic activity at the mission, however, and by the early nineteenth century Mission Dolores counted tens of thousands of cattle, sheep, goats and horses which were pastured on lands that stretched down the San Francisco Peninsula to San Mateo. Travel to these areas was made possible by El Camino Real, or the royal road, which curved east from Mission Dolores to follow the present-day route of Valencia and San Jose streets.
Figure 55. Ludwig Choris painting of Native Americans dancing at Mission Dolores in 1818. (Source: Bancroft Library, BANC PIC 1963.002:1312--FR).
Following the Mexican War of Independence, the Mexican Congress attempted to encourage further settlement of California, as well as reduce the influence of the mission system. This was accomplished through a series of legislative decrees which culminated in An Act for the Secularization of the Missions of California in 1833. Intended to encourage colonization and make land more accessible to
3 Christopher Richard, quoted in Unraveling the Mystery of Lake Dolores, http://missionlocal.org/2011/02/unravelingthe-mystery-of-lake-dolores/ accessed 27 July 2011.
August 12, 2011 - 23 -
the average Californio (as Mexican citizens in California were called), the process of secularization involved the redistribution of the Churchs enormous land holdings through sales to private interests. During the 1830s and 1840s, Mission Dolores land holdings were parceled out to various parties, including Jose Bernal, Jose Noe, the De Haros and Francisco Guerrero. The Mission Dolores church complex remained in the hands of the Catholic Church, but the area immediately surrounding the complex was designated as a common area for use as a pueblo settlement. During this period, ranching continued as the dominant economic activity in the region, including the establishment of a small trading post known as Yerba Buena located along a cove near what is today Portsmouth Square. Following the Mexican-American War, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo required Mexico to cede California to the United States in 1848. Around the same time, news of the discovery of gold at Sutters Mill in the Sierra Nevada reached San Francisco. By 1849, gold seekers from all over the world were surging into California, and the small settlement at Yerba Buena (by this time renamed San Francisco) swarmed with activity. The following year California was granted statehood, with San Francisco as its most populous city. In 1850, a plank toll road was constructed along the route of Mission Street from 4th to 16th streets, providing access to the small Mission Dolores settlement concentrated near what is today Dolores and 16th streets (Figure 56). Soon afterward, San Francisco annexed the Mission Dolores area, although the lands to the south remained outside the city limits until the Consolidation Act of 1856. During this same period, Mexican-American landowners were forced to prove title to their property, often resulting in costly legal battles that forced them to sell their holdings.
Figure 56. 1850 view of Mission Dolores from Red Rock Hill near present-day Church and 19th Streets. What is today the approximate line of 18th Street is marked by a gully at lower right. (Source: University of California Calisphere, brk00001116_20a_k).
By the close of the decade, the Mission District remained thinly settled, with much of the area given over to agriculture. As shown on a US Coast Survey Map produced in 1859, the three principal thoroughfares were El Camino Real, Mission Street and Center Street (todays 16th Street) (Figure 57). The majority of buildings were concentrated near 16th and what would become Dolores Street in
the immediate vicinity of Mission Dolores. Mission Creek is shown running roughly along the line of 18th Street, into a tidal arm of Mission Bay near the present-day intersection of Shotwell and 17th streets. Other prominent features include two horse racing tracks, the Union Race Course and the Pioneer Raceway, which had developed in the southern portion of the Mission District when it was then outside the city limits.
Figure 57. Detail of the 1859 US Coast Survey map showing the northern portion of the Mission District. The Mission Dolores complex is indicated by the large building at upper left. (Source: David Rumsey Map Collection)
A short time after this map was produced, the land that would become Mission Dolores Park was purchased by two Jewish congregations for use as a cemetery. (A specific discussion of Mission Dolores Parks cemetery history is presented in the Section V.) Concurrently, development of the Mission District began to pick up steam owing to a number of key transportation improvements during the second half of the nineteenth century. This included the development of a spur railroad line down Valencia Street in 1863, as well as horse car lines running out Mission, Howard (Van Ness Avenue) and Folsom streets. The ease of access, abundant vacant land and a balmy climate not only encouraged settlement, but also facilitated the construction of recreational and amusement facilities, including The Willows, located near 18th and Valencia streets. The most famous resort, however, was Woodwards Garden, an early amusement park located near 14th and Valencia Streets. Initially the private estate of Robert Woodward, the complex grew to include gardens, a picnic ground, an art museum, a zoo and other attractions. As more people visited the Mission District, the pace of residential development quickened, with large parcels subdivided by homestead associations and other developers. Between 1870 and the turn of the century, the Mission District developed as a densely-populated streetcar suburb, primarily inhabited by working-class residents. To the west and south, the Eureka Valley and Noe Valley neighborhoods also boomed with construction activity, particularly following the development of cable car lines from Market Street out Valencia and Castro streets during the 1880s, and the 18th and Park No. 33 electric streetcar line, built by the San Francisco & San Mateo Railway in 1892. This line ran on 18th Street from Guerrero west to Douglass Street, and served as
the first phase of a streetcar line designed to provide service between the Mission District and Golden Gate Park.4 During this same period, the rapid growth of San Francisco as a whole led to discussion of prohibiting further burials in the city limitsincluding the Jewish cemeteries at what is today Mission Dolores Park. By the turn of the century, community leaders in the Mission District, as well as other San Francisco neighborhoods, began issuing calls for improved civic facilities, including schools and parks. This resulted in the Board of Education purchasing a plot of land north of 18th Street from the Jewish Cemetery Association for a new Mission High School, which was completed in 1898. Leading the demand for a new park was the Mission Park Association, aided by local resident James D. Phelan elected mayor of San Francisco in 1897. Phelan advocated for a host of Progressive Era reforms, including a successful bond measure to develop a park in the Mission District where the Jewish cemeteries (since removed) had been located, as well as to develop parks and boulevards in other San Francisco neighborhoods. The New Mission Park was still in its infancy when a massive earthquake struck San Francisco on April 18, 1906. In the wake of the tremors, fires erupted in various locations, including the ham & eggs fire in Hayes Valley which soon spread south into the Mission District. Using water from the golden fireplug located at Church and 20th streets, as well as other cisterns in the Mission District, firefighters and local residents were able to halt the flames east of the park at 20th Street. In the wake of the disaster, the new Mission Park served as a refugee camp for displaced residents. The Mission District itself also witnessed dramatic growth as thousands of working-class laborers, predominantly Irish immigrants and their children, relocated from the South of Market area to unburned areas of the Mission. Within a short period, Mission Street developed into a thriving commercial strip that included numerous theaters, banks and retail establishments. Those areas of the Mission that had burned, including the area immediately adjacent to Mission Park across Dolores Street, were rebuiltprimarily with two and three-story flats. With this rapid growth came enhanced political power, evidenced by the election of Mission resident, James Rolph, Jr., as Mayor of San Francisco in 1911. Rolph held the office until 1930. The Mission District thrived as a self-contained European-American ethnic community until the close of World War II. As veterans returned from the war, many moved to the newly developed housing tracts in the Parkside and Sunset neighborhoods, as well as Marin County and the Peninsula. As the European-Americans left the Mission District, they were gradually replaced by Salvadoran, Mexican, and Nicaraguan immigrants who were attracted to the areas inexpensive rents and established Catholic parishes. From the 1950s through the 1970s, the continued influx of Latino immigrants transformed the Mission District into San Franciscos largest predominantly Latino neighborhood.5 This was symbolized in part by the installation of the statue of Manuel Hidalgo and the Mexican Liberty Bell in the Mission Dolores Park during the 1960s. In the more recent past, the area has been identified with Lesbian culture, as well as with gentrification issues related to an influx of high-tech workers drawn to the area for its vibrant cultural and commercial life and its easy freeway access to the Peninsula.
4 Walter Rice and Emiliano Echeverria, San Franciscos Pioneer Electric Railway San Francisco & San Mateo Railway, http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist10/sf&sm.html accessed 1 August 2011. 5 City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, City Within a City: Historic Context Statement for San Franciscos Mission District (November 2007).
August 12, 2011 - 26 -
SAN FRANCISCO PLAYGROUND AND PARKS HISTORY To better understand the development of Mission Dolores Park, the following information provides background information on the history of urban parks in the United States, as well as in San Francisco. It outlines how shifting civic, cultural and financial factors helped shape the development of parks, and why the facilities, landscaping and circulation patterns in older parks may demonstrate a variety of influences that have accreted over time.
Development of Recreational Parks in the United States
Throughout San Franciscos history, the development of parks and recreation grounds in the city has generally echoed national trends in municipal park development. During the nineteenth century, Frederick Law Olmsted and his colleagues designed municipal parks, such as Central Park in New York and Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, based upon the principles of the European pastoral picturesque movement in landscape design (Figure 58). These early parks were meant to serve as romantic pleasure grounds and provide a refuge from the bustling cities around them. They included walking paths, water features, ball fields and other landscape features, but architecture was discouraged as buildings were seen as intrusions into the scenic landscape. Buildings were accommodated only where necessary and sited to as not to interfere with the appearance of landscape design features.6 Pleasure grounds flourished in the United States from about 1850 to 1900 and laid the foundation for many of the countrys most beloved parks.
Figure 58. Golden Gate Park, ca. 1890. (SFPL San Francisco Historical Photograph Collection).
Beginning around the turn of the twentieth century, various progressive reforms led to a decrease in working hours and increased leisure time for the working class. The nature of public parks also shifted, as various reform park organizers promoted the idea of parks as a moral defense against the potential for chaos they perceived in this new abundance of free time.7 The playground movement also flourished during this period, as play came to be seen as an activity that molded children into good citizens. New playgrounds were constructed across the country, with many playgrounds inserted into existing parks. Organized activities were also promoted in reform parks, including athletics, crafts and dancing programs. As a consequence, facilities such as clubhouses, field
6 7
Galen Cranz, The Politics of Park Design: A History of Urban Parks in America (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992), 8, 15. Galen Cranz, The Politics of Park Design: A History of Urban Parks in America (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992), 62. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 27 -
August 12, 2011
houses, swimming pools and locker rooms were constructed to accommodate the growth in recreational programming.8 By the 1930s, parks were viewed less as idealistic vehicles to social reform, but rather as necessary components of the urban landscape.9 Demand for new recreational facilities continued to expand across the country, even as the Great Depression stretched municipal budgets. After World War II, the focus in park design was in repairing existing parks that had deteriorated during the Depression and war, and to construct new parks in response to the post-war baby boom. In order to insert these new parks throughout the city fabric, they tended to be much smaller than previous facilities. Parks were also frequently sited adjacent to schools as part of school-park plans, with recreation and education agencies sharing the costs of land acquisition and construction. In the latter half of the twentieth century, parks became more function-driven, with specialized facilities catering to various pursuits. Standardization also became widespread, with equipment, fences, benches, and landscaping all specified for use as part of a basic municipal package. Hard surfaces were also favored because of the premium placed on multiple-use facilities, as well as reduced maintenance costs. These parks and playgrounds, with their paved surfaces and standardized infrastructure, were almost entirely antithetical to the early picturesque pleasure ground prototypes.10
Parks and Playgrounds in San Francisco
San Franciscos earliest public reservations can be traced to the late 1840s, when Union Square and Washington Square both appear as public squares on survey maps. More reservations were added in 1855 by the Van Ness Ordinance, which was enacted to resolve land disputes in what would become the Western Addition. However, many of San Franciscos earliest parks were also the result of private land development schemes. These included South Park in 1856, Precita Park in 1859, and Holly Park in 1860.11 Momentum for more city-owned parks gathered steam in the 1860s during negotiations over the subdivision of the Outside Lands at the western end of the city. In 1868, the Outside Lands Commission submitted its recommendations to reserve Buena Vista Park, Mountain Lake Park (now Lincoln Park), McCoppin Square, and Parkside Square. 12 The largest reservation by far, however, was Golden Gate Park, which emerged as one of the largest urban parks in the United States, comprised of a 1,017-acre, rectangular tract extending westward 3.5 miles from the center of the city to the Pacific Ocean. The design of the park was largely the effort of surveyor William Hammond Hall, who proposed a main drive out to the ocean featuring a number of tree-screened meadows, lawns and artificial lakes. At the time, however, most of the parks acreage was given over to shifting sand dunes. Landscaping in the park was chiefly the result of the efforts of master gardener John Hays McLaren, who stabilized the blowing sand and planted strategic windbreaks that allowed for todays lush vegetation. His efforts were so successful that he was named Assistant Superintendent of Golden Gate Park in 1887, and three years later as Superintendent of Parks, a position he held for more than 50 years until his death in 1943. As it developed, Golden Gate Park came to embody the pastoral, romantic pleasure ground ideal of nineteenth century park design, with nature viewed as a moral tonic for the ills of society. But the park also reflected an elitist aesthetic. In his authoritative work, San Francisco Parks and Playgrounds, 1839-1990, author Randolph Delehanty states that Golden Gate Park was designed after the rich mans estate in nineteenth century apotheosis, with drives, overlooks, lawns, gardens, parterres,
Ibid., 65, 72, 96. Ibid., 101, 109. 10 Ibid., 122-123. 11 Randolph S. Delehanty, Ph.D., San Francisco Parks and Playgrounds, 1839-1990: The History of a Public Good in One North American City (Volumes I and II), (Harvard University: 1992), 109-110; 116. 12 Ibid: 140-149.
8 9
August 12, 2011 - 28 -
follies, ponds, gazebos, glasshouses, nurseries, and menageries. It was laid out and developed at the highest level that the wealthiest men in San Francisco could conceive of in the 1870s.13 The administration of San Franciscos early parks was handled by the Parks Commission, created in 1870 and comprised of three persons appointed by the Governor of California. In 1889, the state legislature authorized the Commission to hire employees, as well as disperse funds from a park tax that collected six cents for every $100 of assessed valuation. Almost the entirety of the Commissions work during this period focused on Golden Gate Park, while the other small squares sprinkled throughout the city received little attention. During this period, the crowded conditions in many San Francisco neighborhoods led to a call for the development of childrens playgrounds. Financier William Sharon donated $50,000 for the construction of the Childrens Playground in Golden Gate Park (now known as the Koret Childrens Quarter). The playground was opened in 1887, and is thought to be the nations first public playground (Figure 59). During this era, the idea of providing a dedicated space solely for youth recreation was unique and groundbreaking.14 The playground included a carrousel, swings and other playground equipment, as well as a large stone Childrens House.
Figure 59. Golden Gate Park Childrens Playground, 1904. (Source: San Francisco Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-7543).
The widespread development of neighborhood parks in San Francisco can be traced to Progressive Era reform ideals that were taking root in San Francisco during the last decade of the nineteenth century. In particular, the election of reform candidate James D. Phelan as mayor of San Francisco in 1897 transformed the nature of public parks and playgrounds. According to Randolph Delehanty: One of Phelans first actions as mayor was to take the existing small parks and squares away from the Department of Streets, Sewers and Squares and put them under the care of the Park Commission. John McLaren, the superintendant of Golden Gate Park, was directed to begin landscaping the long-neglected Western
Ibid: 167. Koret Childrens Quarter, San Francisco Recreation and Parks. Website accessed on 8 February 2010 from: http://www.sfgov.org/site/recpark_page.asp?id=26880
13 14
August 12, 2011 - 29 -
Addition parks which had been reserved in 1855 but then left virtually unimproved. This was the real beginning of neighborhood parks in San Francisco.15 In 1898, Phelan successfully proposed a new city charter that, among other reforms, allowed the mayor to appoint members of the Park Commission, as well as to allow the sale of bonds for park development. Park taxes were also raised one cent. In 1903, San Francisco voters approved $17.5 million in bonds to secure land for various parks and boulevards, including a park in the Mission; the development of Dolores Street as a boulevard; an extension of the Park-Presidio; and an expansion of Pioneer Park atop Telegraph Hill.16 Together, these marked the first major park additions to the city since 1868. Following his departure from office, Phelan was also instrumental in convincing nationally recognized city planner Daniel Hudson Burnham, of Chicago, to design a new master plan for San Francisco in 1905. Among Burnhams many recommendations was the development of an extensive park system and parkways totaling 9,600 acres. He also proposed construction of twelve new playgrounds.17 Burnham felt that small parks and playgrounds should provide plenty of shade and pleasant surroundings to those that resort to them, but they should also include formal plantings that provide a lesson of order and system for visitors.18 While Burnhams plans were never carried out, they did speak to San Franciscos ambitions during the heyday of the City Beautiful movement, which was focused on creating civic virtue through the use of beautification projects and monumental architecture. During this period, San Franciscos park programming firmly embraced the reform park ideal, or what Terrence Young, author of Building San Franciscos Parks 1850 1930, calls the rationalist park. According to Young, the beginning of the rationalist period in San Francisco was marked by the multiplication of new, special-use areas in Golden Gate Park, each with its own promoters and users.19 This change in attitude included the development of athletic facilities, specialty gardens, and even museums. However, the earlier romantic notion that parks should provide contemplative, natural landscapes was not wholly rejected. Rather, some naturalistic plantings were deemed necessary because only natural scenery could provide an escape from the simulation and excess stimulation of an urban life.20 The reform/rationalist movement was accompanied by the continued development of additional playgrounds. In 1898, the California Club established and supported the first public playground on school property at Bush and Hyde Streets. In 1901, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors gave the Board of Education $12,000 to lease and equip a playground at 7th and Harrison streets (the Southside Playground). With the passing of a $741,000 bond issue in 1903, additional lots for the Southside Playground and a North Beach Playground were purchased by the Board of Supervisors.21 Generally speaking, these early neighborhood playgrounds tended to be concentrated in workingclass areas, as they were considered an obnoxious land use because of the noise.22 However, it was also believed that placing playgrounds in lower-income neighborhoods also helped prevent juvenile
15 Randolph S. Delehanty, Ph.D., San Francisco Parks and Playgrounds, 1839-1990: The History of a Public Good in One North American City (Volumes I and II), (Harvard University: 1992), 216. 16 Terence G. Young, Building San Franciscos Parks 1850-1930, (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 187. 17 Randolph S. Delehanty, Ph.D., San Francisco Parks and Playgrounds, 1839-1990: The History of a Public Good in One North American City (Volumes I and II), (Harvard University: 1992), 250-251. 18 Terence G. Young, Building San Franciscos Parks 1850-1930, (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 201. 19 Ibid: 143 20 Ibid: 201. 21 San Francisco Playground Commission, Annual Report, 1928-29, and Review of Activities, 17. 22 Randolph S. Delehanty, Ph.D., San Francisco Parks and Playgrounds, 1839-1990: The History of a Public Good in One North American City (Volumes I and II), (Harvard University: 1992), 288.
August 12, 2011 - 30 -
delinquency. Elsewhere, parks were generally favored by real estate developers as they raised property values. The economics of park development was not lost on the Board of Park Commissioners. In an annual report issued in 1910, they acknowledged that the extension of park areas enhances the value of adjacent taxable land so rapidly that the taxpayer gets an immediate equivalent in public wealth for every dollar invested in park extension.23 More evident, however, is an understanding of the tension between the romantic notion of parks as reflective pleasure grounds, and the reformist, Progressive Era ideals of the park as an amenity for the working class. The same 1910 report recounts that ancient works such as the Elysian Fields and Hanging Gardens of Babylon bear idealistic or practical testimony to the human vision of verdure and foliage, but that the park or garden in its modern aspect and under the sway of progressive humanity, has come to be regarded as a place where the weary, whether weary of head work or hand work, may be refreshed by breathing pure air, gladdened by he sight of flowers and trees, and solaced by the sound of running waters.24 It goes on to state: The modern idea is of a park at the door of the people, where children may go for air and playa park accessible to men and women who cannot go to the country for rest and recreation. Whatever policy may be adopted by inland towns or cities of ordinary size, the fact is now obvious that San Francisco, one of the leading cities of the world, is destined to become densely populated, hence provision must be made for the workers in every avenue of industrial life. The electric railway, the automobile, and perhaps the aeroplane of the future, may bring to the congested districts of the metropolis facilities for reaching the mountains and forests of the country in quick time and at slight cost. On the cheapest basis imaginable this privilege would be denied to people having less than moderate means, therefore the duty of maintaining public parks of vast dimensions and numerous parks and playgrounds of smaller area, will always demand attention.25 The reform park playground movement had been institutionalized in 1907 when the San Francisco Playground Commission was established by City Charter. Instrumental in its creation was Reverend Denis O. Crowley, known as the father of the playground movement, who served as the Commissions president until his death in 1928. To acquire sites for playground development, land was either transferred from the Parks Commission to the Playground Commission, purchased by the Board of Supervisors for the Playground Commission, or purchased by the Playground Commission itself.26 A 1924 amendment to the City Charter appropriated five to seven cents on every $100 of assessed property value for the Playground Commission. The tenure of Mayor James Sunny Jim Rolph from 1911 to 1931 was particularly fruitful in the development of additional playgrounds. These included the North Beach swimming pool within the North Beach Playground in 1913, followed by the Mission Pool in 1915. The Margaret S. Hayward Playground was established in 1918, followed by the Funston (now Moscone), Glen Park, Ocean View, and Julius Kahn playgrounds in 1922. Douglass Playground was formed in 1923, and the Folsom, Portola, and James Lick playgrounds in 1924. The Chinatown, Argonne, and Bay View playgrounds were constructed in 1925, and the Mission, Levi Strauss Sewing Factory, West Portal, and Drama Studio playgrounds were established in 1927. The following year, St. Marys,
23 Hugh M. Burke, ed., Fortieth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners of San Francisco for the Year Ending June 30, 1910, (San Francisco: Dickinson & Scott, 1910), 28. 24 Ibid: 28. 25 Ibid: 28-29. 26 San Francisco Playground Commission, Annual Report, 1928-29, and Review of Activities, 17.
August 12, 2011 - 31 -
Michelangelo (Russian Hill), and Aptos playgrounds were constructed. In total, the San Francisco Playground Commission held jurisdiction over twenty-two playgrounds, fifteen school yards, two pools, and five community buildings by 1928.27 Contrary to the development of new playgrounds, park development during the first two decades of the twentieth century was more uneven. In 1909, the city closed the potters field burial ground in the northwest part of the city, but it was not until 1919 that the Park Commission began converting its 200 acres into Lincoln Park. The Palace of Fine Arts, built for the Panama Pacific International Exhibition in 1915, was also deeded to the Park Commission following the Exhibition. By the 1920s, however, several major new park facilities were being completed, including the development of the 60-acre Fleishhacker Play Field at the junction of the Great Highway and Sloat Boulevard. It included a 1,000-foot-long heated swimming pool and a bathhouse with 800 dressing rooms, and is now the site of the San Francisco Zoo (Figure 60).28
Figure 60. Fleishhacker Pool, 1929. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-4845).
In 1922, the Park Commission also leased 170 acres of land for the new Harding Golf Course at Lake Merced. By this time, park acquisition was being driven primarily by functional concerns, rather than the creation of pastoral pleasure grounds. This same tendency is evident in the installation of the Legion of Honor art museum at the summit of Lincoln Park, as well as the development of a swimming area at Aquatic Park. By far, the most ambitious park development of the era was what came to be known as John McLaren Park, located at the southern end of the city. In 1926, the Board of Supervisors designated 550 acres of a former Mexican land grant for a park. However, the process of acquiring the land took
27 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 399. 28 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 360.
August 12, 2011 - 32 -
decades, and the parks size was eventually reduced to approximately 320 acres. Another important park facility, Stern Grove, was donated by Mrs. Sigmund Stern in 1931 as a memorial to her husband. New uses were frequently introduced into older parks during this time. For example, Golden Gate Park witnessed the construction of the Academy of Sciences in 1917, a new de Young Art Museum in 1919, and Kezar Stadium in 1925. New playgrounds were also inserted within existing parks, as were pools and other recreational facilities such as baseball fields and tennis courts. While the onset of the Great Depression resulted in severe economic hardships for San Franciscans, government programs to stimulate the economy simultaneously led to an expansion of recreational facilities. Between 1930 and 1931, federal funds were allocated to local parks and recreation projects, leading to the construction or expansion of the Funston Annex, Stern Grove, Richmond Tennis Court and Hayes Valley Recreation Center, as well as the Rochambeau (Richmond), Visitacion Valley, Cabrillo, Potrero Hill, Portola, Ocean View, and Helen Wills playgrounds. All of these projects were completed by 1932the same year that the Playground Commission was renamed the Recreation Commission. Through the Civil Works Administration and State Emergency Relief Administration, some 2,500 people were put to work for the Recreation Commission during the Depression, typically grading playground sites in outlying neighborhoods. The extent of the program was such that William Gladstone Merchant, a San Francisco architect and frequent collaborator with Bernard Maybeck, was named consulting architect for San Franciscos playground building projects in 1933, serving in that position until 1939. By 1940, San Francisco counted fifty-two playgrounds, twenty-seven school yards, nine gymnasiums, and thirty-four summer school yards (Figure 61).29
Figure 61. Construction of the Douglas Playground, 1934. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAE-0021).
During World War II, the Recreation Commission experienced deep cuts in its capital budget, with all land purchases and building projects deferred. Simultaneously, it was forced to deal with providing recreational opportunities at massive new temporary housing projects being constructed near the shipyards at Hunters Point. Recreation centers were opened at locations including Sunnydale, Valencia Gardens, Candlestick Cove, Navy Point, Southgate, Harbor Slope, Double Rock and the
29
Ibid. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 33 -
August 12, 2011
Wisconsin, Carolina and Channel War Dwellings.30 By wars end, the citys population had reached an all-time highjust as federal funds for recreation supplies were being eliminated. With the post-war Baby Boom in full swing, San Francisco voters approved Proposition 6, a $12 million recreation bond measure, in November 1947. The Recreation Commission then embarked on a five year plan to upgrade and expand the citys recreational facilities. For the most part, this effort focused on developing small neighborhood recreational facilities to serve the citys growing population. When completed, the program represented San Franciscos greatest expansion of recreational facilities in its history, and was subsequently augmented by a $5 million bond measure in 1954, as well as a $7 million bond measure in 1955 (Figure 62).
Figure 62. Illustration showing the location of new or improved recreation facilities funded by the 1947 recreation bond measure. (Source: Recreation Commission Annual Report of 1949).
In 1949, San Francisco voters also approved another ballot measure to merge the Recreation Commission with the Park Commission, which was accomplished the following year. By 1950, the new Recreation and Park Commission counted forty-four playgrounds, twelve housing centers, ten teen-age centers, two pools, thirty-one all-year schoolyards, twenty-two summer schoolyards, and seventeen gymnasiums. The annual playground attendance was cited at more than 4.1 million.31 Despite the emphasis on playground development, the genesis of a new phase of park development can be traced to a 1954 report prepared by the Department of City Planning. It outlined a survey and plan for new city parks, including major city-wide parks and smaller neighborhood recreation areas. Among its proposals was a new Interior Park Belt stretching from Glen Canyon to Twin Peaks and Mount Sutro. The area was praised for its untouched beauty, described as an almost continuous belt of hilltops and canyons still in their natural state San Francisco here has the opportunity to establish a continuous greenbelt or natural park preserve.32 The idea of preserving open space in its undeveloped state represented a significant philosophical shift in park planning. The concept of
30 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992, 424-425. 31 San Francisco Recreation Commission, Annual Report of the San Francisco Recreation Commission 1950, 3. 32 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 449-450.
August 12, 2011 - 34 -
landscaping was also changing during this period, from the former emphasis on formal gardens to an informal, asymmetric and naturalistic aesthetic. As one author observed, The general effect is simple, open, informal and agreeable. It is the park as a 1950s domestic California patio, not a monumental installation.33 By the 1960s and 1970s, the concept of open space and urban plazas was thoroughly woven into San Franciscos development schemes, including massive urban renewal projects in the Western Addition and South of Market. Mini-parks were also installed in various locations, including the privatelyowned Sidney G. Walton Square in the Golden Gateway Project. However, these projects continued the emphasis on functional or quasi-formal public spaces, rather than the preservation of natural areas. The latter concept was nevertheless given a boost with the 1971 Urban Design Plan which stated that natural areas were irreplaceable, and that Few examples remain of the original sand dunes, hills, cliffs and beaches that once characterized the peninsula, fewer still are the example of natural ecology.34 In its policy recommendations, the plan noted that most remaining natural areas in the city were controlled by the city or the federal government, and that these areas should be targeted for formal preservation. In 1973, Proposition J, the Open Space Acquisition and Park Renovation Fund, was passed by city voters, leading to the creation of the Open Space/Park Renovation Citizens Advisory Committee. It provided funding for neighborhood recreation centers, as well as the acquisition of open space areas such as Kite Hill, Tank Hill and Grandview Park.35 In response to criticism that these purchases disproportionately ignored working-class areas, the California State Park at Candlestick Point near Hunters Point was created in 1973. Though not a city project, far more open space was preserved through the creation of San Franciscos Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA) in 1972. Created by Congress, the GGNRA was authorized to create a 100,000 acre park system running from Fort Funston to the Hyde Street Pier, as well as across the Golden Gate into Marin County.
33 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 460. 34 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 496. 35 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 499-502.
August 12, 2011 - 35 -
V. MISSION DOLORES PARK CULTURAL LANDSCAPE HISTORY

Mission Dolores Park has developed into its current form over a period of more than a century, with improvements that reflect a variety of civic and cultural influences. As a result, the following historic context has been divided into discrete periods of development. These provide background information for important periods of the parks evolution, including the development of buildings and structures, circulation routes, and the installation of trees and other landscape plantings. Historic images frequently provided crucial information and are located throughout the text. Historic images were also used to create several Then and Now photograph comparisons which are located in Appendix A. Specific references to the Then and Now photographs are referenced as Figure Comparisons in the text. A graphic representation of the extant features in the park and their periods of installation can be found in Appendix B. EARLY HISTORY (1776 - 1859)
Historical Context and Land Use
During the Spanish Mission and Mexican periods, the dominant activity in the vicinity of Mission Dolores was cattle ranching and farming. Given the easy access to water in Mission Creek, it appears likely that during this time, the lower slopes of what is today Mission Dolores Park were used for agriculture. Mission historian, Brother Guire Clearly, also states that milking sheds for cows were located above the creek where Mission High School is located today.36 In the years immediately following the Gold Rush, the Mission Dolores area remained thinly settled, with much of the area given over to agriculture. This is confirmed by the 1859 US Coast Survey map, which indicates that the northern portion of what is today Mission Dolores Park, as well as the area now occupied by Mission High School, was completely cultivated, encompassing portions of two farms. Several structures, likely farmhouses and/or agricultural outbuildings, are also indicated and are discussed below.
Topography
By overlaying the 1859 Coast Survey map onto a modern aerial view, it is possible to reconstruct the topography of Mission Dolores Park just a decade following the Gold Rush (Figure 63). It shows the property with sloping topography, largely running uphill in an east-to-west direction between Church and Dolores streets south of what is today the line of 19th Street. North of the line of todays 19th Street, the topography sloped more from north to south, leading down to Mission Creek which ran along the northern end of todays tennis courts. The vicinity of the creek is shown as generally flat, indicating that the area immediately adjacent to todays tennis courts was already fairly level at that time.
Vegetation
During the Mission and Mexican eras, vegetation in the area likely consisted of grass and scrub on the upper slopes of the property, while the lower area near Mission Creek would have been used for cultivation. This pattern appears to have persisted into the early years of American settlement, as indicated by the 1859 Coast Survey map. Early paintings and photographic images of the Mission Dolores area suggest that very few trees were present, and it seems likely that no vegetation dating to this period remains extant.
36
Brother Guire Cleary, Mission Dolores links San Francisco with its 18th century roots Founded as La Misin San Francisco De Ass by Franciscans, it survived earthquake and fire, http://web.archive.org/web/20040206081822/http://catholic-sf.org/013103.html accessed 27 July 2011. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 36 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 63. Overlay of the 1859 US Coast Survey map onto a modern aerial view of Mission Dolores Park. Note the cultivated areas and creek at the north end of the park. (Source: Google Earth/David Rumsey Map Collection). Circulation
The 1859 map shows several structures near the corner of 20th and Church streets, accessed by a dirt path running southwest from El Camino Real. This path followed an elliptically-shaped topographic contour, indicating that the far eastern portion of the bowl surrounding todays playground is a modification of a natural slope. No other circulation features are shown in the park area.
Furnishings
It is not clear whether any furnishings were installed in the Mission Dolores Park area during this period, although some fencing seems likely. No furnishings dating to this period remain today.
Buildings and Structures
As previously mentioned, the 1859 Coast Map indicates that several buildings were present in Mission Dolores Park at that time. These include a very large building and two smaller buildings near the corner of 20th and Church streets. Another small building was located in the vicinity of the present-day basketball court. Three other small buildings were also located along what is today the eastern edge of the park north of 19th Street. None of these buildings remain today.
Views and Vistas
Views from the highest elevation at the southwest corner of the park extended north, northwest and northeast, encompassing portions of what is today Corona Heights, Buena Vista Park, the Western Addition, downtown San Francisco, the Mission District, South of Market, Potrero Hill, San Francisco Bay and the East Bay hills. Local visual landmarks would have included Mission Dolores and Mint Hill, located a short distance to the north. Early maps and photographic images indicate
that very few buildings and trees were present in the Mission District during this period, and thus the views would have been far more expansive than they are during the present day.
August 12, 2011 - 38 -
JEWISH CEMETERIES TO MISSION PARK (1860 - 1904)

In 1860, the land that is today Mission Dolores Park was purchased by two Jewish congregations for use as a burial ground. The development of the cemeteries was detailed in The Chronicles of Emanu-El, written in 1900. Author Jacob Voorsanger recalled: The rapid increase of the Jewish community, between 1850 and 1860, rendered the purchase of other [burial] grounds an absolute necessity In 1860 the Congregation Emanu-El and the Eureka Benevolent Society made joint purchase of Block 86 in the Mission Dolores, which was named the Home of Peace Cemetery. Adjoining, the Sherith Israel acquired similar grounds which became the Hills of Eternity Cemetery. To facilitate the administration of the grounds both the Congregation Emanu-El and the Eureka Benevolent Society consented to the organization of the Home of Peace Cemetery Association, which subsequently incorporated, and with which the name of its President, David Stern, is inseparably connected. The Home of Peace Cemetery was consecrated on July 25, 1860, in the presence of a large concourse of people who had considerable difficulty in reaching the grounds, the sole tramway to the Mission having just been opened.37 According to Carey & Co.s Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2, Congregation Emanu-Els Home of Peace cemetery occupied the northern half of the site, while Sherith Israels Hills of Eternity cemetery occupied the south end. The cemeteries filled rapidly during the 1860s. By 1867, each cemetery counted 300 bodies, and within thirty years, 1,900 bodies were interred at the Home of Peace cemetery alone.38 Based on historic photographs, a large mortuary chapel was installed in the eastern portion of the Home of Peace cemetery adjacent to Dolores Street (Figure 64). Several walking paths led from this chapel to the burial grounds, as well as an ornamental fountain. Because relatively few areas were set aside for recreational use during this period, cemeteries often were used as pleasure grounds for strolling and picnicking. This was particularly true of the large cemeteries in the Western Addition, where Sunday visits to cemeteries were among the first pleasure outings in early San Francisco.39 Thus, though these properties functioned as burial grounds, they were frequently used by the public in ways that were analogous to public parks.
37 Jacob Voorsanger, The Chronicles of Emanu-El: being an account of the rise and progress of the Congregation Emanu-El which was founded in July, 1850, and will celebrate its Fiftieth Anniversary December 23, 1900, (San Francisco, 1900), 138. 38 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 30-31. 39 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992, 103.
August 12, 2011 - 39 -
Figure 64. Congregation Emanu-Els Navai Shalome, or Home of Peace Cemetery, looking southwest from 18th Street, ca. 1863. Note the windmill adjoining Mission Creek in the foreground. 19th Street runs from left to right in the distance. (Source: FoundSF.org, http://foundsf.org/images/b/b1/Mission%24dolores-park-w-1860.jpg).
Another US Coast Survey map produced in 1869 indicates that the Mission District had developed considerably over the intervening decade. A formal grid of streets had been imposed from 16th Street all the way to 26th Street, as well as from Guerrero Street to Harrison Street. However, neither 18th Street nor 20th Street appear to have been graded west of Dolores Street by this time. However, 19th Street was then a major connector between the Mission District and western San Francisco. It is shown running through the cemeteries toward the vicinity of Church Street (not yet graded at this time), where it became a curving path running to the southwest before joining the Ocean House Road. Other than the installation of this grade, the overall topography of what is today Mission Dolores Park appears little changed from the 1859 map. As San Franciscos population grew rapidly during the late nineteenth century, cemeteries were increasingly viewed as an obstacle to development. As early as 1880, a new city charter proposed to ban burials within the city limits, but failed to pass.40 Nevertheless, accusations that the Jewish cemeteries led to sickness in the Mission District were made during the 1880s, leading to repeated calls that the cemeteries be removed.41 The true source of the illness and foul odors appears to have actually come from three pools covering an acre that had formed in the vicinity of the cemetery (likely in the low area marking the drainage of Mission Creek). A public health report did not condemn the cemeteries, but calls for their removal continued. In 1888, the Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance calling for the removal of the cemeteries as a nuisance, which led to protests that the Jewish community was being singled out, as burials were still allowed in Catholic cemeteries.42 Even before the passage of this ordinance, however, Temple Emanu-El was contemplating acquisition of a new cemetery site. According to Jacob Voorsanger:
40 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 103. 41 The Jewish Cemetery Petition of Mission Residents to Have it Closed, San Francisco Chronicle, April 8, 1886. 42 The Supervisors Closing of the Mission Cemeteries Protests Made in Vain San Francisco Chronicle, March 13, 1888.
August 12, 2011 - 40 -
After the lapse of a quarter of a century the community had grown to dimensions that rendered the Eighteenth street cemetery wholly inadequate for its original purposes. Around the sacred grounds a populous city had arisen, and the matter of continuing to inter the dead became a subject of gravest discussion. An ordinance of the Board of Supervisors, forestalling possible action by the Jewish Congregations, demanded the close of the cemetery on January 1, 1889. Responding to the suggestions of the President, a committee of five was appointed This committee speedily reported the purchase of a large tract of land containing seventy-three and one-half acres, ten miles from San Francisco, in San Mateo County.43 The acquisition of the new burial site in Colma was completed in 1888. Twenty acres of the tract were sold at cost to Sherith Israel, and the two congregations agreed to construct a joint mortuary chapel dividing their respective burial grounds. In July 1892, Congregation Emanu-El began the work of removing nearly a thousand bodies from the Home of Peace cemetery, which were loaded on express wagons and taken out the Mission road. Newspaper articles mention that the land was to be filled in and turned into building lots.44 Sherith Israel began disinterring bodies in 1894, and by the following year only 150 bodies remained in the burial grounds. According to one report: A year later, just one gravesite remained between the two cemeteries: A rusty iron railing enclosed the plot of Mrs. Augusta R. Neustadt and her two husbands, located in the center of the Congregation Emanu-El cemetery. A tall stone shaft rose above the three tombstones, making it a prominent fixture in the otherwise abandoned landscape and a source of frustration for would-be real estate developers. As long as this gravesite remained, the property could not be sold and the land could not be developed.45 Discussions about transforming the former burial grounds into a public park began at least as early as 1897, when the Mission Park Union organized for the purpose of securing improvements to the Mission neighborhood. Mayor James D. Phelan was president of the Mission Improvement Union at the time, and the Unions vice president, ex-judge F.W. Van Reynegom, recommended the tract occupied by the Jewish cemeteries. Van Reynegom was quoted as saying: I believe it an excellent idea for the city to purchase a large tract, but first let us have our park where it is accessible by the women and children. I believe it would be a crime to permit these fifteen acres in the old cemeteries to be cut up into building lots. For several reasons these blocks are peculiarly suitable for a park. They are in the center of the Mission sunny belt. One may sit out doors there when the fog is over every other part of the peninsula.46 In December 1899, Phelan and the Board of Supervisors secured a special election authorizing bonds for an extension of the Golden Gate Park panhandle and the purchase of the two Jewish cemeteries for a park in the Mission District. Both measures passed, but were subsequently challenged in court because they had been approved before a new city charter authorizing such bonds took effect.47
43 Jacob Voorsanger, The Chronicles of Emanu-El: being an account of the rise and progress of the Congregation Emanu-El which was founded in July, 1850, and will celebrate its Fiftieth Anniversary December 23, 1900, (San Francisco, 1900), 139. 44 Moving the Dead Scenes at the Old Jewish Cemeteries, San Francisco Chronicle, August 13, 1892. 45 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 30-31. 46 Why the Mission Asks for a Park, San Francisco Chronicle (26 April 1897) 9. 47 Randolph Stephen Delehanty, San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II), Harvard University, 1992), 218-219.
August 12, 2011 - 41 -
Despite this setback, Mission residents continued to pursue acquisition of the cemeteries through the issue of park improvement bonds. The Mission Improvement Union passed a resolution in August 1903, stating that: the establishment of a small park on the two blocks in front of the Mission High School, between Eighteenth and Twentieth streets will be of great benefit to the Mission district and is an urgent necessity for the residents of this section of San Francisco; that we are in favor of the proposed bond issue of $293,000 for the purchase of the park at this point because it is contiguous to the Mission Dolores, will be in the center of 20,000 dwellers in the Mission, is so sheltered as to be the best place for public botanical gardens, and is naturally attractive.48 In September 1903, a series of bond measures were sent to the voters by the Board of Supervisors. These included bonds for improved streets, new schools and playgrounds, and a new county jail, as well as the purchase of land for new and expanded parks. Item No. 12 in the September election was a measure to issue $293,000 in bonds for acquiring Mission Park. The bond item needed a two-thirds majority vote and was passed by 1,888 votes: 19,386 in favor and 6,862 against.49 According to Carey & Co.: The bond measure passed overwhelmingly, a beneficiary of the City Beautiful Movement that had taken hold of San Francisco. The City sold bonds in 1904 to purchase the former Jewish cemeteries and, in February 1905, purchased the land with the promise to its original owners that the site would always remain a place of beauty. After years of delay the city vowed to create one of the most beautiful parks that now adorn San Francisco. 50
Topography
Based on historic photographs, the overall topography of the Jewish cemeteries appears largely consistent with the topography shown on the 1859 US Coast Survey Map. The highest point in the park was the southwest corner, while the northern end was relatively flat. Mission Creek ran along the northern edge of the Home of Peace cemetery adjacent to 18th Street. The most obvious topographical modification was the grading of 19th Street between Dolores and Church streets. Other areas that were obviously graded include the site of the mortuary chapel, as well as the walking paths to the grave sites. The prominent terraces of today are not visible in any of the historic photographs.
Vegetation
During the Jewish cemetery era in the late nineteenth century, it appears that a variety of vegetation was present. Generally speaking, comparisons of historic photographs indicate that the majority of the vegetation was concentrated toward the west end of the property in the vicinity of the gravesites. At one point, shrubs or trees were placed at regular intervals along the Dolores Street border of the property from at least 18th and 19th streets, as well as along 18th Street. The gravesites themselves were also surrounded by various formal plantings. A photograph of the Home of Peace cemetery taken in 1880 shows clear evidence of topiary plantings among the gravesites, with trees and/or shrubs clipped into a cylindrical or conical shapes (Figure 65). Common plants that may have been used for this purpose during the era include European Box (Buxus sempeviruns), Bay Laurel (Laurus nobilis), Yew and Privet.51 This same 1880 photograph also indicates a hedge running east-west toward the northern end of the site, while the mortuary chapel is surrounded by numerous trees and
Anxious For Park, San Francisco Chronicle (26 August 1903) 12. Ten Bond Items Carry; Two Are Voted Down, San Francisco Chronicle (30 September 1903) 16. 50 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 34. 51 Topiary, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topiary accessed 1 August 2011.
48 49
August 12, 2011 - 42 -
shrubs. Other photographs indicate that the course of Mission Creek was surrounded by low shrubbery.
Figure 65. Home of Peace Cemetery, looking east from Church Street, 1880. Dolores Street runs left to right in the background, while 19th Street is visible at upper right. (Source: FoundSF.org, http://foundsf.org/images/e/e5/Mission%24dolores-park-e-1880.jpg).
A circa 1890 photograph indicates that the Hills of Eternity cemetery in the southern half of the site above 19th Street also featured numerous landscape plantings at that time (Figure 66). Though the image is indistinct, it appears to show numerous shrubs and trees.
Figure 66. Detail from a circa 1890 photograph of the Mission. The Jewish cemeteries appear as the dark rectangle at center, with Dolores Street as a white line beyond. (Source: FoundSF.org: http://foundsf.org/index.php?title=File:Castro1$lower-castro-and-mission.jpg).
It is not clear whether any plantings from the cemetery era survive. Photographs taken in the early twentieth century appear to indicate that all of this vegetation was removed.
August 12, 2011 - 43 -
Circulation
At least as early as 1869, 19th Street divided the present park property into two cemeteries. Historic photographs indicate that in 1876, circulation in the northern Home of Peace cemetery between 18th and 19th streets included a straightpossibly pavedwalkway that ran east-west (Figure 67). It connected the mortuary chapel to a circular fountain in the center of the block, and continued to the west end of the property. Curving unpaved paths circled the chapel and paralleled the center path. Narrower unpaved paths extended north and south from this axis. The only circulation path that remains is the line of 19th Street, today marked by a pedestrian boulevard.
Figure 67. Home of Peace Cemetery, looking northeast toward Dolores Street, 1876. Note that 18th Street has not yet been graded east of Dolores Street. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAD-6139) Furnishings
Fences At least as early as 1876, a masonry and wood fence enclosed the Home of Peace cemetery, and quite likely also enclosed Sherith Israels Hills of Eternity cemetery. The fence was presumably removed along with the gravesites during the 1890s, and was definitely removed by 1905. Historic photographs also indicate that formal, sometimes highly decorative iron fences were also installed around numerous gravesites. All of these were removed along with the gravesites during the 1890s. Sculptural Objects Sculptural objects in the cemeteries primarily consisted of headstones and stone obelisks of various sizes. A two-tiered circular fountain was also located at the center of the Home of Peace cemetery, surrounded by a circular fence. None of these sculptural objects remain extant. Of note, no gravesites appear to have been placed at the north end of the site in the vicinity of Mission Creek, almost certainly because the wet boggy soil in that vicinity was considered unsuitable for burials.
August 12, 2011 - 44 -
A mortuary chapel was located at the eastern edge of the Home of Peace cemetery. This rectangular building appears to have been constructed of stone and shows clear Gothic architectural influences. It featured pointed arch windows, a cross-gabled roof, corner finials, and a center cupola with pointed arches. The chapel is no longer extant. It was presumably removed during the 1890s, and was definitively no longer extant by 1905.
Views and Vistas
Views from the highest elevation at the southwest corner of the park extended north, northwest and northeast, encompassing portions of what is today Corona Heights, Buena Vista Park, the Western Addition, downtown San Francisco, the Mission District, South of Market, Potrero Hill, San Francisco Bay and the East Bay hills. As the Mission District steadily developed, new buildings and maturing landscape would have begun to narrow the view shed by degrees. Local visual landmarks would have included Mission High School, which may have obscured views of Mission Dolores following its construction in 1898.
August 12, 2011 - 45 -
MISSION PARKS FIRST DECADE (1905 - 1915)

Following the 1904 sale of bonds for the acquisition of Mission Park, the property largely remained vacant. It was not until February 1905 that the purchase was completed, and several more months passed while designs were submitted for the new park.52 According to Carey & Co.: Proposed designs represented three major trends in architecture that dominated the San Francisco Bay Area during the early twentieth century. A design by G. P. Neilson, for example, featured a rationalized landscape of level ground ornamented with formal gardens, bisecting pathways, and monumental, Classical architecture. This design reflected the Parisian influence of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, then the most prestigious architectural school in the world and highly popular among the Bay Areas younger generation of architects. Arthur Matthews was a preeminent figure in the local Arts and Crafts movement. His design called for a combination of simple artistry and nature, with trees forming a natural archway at the entrance of the park. Only Romer Shawhans design captured the Mission days and reflected the third regional style. He envisioned a largely pastoral landscape of undulating pathways bordered by trees and shrubs that led to simple Spanish colonial style buildings. A formal fountain stood at the center of this design.53 Ultimately, the Park Commission adopted a landscape design by the Superintendent of Parks, John McLaren, in September 1905 (Figure 68). The accepted design featured a pedestrian boulevard with a landscaped median and central roundabout running along the line of 19th Street. An artificial lake 300 feet by 50 feet in size would be located at the southwest corner of the park. It would function as a wading pool, as well as provide irrigation for park plantings. The southern and western ends of the park would be terraced, and a stone stairway would lead down to the pond from Church and 20th streets. A twelve-lap circular cinder track would be laid at the northeast corner of the park with an outdoor gymnasium at the center of the track. The park would also contain two tennis courts and two baseball grounds in the northern half, and a bowling green near the southeast side. A contemporary news article described plans for the landscaping, stating that The garden effect will be semi-tropical, and the entire park stocked with broad leaf plants. A row of palms will border the entire square, and an avenue of trees will be planted along the inner edges. 54 Upon completion, it was declared that the new Mission Park would be one of the most beautiful squares in the city.55 As part of the plan, the Park Commission also adopted a motion to request the Board of Supervisors to convert 19th Street to a pedestrian boulevard through the park. Previous minutes from their meetings indicate that the commissioners felt retaining it as a street would greatly mar its beauty, effectiveness and usefulness as a park land.56 Generally speaking, the plan adopted for Mission Park reflected larger transitions in park design during this period. On one hand, the plans indicate a formal landscape with terraces, an artificial lake and a prominent boulevard, all bordered by regularly-spaced trees. On the other hand, the plans also represent the growing interest in providing recreational amenities, including a baseball field, track, tennis court and lawn bowling area.
Mass Meeting to Help Mission Park Project, San Francisco Chronicle (17 December 1904) 16. Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 34-35. 54 Mission Park Plan Accepted, San Francisco Call (2 September 1905), 9; Plans for Beautifying City are Now Well Under Way, San Francisco Chronicle (2 September 1905), 14. 55 Ibid. 56 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, May 3, 1870 August 1908: 622.
52 53
August 12, 2011 - 46 -
Figure 68. Birdseye View of John McLarens plan for Mission Park, 1905. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle, September 2, 1905).
Even before this plan was adopted, the property found an interim use as the site for the Barnum and Bailey Circus in September 1905 (Figure 69). Previously, the circus had used a site located at 11th and Mission streets, which was by that time considered too small. In order to prepare the park property for the circus attractions, the Barnum and Bailey management undertook substantial grading activities. A contemporary news article from August 1905 mentions that: By arrangement with the Park Commissioners, Louis E. Cook, general agent for the show agreed to level the hills and fill up the ravines with which the surface of the park site at Eighteenth and Dolores streets was covered, and donate the work to the city in return for the use of the site. Hundreds of car loads of clay have been mixed with the sand and spread over the surface to make the ground solid, and before the end of the week the park will be almost level as a floor. Over $2000 has been expended on the work. The lot covers two city blocksjust twice the area ever before utilized by a circus in San Francisco. The show carries a portable grandstand with 5200 opera chairs. There will be accommodation for 14,500 persons in the big tent, and every one is guaranteed a seat. The entrance to the circus will be at the corner of Eighteenth and Dolores streets, and the menagerie will be erected at that end. The immense hippodrome building, which is 400 feet long and 320 feet wide will occupy ground further back. Special attention has been given to the space on which the rings and hippodrome track are placed, and the lot will afford splendid opportunities for fast horse racing.57
57
Circus to Open at Mission Park, San Francisco Chronicle (27 August 1905) 32. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 47 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 69. Portion of an Advertisement for the Barnum & Bailey Circus at Mission Park, 1905. (Source: San Francisco Chronicle, September 3, 1905).
The description of circus preparations on the northern portion of the park property make it clear that the present level appearance of this area was the result of both natural factors and the grading and filling activities by the Barnum & Bailey circus. Also mentioned is the installation of the hippodrome building further back, which quite likely refers to the relatively level area in the southern half of the park stretching from the playground area north toward the pedestrian boulevard. After the departure of the circus on September 10, 1905, it appears that minimal landscaping efforts were undertaken over the following seven months. A newspaper article from December 1905 references a Board of Park Commissioners report on the progress of improvements at Mission Park.58 These appear to have included the terraces located on the south and southwest end of the park, which were in the process of being constructed when the Great Earthquake struck San Francisco on April 18, 1906.59 Following the tremors, fires erupted from a variety of sources, including fallen lanterns and chimneys, damaged boilers, broken gas mains, and flammable industrial materials that were knocked to the ground. These fires quickly grew out of control as they ignited the densely packed wood-frame boarding houses, hotels, and rows of aging houses throughout Downtown San Francisco and the South of Market district. The water mains were mostly broken and fire fighters were powerless to stop the flames from rapidly consuming the neighborhoods. One of these conflagrations, known as the ham and eggs fire, spread from a location in Hayes Valley southward into the Mission District. Local residents and the California National Guard worked to contain the flames, and decided to use 125-foot-wide Dolores Street as a firebreak. Buildings on the streets eastern side were dynamited in advance of the flames, using explosives
58 59
Park Commissioners Hold Regular Session, The San Francisco Call, December 10, 1905, 21. Demand is Made for Better Parks, The San Francisco Call, November 13, 1910, 46. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 48 -
August 12, 2011
supplied by James Phelan.60 Along with water from the golden fireplug located at Church and 20th streets and cisterns located elsewhere in the Mission District, the fire was halted at 20th Street. Even before the flames were extinguished, displaced residents grabbed whatever possessions they could carry and began streaming into Mission Park. Several photos were also taken from Mission Park, as its elevation afforded a near-panoramic view of the unfolding disaster (Figure 70).
Figure 70. View northeast from Church and 19th Streets of refugees gathering in Mission Park, April 18, 1906. (Source: University of California Calisphere, 10051099A)
Once the flames were extinguished, efforts were made to accommodate thousands of displaced residents. Initially, this was carried out informally on an ad-hoc basis. For the first two months after the earthquake, many refugees lived in tents or crude shacks strewn throughout Mission Park (Figure 71). In June, the Army took over administration of the park, and wooden barracks were also erected in the burned area along the east side of Dolores Street, across the street from the park.61 On July 29, 1906, Father D. O. Crowley, head of the Youths Directory (an organization that provided housing for abandoned and abused boys in the Mission District), led a number of volunteers in tearing down the barracks and constructing semi-permanent cottages within Mission Park. These volunteers included James Rolph, then president of the Mission Improvement Association, who also provided headquarters for the Mission Relief organization within the stables of his property located near 25th and Guerrero streets. With permission from the Park Commission, thirty cottages were begun on the eastern frontage of the park along Dolores Street between 18th and 19th streets, as well as along 18th Street between Dolores and Church streets. These marked the very first standardized refugee cottages built in San Francisco following the disaster.62 In addition to using materials from the demolished barracks, $15,000 was estimated as needed to complete the work. Each cottage consisted of two to three
San Francisco Planning Department, City Within a City: Historic Context Statement for San Franciscos Mission District, (San Francisco, November 2007), 57-58. 61 Relief Camps at the Mission, San Francisco Chronicle (28 April 1906) 9. 62 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 42.
60
August 12, 2011 - 49 -
rooms with bathrooms. Each lot was 25 feet wide by eighty feet deep. The houses were managed by the Mission Improvement Association.63 In time, the first earthquake cottage constructed in Mission Park came to be known as the Crowley Cottage, named in honor of Father Crowley. On 26 June 1909, the Mission Promotion Association sent a letter to the Board of Park Commissioners, stating that they: Hereby transfer to the Board of Park Commissioners the Crowley Cottage on the Mission Park at Nineteenth and Dolores Streets. As you are no doubt aware, this cottage, erected by this Association, was the first refugee cottage erected in San Francisco. In transferring this to your jurisdiction we desire to request that it be retained in is present location on the Mission Park and externally beautified with trellises etcetera, so that it will truly be an ornament to the Mission Park and Mission district.64
Figure 71. Informal refugee camp in Mission Park, circa June 1906. (Source: California State Library F869.S3.S24794 Vol. 1:086a).
Not long after the initial cottages were constructed in Mission Park, more organized efforts were undertaken to provide housing for refugees. A non-profit corporation, the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Fund Corporation, was created to help construct refugee camps, including eleven such camps set up in public parks throughout the city. These included a camp at Mission Park, established as Camp No. 29 (Figure 72) and opened on November 19, 1906. It featured 512 three-room houses, constructed at a cost of nearly $74,000.65 At its maximum, the camp housed over 1,600 refugees. In time, relief agencies constructed over 5,300 earthquake shacks throughout San Francisco. These cottages were not free, but rather were designed as affordable interim housing for those with moderate incomes. Those of the poorest classes who could not afford them had to fend for themselves.66
Mission Residents to Build Thirty Cottages for Refugees, San Francisco Chronicle (30 July 1906). Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, September 17, 1908 March 27, 1913, 27. 65 Report of the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Funds, a Corporation, to the American National Red Cross, Sixth Annual Report of the American National Red Cross Covering the Period From January 1 to December 31 1910, (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1911), 90-93. 66 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 42.
63 64
August 12, 2011 - 50 -
Figure 72. View of Relief Camp No. 29 at Mission Park, looking southwest from 18th and Dolores streets, late 1906. (Source: Bancroft Library, BANC PIC 1994.022-ALB v. 314).
The refugee camp at Mission Park operated until 1908. Following the departure of the refugees, Mission Park was described as: one of the first to be reconstructed It was put in condition immediately after the refugee houses were removed therefrom. The water pipe system was taken up and relaid, loam was spread over the park, and fertilizer followed, after which it was plowed and planted. The trees and shrubs destroyed were taken up and growing ones replaced. The macadam from the walks used by the Red Cross people was hauled away and the lawns and whole park were quickly brought into condition.67 In addition to landscaping, several features proposed in John McLarens original plan for Mission Park were also installed about 1909, including tennis courts and a wading pool. The 1910 Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners provides the following inventory: There are terraces, two tennis courts, a wading pool and an athletic field. Grassy borders, shade trees, groups of palms and flowering shrubs, render the grounds attractive. The expectations of the founders of the Park have been met. The dwellers in the Mission District of San Francisco promoted the park enterprise with a deal of enthusiasm and energy, and they have their reward in the pleasure and recreating comforts which the park bestows. The Park Commissioners recently ordered drinking fountains, of the modern type for this park.68 In general, these new amenities were placed in locations approximating the original plans. The new tennis courts were installed in the northwest area of the park, while the athletic field was placed across from Mission High School. The cement wading pool was constructed on the upper slopes of the park near 20th street (Figure 73). But instead of being placed in the southeast corner as
Metson Roasts Public Attack on Park Board, The San Francisco Call, November 13, 1910, 18. Hugh M. Burke, ed., Fortieth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners of San Francisco for the Year Ending June 30, 1910, (San Francisco: Dickinson & Scott, 1910), 53.
67 68
August 12, 2011 - 51 -
envisioned by John McLaren, it was placed further east, in the middle of the bowl-shaped area presumably graded by the Barnum & Bailey Circus. Construction of the pool cost $127.50, while the tennis courts cost $1,018.69
Figure 73. Wading Pool, 1917. (Source: FoundSF.org, Greg Gaar Collection- Mission$Dolores-park-w-1917.jpg)
As an increasingly attractive public space, Mission Park served as an anchor for redevelopment in the Mission Dolores neighborhood. This included the construction of several notable public assembly buildings at its borders, including Reverend Dennis O. Crowleys monumental three-story Catholic Youth Directory, standing atop the hill at 19th and Church Streets. The Mission Congregational Church constructed a Gothic Revival style brick church at Dolores and 19th streets, while the impressive dome of the Second Church of Christ Scientist rose a short distance to the south.70 Despite the recent improvements at Mission Park, however, critics in 1910 charged that not nearly enough was being done. Prominent among them was Father Crowley, who declared that: For a year after the fire Mission Park was partly covered with shacks occupied by the refugees. After the removal of the shacks the grounds were improved to some extent. Although benefited by nature more than other parks, it can not be compared in beauty and condition with the least of the parks in the Western Addition.71 The Mission Promotion Association also made repeated requests for improved facilities at the park. These included the installation of a playground, paved sidewalks, bathrooms, and associated improvements for Dolores Street. The Board of Park Commissioners relented in 1910, promising to install a convenience station (bathroom) in the park, as well as pave the streets in front of the park. Money was also appropriated to install planted medians in the center of Dolores Street.72
69 Hugh M. Burke, ed., Fortieth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners of San Francisco for the Year Ending June 30, 1910, (San Francisco: Dickinson & Scott, 1910), 79. 70 Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volumes 1 and 2 (San Francisco, CA, 2009), 47 71 Demand is Made for Better Parks, The San Francisco Call, November 13, 1910, 46. 72 Mission Park to Get Improvements, San Francisco Chronicle (27 August 1910), 9.
August 12, 2011 - 52 -
It was not until 1912, however, that the pedestrian boulevard along 19th Street was developed between Church and Dolores streets.73 That same year, the Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners revealed that $1,820 was spent on improvements for Mission Dolores Park.74 This appears to have been the first time that it was called Dolores in Board reports. However, Mission Park continued to appear as the typical name used by the Board for many more decades. Also in 1912, a contract was issued to construct the convenience station promised earlier by the Board. At the time, the San Francisco Department of Public Health was advocating for the installation of convenience stations and sanitary drinking fountains at a variety of locations, due in part by the expected crush of visitors who would arrive for the 1915 Panama Pacific International Exhibition. The Department adopted resolutions stating in part that the construction of convenience stations is essentially necessary in order to protect the health and add to the comfort of the citizens, and that the erection of sanitary drinking fountains throughout the city in conjunction with the comfort stations appears to be almost a crying necessity.75 The Department specified that convenience stations should be added in a variety of locations, including Mission Park. Designs for the Mission Park convenience station were prepared by John McLaren, who advocated that it should have tile floors and marble walls, as concrete walls were unsanitary.76 The work was carried out by the Monson Brothers at a cost of $7,150, and presumably completed in 1913.77 Following the presentation of a petition by the mayor, the playing of baseball was allowed in Mission Park in 1913. However, numerous complaints were subsequently made about the danger of flying baseballs.78 Other recreational uses of the park included the tennis courts, which were in use by the Mission Park Tennis Club no later than 1913.79 In 1915, the club requested use of the Crowley Cottage as a dressing room and club, but were denied following a report by John McLaren that the cottage was occupied by one of the employees that protected the park.80 During this period, Mission Park was also frequently used for music concerts by the Municipal Band, as well as 4th of July celebrations complete with fireworks displays. The improvements to Dolores Street contemplated in 1910 were carried out over the course of several years. In particular, the development of landscaped medians, or islands as they were referred to at the time, were not carried out exclusively as a beautification effort for the Mission District. Rather, they were also part of a larger program of boulevard development that was then a major focus of the San Francisco Department of Public Works. Major boulevards in the process of development included Junipero Serra Boulevard, Sloat Boulevard, Portola Boulevard, 19th Avenue, Ocean Boulevard, the San Bruno Avenue Extension, and the Great Highway.81 The first part of Dolores Street to be parked, was the stretch between 25th and 26th streets in 1910. This was followed by twelve island parks installed in 1913-1914 at a cost of $7,000. An additional $1,500 was carried forward to 1914-1915 for additional island parks. Nearly all of this work appears to have been completed by 1917, save for small stretches between 19th and 20th streets and 26th and 27th streets.82
Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1912, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 35. 74 Hugh M. Burke, ed., Forty-Second Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners, (San Francisco: The Hicks-Judd Co., 1912), 20. 75 The Public Comfort Station in America, Engineering Review, January, 1912, 53. 76 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, September 17, 1908 March 27, 1913, 609. 77 Ibid: 634. 78 Ibid: 88; 93. 79 City and County of San Francisco, Municipal Record, 1913, 415. 80 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, April 10, 1913 April 5, 1917, 395. 81 Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1915, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 32. 82 Annual Reports of the Board of Public Works/Bureau of Engineering for the Fiscal Years 1912; 1913-1914 and 1917.
73
August 12, 2011 - 53 -
Street paving and curbing in the area also continued apace. The Annual Report of the Bureau of Engineering for 1915-1916 states that Between July 1, 1915 and June 30, 1916, more pavements were constructed under public assessment than in any other single year in the Citys history.83 A subsequent map prepared by M. M. OShaughnessy for the 1917 Annual Report shows that Dolores Street was then paved with bituminous rock & asphalt from Market to 19th Street; 20th to 24th streets; Jersey to 26th streets; and 27th to 30th streets. Basalt blocks were used from 19th to 20th streets; 24th to Jersey streets; and 26th to 27th streets.
Topography
After the removal of the Jewish cemeteries, the most extensive topographical changes in the nascent park occurred as a result of grading activities by the Barnum & Bailey circus in 1905. This includes leveling the northern end of the park in order to erect a menagerie with an entrance at 18th and Dolores streets. Plans for a hippodrome 400 feet long and 320 feet wide were also announced for the area further back in the park, presumed to be the area south of the line of 19th Street. These grading efforts appear to have resulted in the two most level areas of the park, including the north field and associated tennis and basketball courts, as well as the south lawn which encompasses todays playground area. However, photographs taken in April 1906 indicate that not all of this northern area was perfectly level (Figure 74).
Figure 74. Looking northeast from the old Jewish Cemetery the morning of the Great Earthquake and Fire, 18 April 1906. (Source: UC Berkeley Bancroft Library, BANC PIC 1996.003 v.2336a-fALB.jpg)
As a makeshift refugee camp emerged in Mission Park in the wake of the disaster, historic photographs show that most of the parks ground was heavily disturbed by refugees. These same photos also indicate that the terracing undertaken by the Board of Park Commissioners was also definitively extant by this time (Figure 75). This terracing remains extant at Mission Dolores Park.
83
Annual Report of the Bureau of Engineering City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1916, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 25. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 54 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 75. Looking west from near Dolores Street across the southern end of Mission Park, 1906. Note the recently graded terraces. (Source: California Historical Society - FN-34260)
The installation of the tennis courts in the northwest area of the park and the wading pool in the southern half of the park doubtless were accompanied by grading activities. In particular, installation of the wading pool appears to have enhanced the bowl area presumably graded earlier by the Barnum & Bailey Circus.
Vegetation
Prior to the 1906 Earthquake, it appears that few plantings had been installed in Mission Park. However, early attempts to landscape the grounds included the planting of a number of Guadalupe palms in the bowl toward the southwest end of the park adjacent to what is now the playground area. Newspaper accounts indicate that palm trees were a prominent feature of the park design proposed by John McLaren in 1905. These trees appear in historic photographs of Mission Park taken while it was used as a refugee camp, and most of these palms, now at least 105 years old, remain extant today (See Figure Comparisons 1 and 2). During this period, two other small groupings of Guadalupe palms were planted in the park: one toward the northwest end of the park, flanking what is now a paved walkway, and another northeast of the pedestrian boulevard roundabout. These may have been installed prior to the 1906 Earthquake, but it is more likely they were installed circa 1909 after the refugee camp was removed. These palms were definitely in place by 1915. Following the removal of the refugee camp, trees and shrubs were planted, and the macadamized areas that the Red Cross had used during the emergency relief (typically paved walkways between the rows of cottages) were removed. The new lawn and shrubs are visible in several historic photographs, including one taken circa 1909 which shows the Guadalupe palms at the south end of the park, as well as various shrub and hedge plantings adjacent to the line of 19th Street (Figure 76).
August 12, 2011 - 55 -
Figure 76. Mission Park circa 1909. Note the Guadalupe Palms in the foreground, as well as the hedges adjacent to the line of 19th Street. Crowley Cottage is also visible to the right. (Source: San Francisco Public Library, AAC-8993)
More evidence of landscaping improvementsas well as street improvementsis provided by a photograph of Mission High School taken about 1913 (Figure 77). The photo shows that an orderly row of trees had been installed at the north end of the park adjacent to 18th Street. A small grouping of shrubs was also planted across the street from the high school.
Figure 77. Mission High School from Jewish Cemeteries property- showing lawn, shrub, and tree plantings, ca. 1913. Note the shadow of the tennis court fence at lower right. (Source: UC Berkeley Calisphere- Bancroft Library)
Other historic photos a few years later indicate that at least some of the Victorian Box trees located in the northwestern area of the park adjacent to the tennis court were in place by this time, as was another row of Victorian Box trees located northwest of the roundabout in the pedestrian boulevard (Figure 78). At least some of these trees remain extant today in both locations. Similarly, a Canary Island Date palm was installed at the center of the pedestrian boulevard roundabout circa 1913, and remains extant today. The previously-mentioned Guadalupe palms in the north central and northwest area of the park are also evident. (See Figure Comparison 4). Elsewhere, a grouping of trees/shrubs also are evident at the southwest corner of the park, and appear to be represented by
four avocado trees that stand today immediately east of the MUNI stop at 20th and Church streets. Three California pepper trees located adjacent to the walkway on the east side of the MUNI tracks, south of the pedestrian boulevard, appear to have also existed prior to 1915 (See Figure Comparison 5).
Figure 78. Detail view of the western portion of Mission Park, 1916. (Source: SFMTA Archives, 2888). Circulation
Diagonal Path Historic photographs indicate that an unpaved diagonal path running northwest from Dolores Street toward the intersection of Church and 18th streets existed prior to the 1906 Earthquake (Figure 79). This path was presumably subsumed by the installation of the refugee camp. One photograph taken years after the removal of the camp shows a much more informal foot path in a similar location, but neither of these paths remain extant.
Figure 79. View northeast across Mission Park, April 18, 1906. Note the diagonal path at center. (Source: Bancroft Library BANC PIC 1991.0452-PIC).
19th Street / Pedestrian Boulevard Prior to 1912, 19th Street remained a public thoroughfare between Dolores and Church streets. In 1912, it was converted to a pedestrian boulevard featuring oiled macadam pavement and concrete sidewalks. The work was performed by A. Borland at a cost of $2,306.84 This boulevard is still extant, although it appears to have been resurfaced over the years. Walkway Adjacent to the Playground Area Historic photographs taken in 1906 when the park was used as a refugee camp appear to indicate an unpaved pathway in the vicinity of what is today the playground area. The path is shown running somewhat parallel to the terracing along 20th Street, and then curving north toward 19th Street. A paved walkway is now located in the same area, indicating that this circulation path was in place no later than 1906 (See Figure Comparisons 1 and 2). Dolores and 18th Street sidewalks Historic photographs indicate that paved sidewalks were installed along the northern and eastern edges of Mission Park by the time Camp No. 29 was operational (See Figure 72 above). These sidewalks were quite likely constructed at the behest of the Red Cross to improve conditions at the camp. Both of these sidewalks remain extant. Path in North Field A circa 1910 photo of Mission High School indicates that a paved walkway was located at the north end of the park (Figure 80). This walkway is likely no longer extant, while the current walkway at the south edge of the tennis courts was constructed at the same time as the courts.
Figure 80. View of Mission High School, circa 1910. Note the walking path at center, as well as a dirt play area in the distance.. (Source: Bancroft Library BANC PIC 1991.0452-PIC).
84 Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1912, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 35.
August 12, 2011 - 58 -
Furnishings
Tennis Courts As previously discussed, tennis courts were installed at the northwestern end of Mission Park circa 1909. These courts remain extant today as the western-most tennis court and basketball court located near the intersection of 18th and Church Streets. Wading Pool An irregular, amoeba shaped wading pool was constructed in the southern half of the park circa 1909. It remained in use as a wading pool until the 1920s, when it was converted to a playground. The general shape of the pool was retained until July 2011, when it was removed for playground reconstruction/enlargement. Ball Fields In 1913, baseball playing was allowed in Mission Park, although it does not appear that any formal structures were developed. The exact location of the ball field is unclear, although presumably it was located in the flatter, northern end of the park. A photo of Mission High School taken circa 1910 does show a flattened dirt area at the north end of the park across from the school (See Figure 80 above). Wooden bench The same circa 1910 photograph of Mission High School mentioned above shows a wooden bench adjacent to the walkway. This bench is no longer extant. Flag Pole Historic photos indicate that a large metal flagpole was installed at the southwest corner of the park near 20th and Church Streets prior to 1915. It is no longer extant. Fences Based on historic photographs, chain-link fences were constructed around the northwest tennis courts, and were in place by 1913.
Earthquake Cottages As previously discussed, the first thirty refugee cottages were installed in Mission Park beginning in July 1906. These were later joined by approximately 500 additional refugee cottages installed by the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Fund Corporation. The cottages were concentrated in the north half of the park, including a line of cottages running along a terraced area at the eastern edge of Church Street. All but one of these cottages was removed by the end of 1908. However, the first cottage constructed in Mission Park, known as the Crowley Cottage, was allowed to remain in the park as a reminder of the disaster. It was located adjacent to Dolores Street, immediately north of the line of 19th Street. The cottage was subsequently used by park personnel and remained in the park until sometime between 1956 and 1968. Convenience Station The convenience station (bathroom) was constructed circa 1913 near the center of Mission Dolores Park, south of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard. It was designed by Golden Gate Park Superintendant John McLaren, and constructed by the Monson Brothers. As completed, the convenience station was a concrete building designed in accordance with other civic buildings then
under construction in San Francisco. It evidenced the influence of the City Beautiful Movement with Classically inspired details including corner piers with rusticated accents and a paneled frieze set off by cornices. The building was sunken into the hillside, while the roof was left flat for use as a lookout platform affording views of the park (Figure 81). The convenience station remains extant as the ground floor of the bathroom facility in the park. A new second floor was added on top of the convenience station in 1960. This addition is described more thoroughly in later sections of the report.
Figure 81. Mayor James Rolph, speaking from the viewing platform atop the convenience station in Mission Park, August 11, 1917. (Source: San Francisco Public Library, AAA-6817). Infrastructure
Historic photographs indicate that wooden electric power poles were installed at the north end of the park along 18th Street by circa 1913. These are no longer extant.
August 12, 2011 - 60 -
STREETCARS AND PLAYGROUNDS (1916 1946)

The first major addition to Mission Dolores Park after 1915 was the construction of the San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) streetcar line at the western edge of the park. MUNI was created in 1912 as part of a larger Progressive Era effort by the city to take control of municipal services. This included Article XII of the 1900 City Charter, which declared that it was the intention of the people that its public utilities shall be gradually acquired and ultimately owned by the City and County of San Francisco.85 Soon after its creation, MUNI undertook a large building program, largely funded by $3.5 million in bonds championed by Mayor Rolph and authorized by a vote of 51,452 to 13,782 during a special election held in August 1913. 86 Much of the initial work was directed at developing service for the Panama Pacific International Exhibition (PPIE) held in the Marina District in 1915. Three temporary and four permanent streetcar lines, as well as the 911-foot Stockton Street Tunnel, were all completed by 1915. By 1918, MUNI had also completed the Twin Peaks Tunnel and associated streetcar line, helping to open up the southwestern portion of the city to development. As part of MUNIs bond-funded expansion, a new electric streetcar line was also proposed to run south down Church Street to serve the rapidly-developing Noe Valley area. A major problem, however, was overcoming the steep grades along Church Street from 18th Street to 22nd Street. The 1914-1915 Bureau of Engineering Annual Report stated that nine possible methods of overcoming the grade were studied, including constructing a tunnel at the top of Mission Park with open cut approaches. 87 Plans to insert the streetcar line into Mission Park met with opposition from residents, including a group called the Church Street Railroad Non-Assessment League which spoke against permitting Mission Park to be disfigured by a railroad.88 The City Engineer also stated that constructing a tunnel would injure Mission Park.89 Nevertheless, the 1916 Bureau of Engineering Annual Report stated that after protracted discussion which lasted for 18 months, the Supervisors passed an ordinance empowering the Board of Public Works to authorize the City Engineer to prepare plans for constructing the Church Street extension of the Municipal Railway System and approving the plan for overcoming the grades between 18th and 22nd streets by a diversion through Mission Park and private property between 20th and 22nd streets (Figure 82).90
Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1916, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1916), 15. 86 City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Board of Public Works, 1914-1915, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 39-40. 87 City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Board of Public Works, 1914-1915, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915), 39-40. 88 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, April 10, 1913 April 5, 1917, 373. 89 City and County of San Francisco, 1913 Municipal Record, 137 90 City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Board of Public Works, 1916, (San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1916), 16.
85
August 12, 2011 - 61 -
Figure 82. Construction of the Church Street streetcar extension, 1916. View is looking south from the vicinity of Church and Dorland streets. (Source: SFMTA Archives).
Construction of the line through Mission Park required extensive excavations for a sunken viaduct at the west end of the park. The west side of the tracks adjacent to Church Street was also terraced in order to install a paved walkway. The most novel feature, however, was the installation of a prominent arched concrete bridge which spanned the tracks to connect the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard with Church Street (Figure 83). The overall effect of the bridge, stairs, and passenger stops was very much in keeping with other contemporary MUNI projects, including the Stockton Tunnel and the entrance to the Twin Peaks Tunnel at West Portal. These designs all display Classicalstyle influence in accordance with City Beautiful principles which dominated civic architecture in San Francisco at that time.
Figure 83. Bridge and passenger stops at 19th Street in Mission Park, 1917. Note the extensive grading required to construct the sunken viaduct. (Source: Annual Report of the Bureau of Engineering, 1917).
By contrast, a Spanish Colonial Revival style MUNI passenger stop also appears to have been installed during this period at the northwest end of the park adjacent to the intersection of Church and 18th Streets (Figure 84). It appears on a 1946 Plot Plan of the park, and may have been installed
August 12, 2011 - 62 -
around the same time as the pedestrian bridge/passenger stops to the south at 19th Street. The Spanish Colonial Revival style was used for the Laguna Honda (now known as Forest Hill) MUNI stop developed in conjunction with the Twin Peaks Tunnel, as well as another, apparently identical passenger stop on the Church Street J-Line located a few blocks to the south near the intersection of 21st and Chattanooga streets.
Figure 84. MUNI J-Line at Church and 18th streets, showing the passenger shelter at left, 1964. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAC-8664).
Most of the construction for the new streetcar line south to 30th Street was completed prior to July 1916.91 However, a dispute between MUNI and the United Railroads over rail connections prevented opening of the line until the following year. The new Church Street line (now called the J-Line) commenced operation on August 11, 1917. The cost of the streetcar line was $33,976.54 for the segment from 18th to 22nd Street, and the entire line cost a total of $3.483 million.92 The new MUNI line was not the first electric streetcar to serve the Mission Park area. In 1892, the 18th and Park No. 33 electric streetcar line was completed by the San Francisco & San Mateo Railway. It ran from 18th Street and Guerrero west toward Golden Gate Park, and continued in operation until the 1930s when it was converted to a trolley bus operation. The Muni 33 bus line continues to follow largely the same route. The same year that the new Church streetcar line opened, a new playground was finally being constructed in Mission Park.93 As early as 1909, the Mission Playgrounds Association and the Mission Promotion Association asked the Board of Supervisors to re-submit for the approval of the voters the installation of playground sites at 18th and Dolores streets in Mission Park, as well as two other locations in the Mission District.94 However, it was not until 1916 that the Mission Promotion Association succeeded in convincing the Board of Supervisors to introduce a resolution for installing
Ibid. City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Board of Public Works, 1917, 79. 93 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, April 12, 1917 December 20, 1923 (1917), 26. 94 Mission District Being Improved, San Francisco Chronicle (4 June 1913) 9.
91 92
August 12, 2011 - 63 -
a playground in the park. According to a San Francisco Chronicle article at the time, about 14,000 children resided in the immediate vicinity of the Central Mission who could use the new facility.95 The new playground was located in the northeastern corner of the park across from Mission High School and immediately east of the tennis courts. The minutes of the Board of Park Commissioners for 1917 also show a request from the Mission Promotion Association to construct a ledge around the wading pool to prevent children from falling in, though this ledge does not appear to have been constructed.96 The wading pool remained in use through at least 1924, but historic photos indicate that it was drained and converted to a sandy playground sometime before 1929, likely becoming the replacement for the playground developed at the northern end of the park across from Mission High School. A possible catalyst for the removal of the playground was a fire which destroyed the original Mission High School in 1922. The building was then replaced by the current Mission High School, constructed in phases between 1923 and 1927 and designed in a monumental Spanish BaroqueChurrigueresque style.97 While the new Mission High School was under construction, large temporary classrooms were erected in the northeast corner of Mission Park near the intersection of 18th and Dolores Streets (Figure 85).98
Figure 85. Looking north across the drained wading pool in Mission Park, circa 1927. Note the large temporary classrooms for Mission High School at upper right. (Source: San Francisco Public Library aad-7259)
During the Great Depression and continuing through World War II, only a few improvements appear to have been made in Mission Park. Sometime between 1930 and 1944, a large new set of tennis courts was installed at the northeast corner of the park, taking over the space previously occupied by the playground and temporary classrooms for Mission High School. In 1938, the minutes of the Board of Park Commissioners show a request to install three more tables for chess and checker players at Mission Park. A similar request for more supervision in Dolores Park also
Mission Tots to Have Playground, San Francisco Chronicle (18 March 1916) 9. Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, April 12, 1917 December 20, 1923 (1917), 64. 97 Matt Weintraub, Mission High School - California Department of Parks and Recreation 523A and 523B forms, 30 September 2006, 11. 98 The Mission Year Book of the Mission High School Spring Term 1928. Forward message from principal William J. Drew.
95 96
August 12, 2011 - 64 -
appears in the Board minutes from 1941. The latter mention is notable as it marked the first time since 1912 that it was called Dolores Park in Board reports. Nevertheless, Mission Park continued to appear as the typical name used by the Board for many years afterward. Given the wartime shortage of men and material, it is not surprising that few, if any, improvements were made in the park during World War II. The next mention of it in Board minutes is a request for additional play apparatus in October 1945.99 The decision to end this period of development with the year 1946 is directly related to two important factors. First is the end of World War II and the ensuing baby boom, which resulted in a tremendous expansion of San Franciscos recreational facilities during the 1950s. The other is the availability of a map prepared by the Board of Park Commissioners in December 1946, which provides detailed information regarding structures and landscaping then extant in the park (Figure 86). Thus it is possible to state with great accuracy what features were located in Mission Dolores Park by this time.
Figure 86. Board of Park Commissioners Plot Plan of Mission Park, December 16, 1946. (Source: San Francisco Division of Engineering & Landscape Design) Topography
MUNI Streetcar Line Circa 1915-1916, the topography at the western edge of the park was radically altered by construction of the sunken viaduct and right-of-way for the new MUNI streetcar J line. A large trench was dug into the ground, removing a flat upper terrace adjacent to Church Street. Though less deep at its northern and southern ends, the trench was quite deep adjacent to the western end of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard. This resulted in the current topography in this area, with walkways on either side of the tracks perched high above the streetcar line. Some of the original terracing at the southwestern end of the park was also altered by this construction (Figure 87). This resulted in the
99
Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, January 6, 1938 June 27, 1950, (1945), 169. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 65 -
August 12, 2011
current, more gradual terracing that arcs around the corner of the park in this location. (Figure Comparison 5).
Figure 87. Early construction work on the Church Street streetcar extension, circa late 1915. View is looking north from the vicinity of Church and 20th Streets. (Source: SFMTA Archives, 2888).
Northeast Tennis Court Grading While the northeastern end of the park was already largely level by this time, the installation of additional tennis courts circa 1940 resulted in the present tabled contour in this area, which is slightly elevated above 18th Street.
Vegetation
Construction of the new MUNI streetcar line appears to have removed a considerable number of trees and shrubs from the western edge of the park. However, plantings that remained extant include a grouping of trees near the southeast corner of the park (possibly represented by four avocado trees today). A small stand of Guadalupe palms also remained extant in the northwest portion of the park adjacent to the slope of the viaduct. The other grouping of 1905 palms located in the south-central portion of the park were mentioned in a San Francisco Chronicle article from August 1916.100 They are also a prominent feature of photographs taken in the 1920s and 1930s (Figure Comparison 6 and Figure Comparison 7). In 1924, the Board of Park Commissioners boasted that the grounds of Mission Park have been made horticulturally effective by elaborate plantings of lawns, shade trees, palms and flowering shrubs.101 Many landscape improvements were made along the parks borders. A number of street trees were planted along Dolores Street during this period, appearing fairly mature in photos taken about 1930 (Figure 88). The exact species is not known, although the minutes of the Park Commission in 1938 make several mentions of the removal of Acacia melanozylon trees from Dolores Street for use at the Golden Gate International Exhibition at Treasure Island, which was slated to open the following year.102 These Acacias appear to have been located along many blocks of Dolores Street, and so it is
Restored Vision Gazed Upon Park, San Francisco Chronicle (18 August 1916) 9. Clay M. Greene, ed., Fifty-Fourth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners, (San Francisco, 1924), 41-43. 102 Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, (14 April 1938), 50.
100 101
August 12, 2011 - 66 -
quite plausible that they comprised the plantings along the Dolores Street perimeter of the park at that time. However, Acacia melanozylon is an evergreen species, and a subsequent photo taken in 1944 of Dolores Street shows a line of trees that have dropped their leaves (Figure 89). Thus, it is possible that the Acacia trees along Dolores Street were removed in the late 1930s, and new trees planted in their place. This theory is supported by a 1947 letter to the Park Commissioners from a Mission High School instructor, asking that the acacia trees missing in front of Mission Park be replaced.103 The species of tree shown in the 1944 photo is unknown, and it is unclear how many of these trees remain today.
Figure 88. Trees planted along the eastern border of the park at Dolores Street, ca. 1930. (Source: 1930 Mission High School Yearbook, 2).
Figure 89. Trees planted along the eastern border of the park at Dolores Street, April, 1944. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6828).
The same 1944 view indicates that several hedges were then extant in the park, many of which were located on either side of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard. These hedges remained in place
103
Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, (25 November 1947), 203. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 67 -
August 12, 2011
through at least 1946, but are no longer extant today. Near the eastern end of the pedestrian boulevard, adjacent to the Crowley Cottage, is a fairly large tree which appears to remain today as the fig tree. A few Victorian box trees located south of the western-most tennis courts also remain extant. The 1946 Board of Park Commissioners map indicates that several other mature trees existed by this time. This includes a number of trees located on either side of the eastern approach to the pedestrian bridge. The map also shows a small grouping of Montezuma Cypress trees located east of the wading pool/playground, along the northern edge of the paved walkway. These trees remain extant. Throughout this period, relatively little landscaping appears to have been installed on the west side of the park between Church Street and the MUNI tracks. However, a 1934 photo shows that some shrubs had been installed on the eastern edge of Church Street. (Figure 90). It appears that most or all of these plantings were later removed.
Figure 90. Church Street at 18th Street, looking south, 1934. Note the vegetation planted along the east side of Church Street. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAB-3323). Circulation
The MUNI J streetcar line was installed in 1916, with the track running parallel to Church Street, just inside the park boundaries, from 18th to 20th streets. Paved walkways running parallel to the streetcar line were also installed on the east and west sides of the tracks between 18th and 20th streets (Figure Comparisons 4 & 5). On the east side, the walkway was perched fairly high above the tracks, while the western walkway ran along an intermediate terrace between the tracks and Church Street. Access to this terraced walkway from Church Street was provided by concrete stairs constructed in three locations: a center access point at the intersection of 19th and Church streets to the pedestrian bridge, and two at half-way points between 18th and 19th streets and 19th and 20th streets. All of the walkways and stairs remain extant. A wide path existed that bordered the south side of the northwest tennis and basketball courts; this path no longer exists and was replaced by lawn. The only other new circulation feature during this time appears to have been the paved walkway running along the southern edge of the additional tennis courts installed in the northeast corner of
the park. At its east end, this walkway connected to the sidewalk along Dolores Street, while a perpendicular walkway connected to the 18th Street sidewalk west of the tennis courts. These walkways remain extant today. Dolores Street Parkway The last of the park islands in the center of the Dolores Street all appear to have been installed no later than 1920. This includes the installation of numerous Canary Island Date Palms, as well as a small minority of Guadalupe Palms located in areas such as the median opposite Mission Dolores; the first median south of 18th Street, and the first median south of 22nd Street. The 1924 Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners heaped effusive praise on the boulevard: This splendid boulevard or parkway, which is approximately two miles long and 125 feet wide, bisected by a palm shaded esplanade or alameda which has already reached the dignified appearance of arboreal and horticultural beauty, is designed to become one of the most famous future show places of San Francisco Dolores Street, by reason of its great width, and also because of its prominence as one of the leading traffic arteries from Market Street southward to the Peninsula, has finally been chosen as the future great outdoor art exhibit of San Francisco.104 The reference to Dolores Street as a future great outdoor art exhibit was an apparent reference to the installation of statues in the median. However, only one such statue was installed: a Spanish War Memorial that had previously stood at the intersection of Market Street and Van Ness Avenue. Owing to traffic conditions related to the extension of Van Ness Avenue during the mid-1920s, the 1925-1926 Bureau of Engineering Annual Report states that, the monument was removed to a commanding position in the central island park on Dolores Street just south of Market Street. Acknowledgment is herein gratefully made to Mr. August Schnepf and to the late Father McQuade, who aided in selecting the new site and in securing the consent of the Spanish War Veterans to the relocation of this memorial to their comrades.105
Furnishings
Tennis and Basketball Courts The original circa 1909 set of tennis courts toward the northwest area of the park remained in use throughout this period. Circa 1940, a new set of tennis courts was installed in the northeast corner of the park in the area previously occupied by the playground. All of these tennis courts remain extant today. The 1946 Plot Plan map of Mission Park shows that a basketball court had by that time been installed in the northern edge of the park, replacing one of the original tennis courts. It is presumed that the basketball court was installed circa 1940 along with the new tennis courts. Wading Pool/Playground The original playground, installed circa 1917 at the northeast corner of the park, contained fairly minimal facilities. It appears to have consisted of a large dirt play area containing several swing sets, and was enclosed by a wood post and wire fence (Figure 91).
104 105
Clay M. Greene, ed., Fifty-Fourth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners, (San Francisco, 1924), 46-47. San Francisco Bureau of Engineering Annual Report, 1925-26, 25. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 69 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 91. Original Mission Park playground, ca. 1920. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAB-0388)
The wading pool installed at the southern end of the park circa 1909 was converted into a playground area during the late 1920s. Previously, the playground had been located in the northeast corner of the park, and was most likely removed because of temporary classroom construction associated with the new Mission High School (Figure 92). After the wading pool was drained, the new playground maintained the same irregular amoeba shape as the wading pool. Photographs indicate that it featured a sandy play area, swing sets and perhaps some climbing equipment. The area continued in use as a playground until the present reconstruction/enlargement of the playground area.
Figure 92. Circa 1925 map of Mission Park. Note the original playground in the northeast corner (lower right). (Source: Delehanty 1992, page 211).
Wooden Benches Photographs of the wading pool area after it was converted to a playground show that wooden bench seating had been installed in that area (Figure 93). The 1946 map confirms that five benches were placed at intervals around the border of the playground at that time.106 Also in the 1946 map,
106
Board of Park Commissioners, San Francisco, California Division of Engineering and Landscape Design, Plot Plan of Mission Park Showing Elevations (16 December 1946). Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 70 -
August 12, 2011
two very long benches lined the west side of the curving path that connects the playground to the clubhouse. These benches appear to have since been replaced.
Figure 93. Mission Park playground, 28 January 1929. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6820)
Chess and Checker Tables In 1938, a petition signed by 63 persons was presented to the Park Commission to install three more tables for chess and checker players at Mission Park.107 The petition also asked that a windbreak be installed on the west side of the park. It is unclear whether these additional tables were installed, but the 1946 Plot Plan map of Mission Park does show two paved pads for tables located southeast of the entrance to the 19th Street pedestrian bridge. These particular tables are no longer extant, but the paved areas remain extant.
Pedestrian Bridge/MUNI Stops A pedestrian bridge was constructed over the MUNI Church Street Extension streetcar line in 1916 (Figure 94). It crossed from the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard to Church Street on the west. The opening under the bridge was 17 feet tall at the center of the rise. This bridge featured an entablature at the level of the walkway, and paneled piers at the ends.108 The entrance to the bridge at Church Street was flanked by two iron electroliers, or light standards, which exist today without the lanterns on top. According to a San Francisco Chronicle article from 1919, the electroliers had not been lit by that time. This led to accidents when automobile drivers approaching Church Street from the west along 19th Street failed to recognize that the bridge was not a continuation of the street.109 Beneath the bridge, passenger stops on the east and west sides of the tracks were accessed by double quarter-turn concrete stairs that abutted the south side of the bridge. The platforms were located
Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners 1936 1939, (1938), 39. M.M. OShaughnessy, City Engineer, Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco, California, Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. line from 18th to 22nd St. (1913); City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works- Bureau of Engineering, Church St. Foot Bridge Over MUNI R.R. at 19th Street, Inspection Schedule (October 1941). 109 Leon J. Pinkton, Motorists ask for Danger Signals, San Francisco Chronicle (7 August 1919) 10.
108
107
August 12, 2011 - 71 -
south of the bridge and featured curved ends, concrete curbs, and built-in concrete benches with globe light standards adjacent to the benches. A concrete retaining wall was also installed on the west side of the track. Overall, the design of the bridge and passengers stops was consistent with the City Beautiful designs of other public works constructed during the same period, including the Stockton Street Tunnel and the Twin Peaks Tunnel at West Portal. All of the features associated with the 19th Street pedestrian bridge and passenger stops remain extant except for the light standards located adjacent to the benches and the lanterns atop the electroliers. However, the smaller Spanish Colonial Revival passenger stop at 18th and Church streets was subsequently removed for the installation of a wheelchair-accessible loading platform.
Figure 94. MUNI J line, looking south toward the bridge, 1917. (Source: University of California Calisphere, I0049710A).
Convenience Station No changes appear to have been made to the convenience station between 1916 and 1946. A photograph taken in October 1926 shows a large public gathering with the convenience station viewing platform used as a stage (Figure 95). The Crowley Cottage at 19th and Dolores Street, as well as the large Youth Directory building at 19th and Church Street, also appear in the same photograph. The Board of Park Commissioners did consider rehabilitating the convenience station in 1946. A set of drawings issued that year show that the entrances to the mens and womens restrooms were located in the same area as they are today. However, these entrances opened into vestibules that included terrazzo steps running down into long corridors. The mens restroom then included four urinals, three toilets and three sinks. The womens restroom included five toilets and three sinks. The bathrooms featured tile floors and wainscots, and were separated from each other by a long storage corridor at the center of the building.110 Based on photos taken after 1946, however, this work was never carried out.
110 San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, Rehabilitation of Convenience Station in Mission Park, San Francisco, Building plans dated 20 June 1946.
August 12, 2011 - 72 -
Figure 95. An apparent political rally at Mission Park, 12 October 1926. View is to the northwest from 19th and Dolores Streets. The arrow points to the convenience station Note the Crowley Cottage at lower right. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6824).
Crowley Cottage The Crowley Cottage originally built as housing for earthquake refugees remained extant throughout this period (Figure Comparison 7). It was referred to as the caretakers building in Parks and Recreation Minutes from 8 May 1949. Mission High School Temporary Classrooms During the construction of the present Mission High School Building, two large gable-roofed temporary classroom buildings were installed in the northeast corner of the park (Figure Comparison 7). These buildings are presumed to have been extant circa 1925 1928, and were removed following the completion of the high school.
Infrastructure
Fences A concrete fence with metal railings was installed along the east side of Church Street as part of the construction of the MUNI streetcar line through Mission Park (Figure Comparison 4). This fence remains extant. Based on historic photographs, chain-link fences were constructed with the northeast tennis courts (Figure Comparison 8). Lights Various historic photos taken of Church Street in 1934, Dolores Street in 1944, and 18th Street in 1954, all show identical metal streetlamps with a distinctive scrolling arm supporting a glass lantern. Thus, it is clear that these lamps were installed no later than 1934, and remained extant through at least the mid-1950s. However, these streetlights are no longer extant today. No photographs taken during this period conclusively indicate that lights existed along paths in the park, although it is possible that a few were installed. A 1944 photograph of Dolores Street clearly
shows wooden power poles angling inward from Dolores Street to provide power to the Convenience station. MUNI Infrastructure When the MUNI streetcar line was installed at the west side of the park, it included concrete posts with T-shaped extensions supporting the overhead wires (Figure 96). The poles were subsequently replaced.
Views and Vistas
The views from the top of Mission Dolores Park evolved along with the growth of San Francisco and the maturation of vegetation. A San Francisco Chronicle article from August 1916 described the broad view from [the elevated] bridge toward the eastern side of the park.111 Expansive views also remain evident in a 1927 photograph taken near the southwest corner of the park (Figure 96). Prominent nearby buildings that would have been visible during this period include the tower of the Mission Dolores Basilica, completed in 1918. During the 1920s, the new Mission High School was completed at the base of the park, as well as Everett Junior High School at Church and 17th streets. Further north, the new U.S. Mint building was completed at Hermann and Buchanan Streets in 1937. Along with the churches along Dolores Street, these remain as many of the most prominent local landmarks (Figure Comparison 7). Views to the east from various points in the park narrowed along with the maturation of trees along Dolores Street, but not to a great degree. In later years, however, the installation of vegetation along the MUNI J Line tracks severely curtailed views to the west.
Figure 96. MUNI J-Line streetcar, looking northeast from vista point toward downtown San Francisco, 1927. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAC-8661).
111
Restored Vision Gazed Upon Park, San Francisco Chronicle (18 August 1916) 9. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 74 -
August 12, 2011
POST-WAR RENOVATIONS AND ADDITIONS (1947-1966)

As a result of the post-World War II baby boom and increasing interest in organized sports, recreational programming in San Francisco dramatically expanded during the 1950s through the establishment of numerous neighborhood playgrounds and recreation centers. Between 1949 and 1959, the city added no fewer than thirty-five new recreation facilities. During this period, there appears to have been considerable interest in installing a recreation center in Mission Park. As early as 1950, the minutes of the Recreation and Park Commission show that various representatives recommended installing a swimming pool in Mission Park, as well as swimming pools at Hamilton Playground and Rossi Playground.112 However, some area residents, particularly the Dolores Heights Improvement Club, strongly opposed the installation of a recreation center in the park.113 While a recreation center was never constructed, Mission Park did receive improvements during the 1950s. In 1957, the tennis courts were resurfaced, and in 1959, the park perimeter along 20th Street was planted with magnolia trees.114 More work followed in 1960 when a contract was awarded to architect Donald Beach Kirby to rehabilitate the convenience station. This included adding a new, second-floor field house on top of the older structure, while reducing the size of the bathrooms to accommodate additional storage.115 By 1961, the Recreation and Park Commission was receiving letters from residents thanking them for the tremendous improvement in the appearance of Mission Park.116 During this period, the park continued to be used for community events, including frequent concerts. In May 1964, the SF Mime Troup was given permission to perform at the park with the understanding that their permit may be revoked if their performances were not suitable for children. The first performances were slated for August 27-30, 1964, and today the Mime Troup continues to host performances in the park.117 During the early 1960s, the Recreation and Park Commission again entertained proposals to add additional recreational facilities in the park, including a swimming pool and baseball facilities. As before, however, these facilities were resisted by local residents. In 1965, Mrs. Elizabeth Rote, representing the Greater Mission Council and Dolores Heights Improvement Club, wrote to the Commission to oppose additions to Mission Park, particularly the plan to redesign the baseball field area. She emphasized that the residents surrounding Mission Park wanted the area retained as a park and not a recreation center.118 The most visible changes to the park during this period reflected strong demographic changes in the Mission District as a whole. Following World War II, the older European-American residents of the Mission began relocating to the suburbs in large numbers and were replaced by Hispanic immigrants. This new sense of identity for the Mission District was recognized by the installation of two new works of public art tied to the Mexican War of Independence. The first was a sculpture of Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, a Mexican priest considered the father of the Mexican War of Independence. It was placed in a prominent position at the top of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard in 1962. Four
Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (14 December 1950), 59. Ibid: (14 February 1952), 22. 114 Ibid: (9 April 1959), 107. 115 City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, Alterations and Additions to the Convenience Facility Mission Park, 24 March 1960. 116 Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (26 October 1961), 272. 117 Ibid: (28 May 1964), 157. 118 Ibid: (7 January 1965), 13.
112 113
August 12, 2011 - 75 -
years later, a replica of the Mexican Liberty Bell rung by Father Hidalgo y Costilla in 1810 was installed in a plaza at the base of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard adjacent to Dolores Street. Just a few months before the bell was unveiled, Dolores Park hosted the first annual Latin-American fiesta, which included a mass given by Archbishop McGucken. Around the same time that these monuments were installed, a reminder of the parks history was also removed. Aerial photographs indicate that sometime between 1956 and 1968, the old Crowley Cottage installed after the 1906 Earthquake and Fire was removed. Research has thus far not revealed the exact year or reasons for its removal.
Topography
It does not appear that any changes were made to the topography of Mission Park during this period.
Vegetation
Most of the magnolia trees that line 20th Street were planted in 1959.119 A line of trees appears along 18th Street in aerial photographs taken in 1946 and 1956. However, no trees are shown in a 1968 aerial photograph, save for plantings lining either side of the walkways connecting 18th Street to the basketball and tennis courts. Thus, the current magnolia trees located along 18th Street post-date the year 1968. Similarly, the majority of trees lining Dolores Street appear to post-date the 1968 aerial photograph. The installation of the Mexican Liberty Bell and plaza in 1966 removed portions of the lawn in the center of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard. Previously this lawn continued all the way to Dolores Street, where it featured a rounded terminus. Comparisons of historic aerial photographs taken in 1946, 1956, and 1968 provide important information about the landscaping along the western end of the park adjacent to the MUNI streetcar line. In 1946, a line of shrubs appears to run along the sidewalk between Church Street and the streetcar tracks. By 1956, however, a fair portion of this vegetation appears to have been removed, save for a small cluster located near the concrete stairs leading down from Church Street toward the southern end of the park. However, historic aerial photos taken in 1968 show an almost continuous line of plantings along both sides of the concrete walkway located between Church Street and the MUNI streetcar tracks. This vegetation appears more mature in the vicinity of the pedestrian bridge, while it is sparser elsewhere. Photographs taken during that time indicate that the area primarily featured flowering shrubs, lawn, and a few small trees in 1963 (Figure 97; Figure Comparison 13). It is not clear exactly how many of these trees and shrubs remain extant.
119
Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (9 April 1959) 107. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 76 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 97. MUNI J line surrounded by lawn, small trees, and flowering shrubbery, June 1963. (Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/46633980@N04/4520723872/in/set-72157623850021336). Circulation
It does not appear that any new circulation features with the park were added or altered during this time period.
Infrastructure
Lights A 1962 photograph of the park indicates that at least one light had been installed at the east end of the entrance to the pedestrian bridge crossing the MUNI streetcar line (Figure 98). However, this light is no longer extant. Another streetlight was installed by PG&E in the park in 1963, though the location is unknown.120 While it is possible that other lights existed, historic photographs do not appear to indicate that streetlights existed along park walkways during this period (Figure Comparisons 8, 13, and 14). MUNI Infrastructure Based on historic photographs of the MUNI streetcar line taken in 1963 and 1964, the original poles supporting the overhead electric wires were in place at this time (Figure 97). These were replaced with the current metal poles sometime between 1964 and 2011.
Furnishings
Sculptural Objects In 1962, a statue was erected in Mission Dolores Park to honor Mexican War of Independence hero, Miguel Guadalupe Hidalgo y Costilla (Figure 98). It was placed at the west end of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard adjacent to the entrance to the bridge. Park Commission Resolution No. 5384 also approved plans submitted by the Consul General of Mexico, for an iron fence to be installed around the statue of Miguel Hidalgo in Mission Dolores Park.121 The statue and fence remain extant.
120 121
Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (28 February 1963) 68. Ibid: (8 August 1963) 218. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 77 -
August 12, 2011
Figure 98. Monument to Miguel Guadalupe Hidalgo y Costilla in Mission Dolores Park, 17 September 1962. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-93354).
In 1966, a replica of the Mexican Liberty Bell was installed in the park. Prior to installation of the bell, Adolfo G. Dominguez, Consul General of Mexico, presented the historical background of the Liberty Bell offered to the city, stating, It was a replica of the bell which had been rung by Father Miguel Hidalgo on the morning of September 16, 1810, in the town of Dolores when the Mexican people were seeking their independence from Spain. The bell was unveiled on 16 September 1966 and was presented by Gustavo Diaz Ordaz, president of the United Mexican States.122 The plaza in which the bell is situated was designed by architect Donald Clark, whose drawings showed the mounted bell in an attractively landscaped plaza, 50 x 100, which would be installed by the Mexican Government at no cost to the city.123 Both the plaza and bell remain extant. Sports Facilities By 1947, there was a plan to resurface the tennis courts and insert five courts into the northeast corner where there had originally been four (Figure 99).124 However, it appears that the change in number of tennis courts may not have actually taken place at that time, as a plan from 1968 still shows four courts in the northeast corner.125 The courts were resurfaced in 1957.126 Today, there are five courts in the northeast corner.
122 Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (8 September 1966) 210; Carey & Co., Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey, Volume 1 of 2 (San Francisco, California) 59. 123 Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (28 April 1966) 105. 124 Board of Park Commissioners, San Francisco, California Division of Engineering and Landscape Design, Surfacing of Tennis Courts at Mission Park (20 March 1947). 125 City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering, Asphalt Concrete Resurfacing at Golden Gate Park and Mission Park (35 March 1968). 126 Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (13 June 1957) 124.
August 12, 2011 - 78 -
Figure 99. Northeast tennis courts, looking southeast, 18 October 1954. (Source: SPFL Historical Photograph Collection, AAD-6412).
Park Commission minutes indicate that plans were submitted during the 1960s for a baseball field area. However, aerial photographs from 1968 do not show any formal baseball playing facilities. Wooden Benches Historic photographs taken in 1952 show that wooden benches were installed in several locations immediately adjacent to the convenience station (Figure Comparisons 10 and 12). Another view taken in 1960 shows that additional wooden benches were located along the eastern edge of the playground area. Chess/Checker Tables Historic aerial photographs from 1946, 1956, and 1968 indicate that chess and checker/picnic tables remained in the park, located slightly southwest of where the statue of Manuel Hidalgo was installed. The tables are no longer extant.
Convenience Station/Clubhouse In 1946, alterations to the convenience station were proposed in order to renovate the restrooms, narrow the west stairs to the viewing platform so that additional windows could be inserted on either side, install ball finials at the corners of the deck, pave walkways around the building, and install a new water fountain.127 These improvements were never made (Figure Comparisons 10 and 11). Major renovations of the convenience station did occur in 1960, however. It was at this time that a new second-story field house was installed atop the older convenience station. The renovations were designed by San Francisco architect Donald Beach Kirby, with construction contracted to the Nibbi Brothers.128 Kirbys initial set of plans from 1958 Proposed Alterations Field House, Toilets
127 Board of Park Commissioners, San Francisco, California, Division of Engineering & Landscape Design, Rehabilitation of Convenience Station in Mission Park, San Francisco (20 June 1946). 128 Minutes of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission, (8 September 1960), 254; Ibid (30 September 1960) 280.
August 12, 2011 - 79 -
and Storage envisioned relocating the restrooms to the west half of the building and installing a new door on the east facade that accessed a storage area.129 The new second floor was to be divided into a directors office and activity area. As constructed in 1960, however, the restrooms were left in their original locations, but dramatically reduced in size in order to insert a much larger storage area to the west. The interior stairs that formerly accessed the restrooms were also removed. The elevation plans for the original ground floor (dated March 1960) show new aluminum sash awning windows on the north and south facades, the infill of older windows on the north and south facades, and the insertion of a new door on the north faade to access the storage area. Previously, the mens restroom included four urinals, three toilets and three sinks. The womens restroom included five toilets and three sinks. Following this work, the mens room included one urinal, one toilet, and one sink. The womens restroom included two toilets and one sink. The original decorative vents were removed, as well as the decorative posts that had ornamented the viewing platform. The walls were also re-stuccoed.130 The elevation plans for the second floor (dated November 1960) reveal a wood frame structure with a hip roof, aluminum roofing and gutters. The second story was wrapped by ribbons of aluminumsash awning windows, and new windows were also installed on the west facade flanking partiallyglazed double doors. The concrete stairs on the west facade also received new pipe handrails that led to the entrance. The interior contained a directors room to the east and an activity room to the west, separated by a Dutch door flanked by windows. The interior floors were clad in asphalt tile over cement.131 Total cost for the construction was $12,941.132 Crowley Cottage Aerial photos from 1956 indicate the Crowley Cottage was still extant in Mission Dolores Park at that time. The building was removed sometime between 1956 and 1968. Research has not yet shown the exact year and reason for its removal. Pedestrian Bridge/MUNI passenger stops It does not appear that the 19th Street pedestrian bridge and associated passenger stops were altered during this period. The small passenger stop/shelter located southwest of the intersection of 18th and Church streets also remained extant during this time. Playground Historic aerial photographs taken in 1946, 1956, and 1968 show that the playground area maintained its same basic amoebic shape during this period. A map of the southern half of the park from 1947 shows that giant swings were located to the southeast, a double slide with sandboxes on both ends to the northwest, and childrens swings to the west. Five benches lined the playground area at interspersed locations.133 The playground equipment appears to have remained largely the same through the mid-1960s (Figure Comparison 14).
129 Donald Beach Kirby & Associates, Recreation & Park Department, City & County of San Francisco, Proposed Alterations: Field House, Toilets & Storage, Mission Park (18 November 1958). 130 Donald Beach Kirby & Associates, Plans- Elevations, City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission: Alterations and Additions to the Convenience Facility Mission Park, 19th & Dolores Streets, San Francisco (24 March 1960). 131 Donald Beach Kirby & Associates, Plans- Elevations, City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Department: Mission Park Convenience Facility, 19th & Dolores Streets, San Francisco (16 November 1960). 132 City of San Francisco, Recreation and Park Commission Minutes (2 May 1960) 155. 133 Board of Park Commissioners, San Francisco, California, Division of Engineering & Landscape Design, Improvements at Mission Park (7 March 1946).
August 12, 2011 - 80 -
MODERN PARK USES (1967 - 2011)

Between 1967 and the present, Mission Park gradually acquired the vernacular name Dolores Park, presumably in recognition of its association with both Mission Dolores and Dolores Street. Today, the name Mission Park has been completely superseded. During this period, park uses continued in much the same vein as they had in the earlier post-World War II period. The park was used primarily for active and passive recreation, as well as various public events including concerts, outdoor movie nights, performances by the San Francisco Mime Troup, political rallies, and other events that reflected the diverse nature of park users. Improvements made prior to the late 1990s included several new tree plantings, most frequently using palm trees. Improved lighting was also added in various areas of park, including lights for the basketball and tennis courts. Other recreational improvements included the installation of a multipurpose soccer field on the north lawn, and the upgrading/replacement of playground equipment. No new buildings were installed during this period. However, the MUNI streetcar stop at 19th Street was abandoned and replaced with new stops at 18th and 20th streets. During the 1990s, the park garnered a reputation for drug dealing, which led to discussions of ways to improve attendance and safety in the park.134 Beginning in 1997, a new strategic plan for Dolores Park was developed over a period of eighteen months. It included a study of existing conditions, as well as a series of public meetings to garner community input. Published in 2000 as the Strategic Plan for Dolores Park, it envisioned a variety of improvements for the park, including a new caf on the east side of the Clubhouse; a new esplanade along the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard; additional bathrooms; improvements to drainage and lighting; and a dedicated dog play area. It appears that few of these improvements were subsequently made. In 2008, San Francisco voters approved a $163 million general obligation bond that provided $13.2 million for improvements to Dolores Park.135 One result of this was a Memorandum of Understanding between the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission and the Neighborhood Parks Council, acting on behalf of the Friends of Dolores Park Playground organization. The Memorandum provided for joint planning and funding of a new playground for the park, to be renamed the Helen Diller Playground. The conceptual plan was approved in 2009 through Resolution No. 0906-011 of the Recreation and Park Commission. The scope of the project includes demolition of the existing playground; excavation and re-grading of an enlarged playground site, including grading out a portion of the existing terrace; the installation of a new access driveway and accessible parking space; as well as various irrigation and lighting improvements.136 Demolition and grading activities for this project began in July 2011, the same time that research for this study commenced. A series of community meetings also began in April 2011 in order to solicit input regarding other park improvements to be carried out using funds provided by the 2008 bond.
134
Mission Economic Development Association (MEDA), Strategic Plan for Dolores Park, (San Francisco: MEDA, 2000),
8.
135 San Francisco Recreation & Parks Department, Mission Dolores Park Improvements, http://sfrecpark.org/doloresParkProject.aspx accessed 8 August 2011. 136 Dolores Parks Works, Park Commission on Track to Award Contract for New Playground, http://www.doloresparkworks.org/2011/04/park-commission-on-track-to-award-contract-for-new-playground/ accessed 10 August 2011.
August 12, 2011 - 81 -
Topography
A rectangular soccer/multipurpose field, 270 feet long by 190 feet wide, was leveled out on the north lawn in 1994. It was envisioned that the site would be used as two youth non-regulation soccer fields. Previously, this area featured a relatively gentle grade, and evidence of grading for the field is most apparent at the northeast and southwest corners of the field. In the northeast portion, the existing slope was cut away and contoured to create a ninety-degree angle, while the southeast corner features a similar ninety-degree angle perched above the surrounding area. Irrigation was also installed for the field at that time.137 As of August 2011, construction of a new enlarged playground facility has resulted in the removal of portions of the terrace at the southern end of the park adjacent to the former playground, as well as extensive excavations for a new circular access drive to the west (Figure 100).
Figure 100. Graded access drive and terraces at the southern end of Dolores Park, 18 August 2011. View is from Dolores Street looking west toward Church and 20th streets. (Source: Page & Turnbull).
Vegetation
The most prominent trees added to the park during this period were palms, all of which appear to have been in place prior to 1979. These include a group of nine Mexican fan palms planted at the eastern edge of the park by Dolores Street, halfway between 19th and 20th streets. To the south, a circle of Canary Island Date palms was planted near the intersection of Dolores and 20th streets. Other prominent clusters of Canary Island Date palms were installed west of the Clubhouse, as well as northeast of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevards roundabout (Figure Comparisons 11 and 12).
137 Bureau of Engineering, Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco, Dolores Park Soccer Field Layout Plan, As Builts (September 1994).
August 12, 2011 - 82 -
All of these trees remain extant today. By 1984, three Mexican fan palms were also planted along the walkway east of the MUNI track between 19th and 20th streets (extant).138 Magnolia trees were another prominent addition to the park. Aerial photographs indicate that the magnolias running along the parks southern border at 18th Street were planted sometime between 1968 and 1979 (extant). By 1979, a group of magnolia trees had also been planted at the southwest edge of the playground.139 These trees appear to have been removed in mid-2011 for reconstruction/enlargement of the playground. Aerial photographs taken from 1968 through 2005 provide ample evidence of the dramatic growth of trees and other vegetation along the western edge of the park. In 1968, the most mature vegetation was clustered north and south of the western entrance to the pedestrian bridge. By 1993, however, an almost solid line of mature vegetation appears along the western walkway parallel to Church Street. The younger plantings at this time all appear to have been located along the northern end of the walkway toward 18th Street. In 1968, plantings surrounded the two paved picnic table areas (known as chess or card table areas on earlier plans), which were located west of the clubhouse. Today, tall olive trees stand in the vicinity of the western-most card table, which is now occupied by a storage container. No vegetation currently surrounds the eastern-most picnic tables. From 1968 through at least 1987, hedges lined the walkways running from 18th Street to the tennis and basketball courts. These hedges are no longer extant. At least as early as 1994, a row of shrubs wrapped around the east and north sides of the tennis courts in the northeast corner of the park. These shrubs are no longer extant. Circa June 2011, most of the vegetation located immediately adjacent to the playground area was removed in anticipation of reconstruction/enlargement of the playground. This included the removal of six Guadalupe palms to the west and northwest of the playground; eight Southern Magnolia trees to the north of the playground; eight California Bay trees and one Victorian Box tree east of the playground; and five Southern Magnolia trees south of the playground.
Circulation
In 1968, a substantial portion of the parks pavement was resurfaced. This included resurfacing the paths around the tennis and basketball courts; resurfacing the circulation path running from the Clubhouse and curving around the playground area; and resurfacing the two card table areas located west of the clubhouse.140 By 1981, a paved driveway was installed that paralleled the north side of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard before curving south to join the boulevard farther west.141 This path may have been installed in conjunction with irrigation improvements and no longer exists today. Circa 2010, a new curved driveway was inserted on the south side of the pedestrian boulevard, connecting Dolores Street to the pedestrian boulevard farther west.
Mission Dolores Park Picnic Areas (1984). City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering, Various Locations Automatic Irrigation Systems, Mission Dolores Park (11 August 1981). 140 City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering, Asphalt Concrete Resurfacing at Golden Gate Park and Mission Park (35 March 1968). 141 City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering, Mission Dolores ParkIrrigation Plan (June 1981).
138 139
August 12, 2011 - 83 -
As of August 2011, a new curving circulation drive was under construction in the southeastern end of the park, designed to provide access to a new enlarged playground facility.
Infrastructure
Irrigation In 1981, irrigation improvements were made to the lower north field, as well as the vicinity of the pedestrian boulevard and tennis courts.142 Lights Various lighting improvements were made during this period. By 1982, three light standards bordered the curving path between the playground and clubhouse, remaining extant today.143 More lights were also added to the tennis court areas. Circa 1980, only one light standard was located at the intersection of paths between the northeast tennis courts and the basketball court (Figure Comparison 16). In 1991, several new lights were added to allow nighttime play at the courts.144 All of these lights remain extant today.
Furnishings
Sports Facilities The tennis courts were resurfaced in 1991.145 As previously discussed under topography, a new rectangular soccer/multipurpose field, 270 feet long by 190 feet wide, was also leveled out on the north lawn in 1994. Benches Based upon the aerial photograph from 1979, numerous benches were located at regular intervals along the west side of the curving path that connected the playground to the clubhouse. These benches no longer exist.146 Tables New tables were installed for chess and checkers players in January 1969.147
Clubhouse In 1981, the clubhouse was renovated with new electrical work for the restrooms and utility room.148 Pedestrian Bridge An upside-down V-shaped chain-link fence (called a steel canopy in drawings) was added to the pedestrian bridge spanning the MUNI streetcar line in May 1975.149
Ibid. City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works- Bureau of Engineering, Mission Dolores Park Lights: Plan of Electrical Work for Lights (July 1982). 144 Mission Economic Development Association (MEDA), Strategic Plan for Dolores Park, (San Francisco: MEDA, 2000), 25. 145 Ibid. 146 Towill, Inc. Aerial Photgoraphy, Mission Dolores, Job No. 5727, Negative No. 3571-26-2 (31 July 1979). 147 City of San Francisco, Recreation and Park Commission Minutes (9 January 1969) 2. 148 City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering, Mission Dolores Park Installation of New Electrical Service and Irrigation Facilities- Plan, Elevation and Section Views of Fieldhouse (May 1981).
142 143
August 12, 2011 - 84 -
MUNI Stop Shelter The hip-roofed MUNI stop shelter close to the corner of 18th and Church streets was removed sometime between 1994 and 1998 and replaced by ADA-accessible ramps for a new MUNI passenger stop. Playground A 1979 aerial photograph shows two sets of swings in the playground. These swings remained in the same location through early 2011. Similarly, a 1981 irrigation system drawing reveals that the playground then contained two areas of sand that remained in the identical location through early 2011. By July of 2011, all of the playground structures had been removed in anticipation of reconstruction/enlargement of the playground. The former sandy play area remained visible at this time, but has subsequently been removed during construction activities (Figure Comparison 17).
149 City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works- Bureau of Engineering, Church St. Foot Bridge Over MUNI R.R. at 19th Street, Inspection Schedule (October 1941).
August 12, 2011 - 85 -
V. EVALUATION
As previously discussed in Section II., Mission Dolores Park has already been determined eligible as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District, adopted by the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) in 2010. The HPC further clarified the parks status by adopting additional findings explicitly stating that Mission Dolores Park, as well as the Dolores Street Median between Market Street and 20th Street, were included as contributors to the identified historic district. As a result of these actions, the San Francisco Planning Department considers the historic district (which includes Mission Dolores Park as a contributing element) as a historic resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mission Dolores Parks status as a contributing resource to the historic district is not contested by this report. However, research conducted for this study indicates that Mission Dolores Park also has individual significance, and thus the following is an evaluation of the parks potential eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places as a designed historic landscape. As defined by National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes, the National Park Service defines such landscapes as follows: For the purposes of the National Register, a designed historic landscape is defined as a landscape that has significance as a design or work of art; was consciously designed and laid out by a master gardener, landscape architect, architect, or horticulturalist to a design principle Although many historic landscapes are eligible for the National Register primarily on the merits of their historic landscape design, a substantial number also possess significance in other areas. New Yorks Central Park, for example, has significance in social history and transportation, although its primary significance is landscape architecture.150 The National Register Bulletin indicates that designed historic landscapes include features such as local, state and national parks; grounds designed or developed for outdoor recreation and/or sports activities; botanical and display gardens; and plazas or other public squares. Because such spaces typically include a number of distinct elements, individual features that contribute to the overall identity and character of the landscape should be considered, in most instances, not individually but in terms of their relationship to the totality of the landscape.151 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES The National Register of Historic Places is the nations most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. Typically, resources over fifty years of age are eligible for listing in the National Register if they meet any one of the four criteria of significance and if they sufficiently retain historic integrity. However, resources under fifty years of age can be determined eligible if it can be demonstrated that they are of exceptional importance, or if they are contributors to a potential historic district. National Register criteria are defined in depth in National Register Bulletin Number 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. There are four basic
150 J. Timothy Keller and Genevieve P. Keller, National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes, (Washington, DC: US Department of the Interior National Park Service Interagency Resources Division), 2. 151 Ibid: 4.
August 12, 2011 - 86 -
criteria under which a structure, site, building, district, or object can be considered eligible for listing in the National Register. These criteria are: Criterion A (Event): Properties associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Criterion B (Person): Properties associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; Criterion C (Design/Construction): Properties that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction; and Criterion D (Information Potential): Properties that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. A resource can be considered significant on a national, state, or local level to American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. A property that is eligible for listing in the National Register is automatically eligible for the California Register of Historical Places. Below is a discussion of how all four National Register Criteria apply in the case of Mission Dolores Park.
Criterion A (Event)
Mission Dolores Park appears individually eligible for listing in the National Register as a designed cultural landscape under Criterion A (Event) for its association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. Mission Dolores Park is associated with a variety of historic tends and events that have all played a role in its development. First and most prominent is its association with Progressive Era ideals in park planning which led directly to the acquisition and development of small neighborhood reform parks and playgrounds in San Francisco around the turn of the twentieth century. In particular, amendments to the City Charter ushered in by San Francisco Mayor James D. Phelan in 1900 placed the Board of Park Commissioners under the control of the mayor, while also allowing the city to issue bonds for park development. Within a very short period, voters in 1903 approved a bond measure to acquire Mission Dolores Park, develop Dolores Street as a boulevard, create a Park Presidio extension, and expand Pioneer Park. Together, these marked the first major park development projects in San Francisco since 1868, and Mission Park became the first new neighborhood park created under the revised City Charter. Elsewhere, many of San Franciscos smaller squares and public reservations were improved for the first time since the 1850s. In this sense, the park is also strongly associated with the rising political power of the Mission District, which began to assert itself quite prominently at the turn of the century. Mayor Phelan was a resident of the Mission District, and helped found the Association for the Improvement and Adornment of San Francisco, which was a prominent City Beautiful organization. After leaving office, Phelan served as a member of the Board of Park Commissioners between 1908 and 1912, a time frame that brackets the crucial period when Mission Dolores Park was formally developed following its use as an earthquake refugee camp. Another Mission District resident, James Rolph, was elected mayor in 1911 and held that position until 1931 when he became Governor of California. During his tenure, the city undertook a number of key improvements, including the reconstruction of City Hall and the development of the Civic Center, as well as the inauguration and extension of the citys Municipal Railway. The playground movement also gathered considerable momentum in San Francisco during Rolphs tenure as mayor, as did the acquisition of further areas for parks.
August 12, 2011 - 87 -
Several other historic events and trends contribute to the significance of Mission Dolores Park under Criterion A. This includes its use as the first site in San Francisco where refugee cottages were constructed after the 1906 Earthquake and Fire, as well as its use as one of eleven formal refugee camps built by the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Fund Corporation. While the camp buildings were later removed, the line of the sidewalks originally constructed by the Red Cross along Dolores and 18th streets remain as a reminder of the camps existence. The park is also associated with the development of the Municipal Railway (MUNI), which was inaugurated in 1912 as a Progressive Era response to control of the citys transportation networks by private corporations. Soon after its formation, MUNI began a rapid period of expansion which included the development of the Church Street extension and its associated right-of-way through Mission Park. Finally, Mission Dolores Park is strongly identified with the increasing Hispanic character of the Mission District during the mid-twentieth century. This was given tangible recognition through the installation of the statue of Mexican War of Independence hero, Manuel Hidalgo, at the top of the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard in 1962, as well as the installation of the Mexican Liberty Bell and plaza at the base of the boulevard in 1966. The park was also the site of the citys first annual LatinAmerican Fiesta, which took place only four months before the Liberty Bell was formally unveiled. The period of significance established under this Criterion is 1905 to 1966. This period brackets the formal acquisition of the park by the City and County of San Francisco, through the year the Mexican Liberty Bell was installed in recognition of the Mission Districts prominent Hispanic identity.
Criterion B (Person)
Mission Dolores Park does not appear eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 2 (Person). While the park was associated with several prominent individuals, including former San Francisco mayor, James D. Phelan, and Revered Dennis. O. Crowley, the father of the playground movement, their association with the park does not appear sufficient to list Mission Dolores Park under this criterion.
Criterion C (Design/Construction)
Mission Dolores Park appears eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion C (Design/Construction) for local significance as a property that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; that represents the work of a master; and that represents a significant distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. Mission Dolores Park is an excellent example of the so-called reform or rational parks that were developed in San Francisco around the turn of the century. These parks included landscaped areas that provided relief from urban congestion, while also incorporating various specialized activity or recreational areas that appealed to different constituencies of park users. According to San Francisco park historian Terrence Young, Mission Park emphasized rationalistic concerns. Its vegetation was arranged in a formal geometric fashion, rather than the flowing, naturalistic style of the romantic era, with terraces, grassy borders, shade trees, and groups of palms and flowering shrubs Mission Park also incorporated a number of areas for active recreation, including two tennis courts, a wading pool, and an athletic field.152
152
Terence G. Young, Building San Franciscos Parks 1850-1930, (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004), 189.
August 12, 2011 - 88 -
As Mission Park accreted new features, most were also in accordance with reform/rational concerns. These included the installation of a convenience station/viewing platform, a childrens playground, and tables for chess and checker players. Two prominent park features, the convenience station and the MUNI pedestrian bridge/passenger platform, also show strong influences of the City Beautiful Movement, which was rooted in Progressive Era reforms. The parks formal landscaping plan has been largely retained, including the installation of formal rows of Magnolia street trees during the 1950s. Despite strong pressure, Mission Dolores Park never evolved into a purely recreational park. Following World War II, area residents strongly resisted the installation of a recreation building in the park, and were frequently critical of efforts to convert landscaped areas into additional activity areas. The design of Mission Dolores Park is also the work of master gardener John McLaren. Best known for his role in coaxing the verdure of Golden Gate Park from shifting sand dunes, McLaren earned the enduring respect of his contemporaries to the extent that he served as Superintendant of Parks from 1890 until his death in 1943, a period which includes the installation of the vast majority of Mission Dolores Parks extant features. Known for exercising tight control over his work, McLaren completed the initial design of the park in 1905, and was responsible for supervising the crews that landscaped the park following the removal of the refugee camp. He also designed the convenience station installed in the park circa 1913, and almost certainly was consulted on the design of other park amenities such as the wading pool, tennis courts and playground. Although Mission Park accreted various new features and landscape plantings over the years, McLarens initial design for the park remains readily identifiable. The period of significance established under Criterion C is also 1905 to 1966. This period brackets the year that John McLaren submitted the first formal plan for the park, and ends with the installation of the Mexican Liberty Bell plaza as the gateway to the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard.
Criterion D (Information Potential)
The analysis of Mission Dolores Park for eligibility under Criterion D (Information Potential) is beyond the scope of this report. CONTRIBUTING FEATURES See Appendix B for a map of the extant features that contribute to the site within the period of significance (1905 to 1966). The time periods in which the features were installed, corresponding to the historic context above, are represented on the map through different colors. INTEGRITY In order to qualify for listing in local, state, and national registers, a property must possess significance under one of the aforementioned criteria and have historic integrity. The process of determining integrity is similar for both the California Register and the National Register. The same seven variables or aspects that define integritylocation, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and associationare used to evaluate a resources eligibility for listing in the California Register and the National Register. According to the National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, these seven characteristics are defined as follows: Location is the place where the historic property was constructed.
August 12, 2011 - 89 -
Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plans, space, structure and style of the property. Setting addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the landscape and spatial relationships of the building/s. Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern of configuration to form the historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history. Feeling is the propertys expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. Mission Dolores Park retains integrity of location, setting and association, as it continues to serve as a neighborhood park anchoring the Mission Dolores neighborhood. It retains its original borders, and the majority of the buildings located along its edgesincluding two prominent churches and Mission High Schoolwhich were all constructed prior to 1930. As envisioned by its earliest promoters, the park continues to provide a venue for relaxation and recreation, and accommodates a diverse set of users that include area residents and citizens from all over San Francisco. Mission Dolores Park possesses integrity of design, retaining many of the elements envisioned in the 1905 plan prepared by master gardener John McLaren and nearly all of the major features that were actually constructed during the first decade of its existence. These include terraces, the pedestrian boulevard, tennis courts, athletic field, lawns, circulation paths, palm trees, and a surrounding border of regularly-spaced street trees. Until July 2011, the former site of the wading pool/playground installed in 1909 also remained readily identifiable. The base of the convenience station constructed circa 1913 was also designed by John McLaren. Some features that were installed over time were also in keeping with the original design intent. These include the basketball and tennis courts in the northcentral and northeast corner of the parkboth recreational features that were installed in lieu of an athletic track. As stated in National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes: The clearest evaluation of integrity is based on the presence of identifiable components of the original design. To evaluate the historic integrity of a designed landscape, it is useful to compare the present appearance and function of the landscape to its historical appearance and function A designed historic landscape need not exist today exactly as it was originally designed or first executed if integrity of location and visual effect have been preserved.153 Generally speaking, very few prominent elements were installed in the park after 1940, and virtually none were installed outside the period of significance. Construction associated with the rebuilding/enlargement of the playground area in the southern half of the park, which was initiated in July 2011, has thus far has begun to diminish integrity of design by removing part of the lower
153 J. Timothy Keller and Genevieve P. Keller, National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes, (Washington, DC: US Department of the Interior National Park Service Interagency Resources Division), 6-7.
August 12, 2011 - 90 -
terrace at the north end of the park, as well as removing the circulation path that curved around the bowl in this area. Mission Dolores Park also retains integrity of materials and workmanship. This refers both to the materiality of constructed features, such as sidewalks, paths, plazas and courts, as well as landscaping elements such as lawns, shrubs and trees. By necessity, many surfaces were repaired or resurfaced over time, but this was generally accomplished using the same or similar types of materials (e.g., resurfaced tennis courts). Similarly, it is expected that the playground equipment was upgraded over the years. The convenience station was altered by the addition of a clubhouse structure on top of the original concrete base in 1960, but this alteration took place within the period of significance. In terms of vegetation and landscaping elements, several landscape plantings dating to the earliest years of the park survive, notably including a grouping of Guadalupe palms in the southern half of the park that were in place by 1906. The large open lawns in the northern and southern halves of the park also date to the parks earliest years. Other extant plantings include a cluster of trees near the entrance to the pedestrian bridge, as well as two clusters of Victorian Box trees. The most obvious changes in vegetation include the removal of hedge plantings in various locations along or near the 19th Street pedestrian boulevard, as well as the dramatic overgrowth of the area immediately adjacent to the MUNI streetcar line. As late as the mid-1960s, the vicinity of the streetcar line contained very few trees, and views were generally open between Church Street and the rest of the park. Other prominent landscaping changes include the apparent replacement of most of the sidewalk trees planted along Dolores, 18th and 19th streets. However, as stated in National Register Bulletin 18: How to Evaluate and Nominate Designed Historic Landscapes, The absence of original vegetation may not diminish integrity, for example, if the same or similar species of appropriate size have been replanted to replace dead, diseases or mature specimens.154 After the period of significance, clusters of Canary Island Date palms were planted near the clubhouse, as well as in the southeast portion of the park. As these trees are in accordance with the plantings in the Dolores Street median, they do not significantly detract from the parks historic character. Likewise, the general thrust of the park landscaping as a combination of lawns and discrete clusters of plantings has been maintained, and therefore overall integrity of materials and workmanship are retained. Mission Dolores Park also possesses integrity of feeling. Most of the parks original key features remain intact, and it has witnessed relatively few alterations since World War II. It also continues to be used by area residents in essentially the same manner as originally intended. Thus, the sense of the area as a neighborhood oasis within the larger urban context has been maintained, and the park retains sufficient overall integrity to convey its significance.
154
Ibid: 7. Page & Turnbull, Inc. - 91 -
August 12, 2011
VI. CONTEXT & RELATIONSHIP

Mission Dolores Park is located on a large rectangular parcel bounded by 18th Street to the north; Dolores Street to the east; 20th Street to the south, and Church Street to the west. The general area comprises San Franciscos oldest developed residential neighborhood, anchored by Mission Dolores located two blocks to the north. The blocks containing the park appear to have first been formally developed for agriculture, and later used as two adjacent cemeteries. Prior to 1906, the area was primarily residential, consisting of single-family dwellings and flats. The most prominent local landmark was Mission High School, constructed in the late 1890s and located across from the north end of the park. Following the 1906 Earthquake and Firewhich destroyed all of the buildings east of the parks boundariesMission Dolores Park was initially used a refugee camp. As the area was reconstructed and the park restored to its intended use, the park served as a catalyst for the development of several prominent public assembly buildings in the immediate vicinity, including two churches and a facility for abandoned youth. Today, the neighborhood immediately surrounding Mission Dolores Park strongly retains the character it developed in the post-Earthquake period, with a majority of residential buildings augmented by a minority of prominent public assembly buildings. Instances of modern infill are modest, and nearly all buildings in the immediate vicinity were constructed during the parks period of significance.
August 12, 2011 - 92 -
VII. CEQA FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS

The following information has been included to assist project sponsors in understanding how the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act would relate to alterations of Mission Dolores Park. A. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENT QUALITY ACT (CEQA) The California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) is state legislation (Pub. Res. Code 21000 et seq.), which provides for the development and maintenance of a high quality environment for the presentday and future through the identification of significant environmental effects.155 CEQA applies to projects proposed to be undertaken or requiring approval from state or local government agencies. Projects are defined as activities which have the potential to have a physical impact on the environment and may include the enactment of zoning ordinances, the issuance of conditional use permits and the approval of tentative subdivision maps.156 Historic and cultural resources are considered to be part of the environment. In general, the lead agency must complete the environmental review process as required by CEQA. In the case of the proposed project at Mission Dolores Park, the City of San Francisco will act as the lead agency. According to CEQA, a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.157 Substantial adverse change is defined as: physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historic resource would be materially impaired.158 The significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify or account for its inclusion in, or eligibility for inclusion in, the California Register.159 Thus, a project may cause a substantial change in a historic resource but still not have a significant adverse effect on the environment as defined by CEQA as long as the impact of the change on the historic resource is determined to be less-than-significant, negligible, neutral or even beneficial. A property may qualify as a historic resource if it falls within at least one of four categories listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), which are defined as: 1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.). 2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of section 5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public
155 State of California, California Environmental Quality Act, http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/ceqa/summary.html, accessed 31 August 2007. 156 Ibid. 157 CEQA Guidelines subsection 15064.5(b). 158 CEQA Guidelines subsection 15064.5(b)(1). 159 CEQA Guidelines subsection 15064.5(b)(2).
August 12, 2011 - 93 -
agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. 3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agencys determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852). 4. The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to section 5020.1(k) of the Pub. Resources Code), or identified in an historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in section 5024.1(g) of the Pub. Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in Pub. Resources Code sections 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. 160 Based on the previous designation of Mission Dolores Park as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District, adopted by the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commissionas well as the analysis in Section V. of this reportMission Dolores Park meets the criteria for listing in both the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources. As such, the property falls within category 2 and therefore qualifies as a historic resource under CEQA.161
B. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT CEQA REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES As a certified local government and the lead agency in CEQA determinations, the City and County of San Francisco has instituted guidelines for initiating CEQA review of historic resources. The San Francisco Planning Departments CEQA Review Procedures for Historical Resources incorporates the States CEQA Guidelines into the Citys existing regulatory framework.162 To facilitate the review process, the Planning Department has established the following categories to establish the baseline significance of historic properties based on their inclusion within cultural resource surveys and/or historic districts: Category A Historical Resources is divided into two sub-categories: o Category A.1 Resources listed on or formally determined to be eligible for the California Register. These properties will be evaluated as historical resources for purposes of CEQA. Only the removal of the propertys status as listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the
Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a), Category 3: Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. 162 San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco Preservation Bulletin No. 16: City and County of San Francisco Planning Department CEQA Review Procedures for Historic Resources (October 8, 2004).
160 161
August 12, 2011 - 94 -
California Register of Historic Resources by the California Historic Resources Commission will preclude evaluation of the property as an historical resource under CEQA. o Category A.2 Adopted local registers, and properties that have been determined to appear or may become eligible, for the California Register. These properties will be evaluated as historical resources for purposes of CEQA. Only a preponderance of the evidence demonstrating that the resource is not historically or culturally significant will preclude evaluation of the property as an historical resource. In the case of Category A.2 resources included in an adopted survey or local register, generally the preponderance of the evidence must consist of evidence that the appropriate decision-maker has determined that the resource should no longer be included in the adopted survey or register. Where there is substantiated and uncontroverted evidence of an error in professional judgment, of a clear mistake or that the property has been destroyed, this may also be considered a preponderance of the evidence that the property is not an historical resource.
Category B - Properties Requiring Further Consultation and Review. Properties that do not meet the criteria for listing in Categories A.1 or A.2, but for which the City has information indicating that further consultation and review will be required for evaluation whether a property is an historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Category C - Properties Determined Not To Be Historical Resources or Properties For Which The City Has No Information indicating that the Property is an Historical Resource. Properties that have been affirmatively determined not to be historical resources, properties less than 50 years of age, and properties for which the City has no information.163 Mission Dolores Park has been previously identified as a contributing resource to a historic district adopted by the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission. This study has also concluded that the park is individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as a designed historic landscape. Properties listed in the National Register are automatically listed in the California Register. Consequently, the property is classified under Category A.2 Adopted local registers, and properties that have been determined to appear or may become eligible, for the California Register, and is therefore considered by the City and County of San Francisco to be a historic resource under CEQA. D. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIORS STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Secretarys Standards) provide guidance for working with historic properties. The Secretarys Standards are used by Federal agencies and local government bodies across the country (including the San Francisco Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board) to evaluate proposed rehabilitative work on historic properties. The Secretarys Standards are a useful analytic tool for understanding and describing the potential impacts of
163 San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco Preservation Bulletin No. 16 CEQA and Historical Resources (May 5, 2004) 3-4.
August 12, 2011 - 95 -
substantial changes to historic resources. Compliance with the Secretarys Standards does not determine whether a project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource. Rather, projects that comply with the Secretarys Standards benefit from a regulatory presumption under CEQA that they would have a less-than-significant adverse impact on an historic resource. Projects that do not comply with the Secretarys Standards may or may not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource. The Secretarys Standards offers four sets of standards to guide the treatment of historic properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. The four distinct treatments are defined as follows: Preservation: The Standards for Preservation require retention of the greatest amount of historic fabric, along with the buildings historic form, features, and detailing as they have evolved over time. Rehabilitation: The Standards for Rehabilitation acknowledge the need to alter or add to a historic building to meet continuing new uses while retaining the buildings historic character. Restoration: The Standards for Restoration allow for the depiction of a building at a particular time in its history by preserving materials from the period of significance and removing materials from other periods. Reconstruction: The Standards for Reconstruction establish a limited framework for re-creating a vanished or non-surviving building with new materials, primarily for interpretive purposes.164 Typically, one set of standards is chosen for a project based on the project scope. In the event of any future alterations to Mission Dolores Park, the Standards for Rehabilitation should be applied.
164 Kay D. Weeks and Anne E. Grimmer, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995), 2.
August 12, 2011 - 96 -
IX. CONCLUSION
Mission Dolores Park has been previously identified in a locally adopted survey as a contributing resource to the Mission Dolores Neighborhood 1906 Fire Survivors and Reconstruction Historic District. This study also finds that the park is individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places at the local level of significance as a designed historic landscape under Criterion A (Event) and Criterion C (Design/Construction), with a period of significance from 1905 to 1966. Designed in 1905 by master gardener John McLaren, Mission Dolores Park is a significant example of a San Francisco reform or rational park designed in accordance with Progressive Era ideals in park planning. The park is also associated with several other historically significant trends and events, including the advent of the Mission District as a potent force in San Francisco politics; the relief efforts following the 1906 Earthquake and Fire; and the evolution of the Mission District as a strongly Latino neighborhood. The period of significance for Mission Dolores Park is identified as 1905 to 1966, beginning with the year that it was formally acquired by the City and County of San Francisco for use as a park, and ending with the installation of the Mexican Liberty Bell plaza. The park retains integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, association and feeling. The vast majority of the parks contributing features were all installed prior to World War II, and the park has experienced relatively few alterations since 1966. Significantly, John McLarens initial 1905 design for the park remains readily identifiable despite the accretion of various features over the years. Because Mission Dolores Park has been identified as a contributing historic resource in an adopted local survey, as well as an individual historic resource in this study, it is considered to be a historic resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Any projects which contemplate alterations to the park are therefore subject to review by the San Francisco Planning Department, and should be carried out in compliance with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties pursuant to CEQA.
August 12, 2011 - 97 -
X. REFERENCES CITED
REPOSITORIES Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley California Historical Society David Ramsey Map Collection SFMTA Archives San Francisco Public Library Historical Photograph Collection San Francisco Public Library History Room University of California, Calisphere. Website accessed from: http://www.calisphere.universityofcalifornia.edu/ PUBLISHED WORKS California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistant Series No. 7, How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historic Resources. Sacramento, CA: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001. Cranz, Galen. The Politics of Park Design: A History of Urban Parks in America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992. Keller, J. Timothy and Genevieve P. Keller, Land and Community Associates. National Register Bulletin No. 18: Technical Information on Comprehensive Planning, Survey of Cultural Resources, and Registration in the National Register of Historic Places. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: Washington D.C., n.d. Page, Robert R., Cathy A. Gilbert & Susan A. Dolan. A Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports: Contents, Process, and Techniques. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: Washington D.C., 1998. Mission Economic Development Association (MEDA). Strategic Plan for Dolores Park. San Francisco, CA: MEDA, 2000. San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco Preservation Bulletin No. 16: City and County of San Francisco Planning Department CEQA Review Procedures for Historic Resources, 8 October 2004. Weeks, Kay D. and Anne E. Grimmer. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995. Young, Terence G. Building San Franciscos Parks 1850-1930. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004.
August 12, 2011 - 98 -
PUBLIC RECORDS Burke, Hugh M., ed., Fortieth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners of San Francisco for the Year Ending June 30, 1910. San Francisco: Dickinson & Scott, 1910. _____. Forty-Second Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners. San Francisco: The Hicks-Judd Co., 1912. Carey & Co. Revised Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey Volume 1 of 2. San Francisco, CA: Carey & Co., 2009. City and County of San Francisco. Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1912. San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915. City and County of San Francisco. Annual Report of the Board of Public Works City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1915. San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1915. City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Bureau of Engineering City and County of San Francisco for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1916. San Francisco: Neal Publishing, 1916. City and County of San Francisco, Annual Report of the Board of Public Works, 1917. City and County of San Francisco, City and County of San Francisco, Municipal Record, 1913. City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, City Within a City: Historic Context Statement for San Franciscos Mission District. San Francisco, CA: November 2007. City of San Francisco Parks and Recreation Minutes, 1909, 1950, 1952, 1957, 1959, 1960, 1963, 1965, 1966, 1969. Greene, Clay M., ed., Fifty-Fourth Annual Report of the Board of Park Commissioners. San Francisco, 1924. HortScience, Inc. Tree Assessment Draft Mission Dolores Playground San Francisco CA. Prepared for Recreation and Park Department, City of San Francisco, November 2009. _____. Tree Assessment Mission Dolores Park (N. side). Prepared for Recreation and Park Department, City of San Francisco, July 2011. Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, May 3, 1870 August 1908. Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, January 8, 1908 January 6, 1932. Minutes of the San Francisco Board of Park Commissioners, January 6, 1938 June 27, 1950. The Mission Year Book of the Mission High School Spring Term 1928. Forward message from principal William J. Drew. The Mission Year Book of Mission High School, 1930. Report of the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Funds, a Corporation, to the American National Red Cross, Sixth Annual Report of the American National Red Cross Covering the Period From January 1 to December 31 1910. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1911.
San Francisco Planning Department, Preservation Bulletin No. 9 Landmarks. San Francisco, CA: January 2003. San Francisco Playground Commission, Annual Report, 1928-29, and Review of Activities. San Francisco Playground Commission, Annual Report, 1929-30, and Review of Activities. San Francisco Playground Commission Minutes, 1923 - 1931. San Francisco Public Library History Room microfilm. San Francisco Recreation Commission, Annual Report of the San Francisco Recreation Commission, 1949. San Francisco Recreation Commission, Annual Report of the San Francisco Recreation Commission, 1950. Voorsanger, Jacob. The Chronicles of Emanu-El: being an account of the rise and progress of the Congregation Emanu-El which was founded in July, 1850, and will celebrate its Fiftieth Anniversary December 23, 1900. San Francisco, CA: 1900. Weintraub, Matt. Mission High School - California Department of Parks and Recreation 523A and 523B forms, 30 September 2006. NEWSPAPERS AND PERIODICALS Anxious For Park, San Francisco Chronicle (26 August 1903) 12. Circus to Open at Mission Park, San Francisco Chronicle (27 August 1905) 32. Demand is Made for Better Parks, The San Francisco Call (13 November 1910) 46. Mass Meeting to Help Mission Park Project, San Francisco Chronicle (17 December 1904) 16. Metson Roasts Public Attack on Park Board, The San Francisco Call (13 November 1910) 18. Mission District Being Improved, San Francisco Chronicle (4 June 1913) 9. Mission Park Plan Accepted, San Francisco Call (2 September 1905) 9. Mission Park to Get Improvements, San Francisco Chronicle (27 August 1910) 9. Mission Residents to Build Thirty Cottages for Refugees, San Francisco Chronicle (30 July 1906) 27. Mission Tots to Have Playground, San Francisco Chronicle (18 March 1916) 9. Moving the Dead Scenes at the Old Jewish Cemeteries, San Francisco Chronicle (13 August 1892). Park Commissioners Hold Regular Session, The San Francisco Call (10 December 10 1905) 21. Pinkton, Leon J. Motorists ask for Danger Signals, San Francisco Chronicle (7 August 1919) 10. Restored Vision Gazed Upon Park, San Francisco Chronicle (18 August 1916) 9.
August 12, 2011 - 100 -
Plans for Beautifying City are Now Well Under Way, San Francisco Chronicle (2 September 1905) 14. Relief Camps at the Mission, San Francisco Chronicle (28 April 1906) 9. Restored Vision Gazed Upon Park, San Francisco Chronicle (18 August 1916) 9. Ten Bond Items Carry; Two Are Voted Down, San Francisco Chronicle (30 September 1903) 16. The Jewish Cemetery Petition of Mission Residents to Have it Closed, San Francisco Chronicle (8 April 1886). The Public Comfort Station in America, Engineering Review (January 1912) 53. The Supervisors Closing of the Mission Cemeteries Protests Made in Vain, San Francisco Chronicle (13 March 1888). Why the Mission Asks for a Park, San Francisco Chronicle (26 April 1897) 9. UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPTS AND DRAWINGS Board of Park Commissioners, San Francisco, California Division of Engineering and Landscape Design, Plot Plan of Mission Park Showing Elevations, 16 December 1946. _____. Improvements at Mission Park, 7 March 1946. _____. Rehabilitation of Convenience Station in Mission Park, San Francisco, 20 June 1946. _____. Surfacing of Tennis Courts at Mission Park, 20 March 1947. City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering, Asphalt Concrete Resurfacing at Golden Gate Park and Mission Park, 35 March 1968. _____. Church St. Foot Bridge Over MUNI R.R. at 19th Street, Inspection Schedule, October 1941. _____. Dolores Park Soccer Field Layout Plan, As Builts, September 1994. _____. Mission Dolores Park Installation of New Electrical Service and Irrigation Facilities- Plan, Elevation and Section Views of Fieldhouse, May 1981. _____. Mission Dolores Park Lights: Plan of Electrical Work for Lights, July 1982. _____. Mission Dolores Park-Irrigation Plan, June 1981. _____. Various Locations Automatic Irrigation Systems, Mission Dolores Park, 11 August 1981. Delehanty, Randolph Stephen. San Francisco parks and playgrounds, 1839 to 1990: The history of a public good in one North American City (Volumes I and II). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1992.
August 12, 2011 - 101 -
Donald Beach Kirby & Associates, Recreation & Park Department, City & County of San Francisco, Proposed Alterations: Field House, Toilets & Storage, Mission Park, 18 November 1958. _____. Plans- Elevations, City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission: Alterations and Additions to the Convenience Facility Mission Park, 19th & Dolores Streets, San Francisco, 24 March 1960. _____. Plans- Elevations, City and County of San Francisco Recreation and Park Department: Mission Park Convenience Facility, 19th & Dolores Streets, San Francisco, 16 November 1960. Mission Dolores Park Picnic Areas, 1984. OShaughnessy, M.M., City Engineer, Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco, California, Municipal Railway System, Bong Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. line from 18th to 22nd St., 1913. Towill, Inc. Aerial Photgoraphy, Mission Dolores, Job No. 5727, Negative No. 3571-26-2, 31 July 1979. INTERNET SOURCES Brother Guire Cleary, Mission Dolores links San Francisco with its 18th century roots Founded as La Misin San Francisco De Ass by Franciscans, it survived earthquake and fire, Website accessed 27 July 2011 from: http://web.archive.org/web/20040206081822/http://catholic-sf.org/013103.html Dolores Parks Works, Park Commission on Track to Award Contract for New Playground, http://www.doloresparkworks.org/2011/04/park-commission-on-track-to-award-contractfor-new-playground/ accessed 10 August 2011. www.FoundSF.org Koret Childrens Quarter, San Francisco Recreation and Parks. Website accessed on 8 February 2010 from: http://www.sfgov.org/site/recpark_page.asp?id=26880 Richard, Christopher. Quoted in Unraveling the Mystery of Lake Dolores. Website accessed 27 July 2011 from: http://missionlocal.org/2011/02/unraveling-the-mystery-of-lake-dolores/ Rice, Walter and Emiliano Echeverria. San Franciscos Pioneer Electric Railway San Francisco & San Mateo Railway, Website accessed 1 August from: 2011http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist10/sf&sm.html. San Francisco Recreation & Parks Department, Mission Dolores Park Improvements, http://sfrecpark.org/doloresParkProject.aspx accessed 8 August 2011. Topiary, Website accessed 1 August 2011http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topiary. State of California, California Environmental Quality Act, Website accessed 31 August 2007 from: http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/ceqa/summary.html,.
August 12, 2011 - 102 -
XI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: THEN AND NOW FIGURE COMPARISONS APPENDIX B: TIME PERIODS AND CONTRIBUTING FEATURES MAP APPENDIX C: HISTORIC MAPS APPENDIX D: CONVENIENCE STATION/CLUBHOUSE DRAWINGS APPENDIX E: MUNI J-LINE TRACK AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DRAWINGS
APPENDIX A: THEN AND NOW FIGURE COMPARISONS
August 12, 2011 - 103 -
Figure Comparison 1.
Mission Park Camp, 1906. (Source: California Historical Society - FN-34260)
Similar view, July 2011 (Source: Page &Turnbull)
August 12, 2011 - 104 -
Mission Park 20th & Dolores Streets, 1906. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAC-3113)
August 12, 2011 - 105 -
New San Francisco, circa 1909. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAC-8993)
August 12, 2011 - 106 -
J Line Construction, 1916. (Source: SFMTA Photo Archives, 1916-W3326)
August 12, 2011 - 107 -
Church Street above 20th Street, 1920. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAB-3220)
August 12, 2011 - 108 -
Mission Dolores Park circa 1920s. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6821)
August 12, 2011 - 109 -
Mission Dolores Park circa 1927. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAD-7259)
August 12, 2011 - 110 -
Dolores Street and Park on April 22, 1944. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6828)
August 12, 2011 - 111 -
Mission High School, circa 1951. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAB-04110)
August 12, 2011 - 112 -
Roman Rodriguez Jury in Mission Dolores Park, March 25, 1952. (SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6822)
August 12, 2011 - 113 -
Rodriguez Jury in Mission Dolores Park, July 29, 1952. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6832)
August 12, 2011 - 114 -
Rodriguez Jury in Mission Dolores Park, July 29, 1952. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6842)
August 12, 2011 - 115 -
MUNI J Line in June 1963. (Source: petespix75 http://www.flickr.com/photos/46633980@N04/4520716554/)
August 12, 2011 - 116 -
Mission Dolores Park Playground, 1964. (SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAA-6825)
August 12, 2011 - 117 -
Mission High from Mission Dolores Park, circa 1980. (SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAD-4811)
August 12, 2011 - 118 -
Mission High from Mission Dolores Park, circa 1980. (Source: SFPL Historical Photograph Collection, AAD-4810)
August 12, 2011 - 119 -
APPENDIX B: TIME PERIODS AND CONTRIBUTING FEATURES MAP
August 12, 2011 - 120 -
TIME PERIODS AND CONTRIBUTING FEATURES Early History (1776-1859) No Extant Features Jewish Cemeteries to Mission Park (1860-1904) No Extant Features Mission Parks First Decade (1905-1915)
14 19 13 11 19 9
15
20
12
18
23 25 6
6 7 28
17 10 8 7 10 21
Contributing Features: 1. Clubhouse (first story) (1913) 2. Northwest tennis/basketball courts (1909) 3. Location of wading pool/playground (1909) Contributing Circulation: 4. Curvilinear walkway from Dolores Street, past playground to Clubhouse (ca. 1905) 5. Bisecting pedestrian boulevard (1913) Contributing Landscape Setting: 6. Terracing (1905) 7. Guadalupe palm trees (1905, ca. 1909) 8. Canary Island date palm (ca. 1913) 9. California pepper trees (ca. 1915) 10. Victorian box trees (ca. 1915) 11. Avocado trees (ca. 1915) Streetcars and Playgrounds (1916-1946) Contributing Features: 12. Pedestrian Bridge (1916) 13. Original MUNI stop with benches and retaining walls (1916) 14. Low concrete wall along Church Street (1916) 15.Electrolier light standards (2) (1916) 16. Northeast tennis courts (ca. 1940) 17. Paved picnic table/chess area pads (2) (ca. 1920s) Contributing Circulation: 18. MUNI J-Line track (1916) 19. Walking paths that parallel MUNI track (1916) 20. Stairs (3) from path to Church Street (1916) 21. Paths around tennis/basketball courts (ca. 1940) Contributing Landscape Setting: 22. Montezuma Cypress trees (ca. 1920s-1940s) 23. Various trees, including blackwood acacias (ca. 1920s-1940s) Post-War Renovations and Additions (19471966) Contributing Features: 24. Clubhouse (second story) (1960) 25. Miguel Hidalgo statue (1962) 26. Mexican Liberty Bell (1966) 27. Mexican Liberty Bell Plaza (1966) No Contributing Circulation Contributing Landscape Setting: 28. Trees (primarily Southern magnolias) bordering park at 20th and Dolores streets (ca. 1959)
3
1, 24
16
22
26 27
Page & Turnbull July 2011
Modern Park Uses (1967-2011) Outside Period of Significance- No Contributing Features
APPENDIX C: HISTORIC MAPS AND AERIAL VIEWS
Figure C1. Mission Dolores Park, ca. 1925. (Source: Delehanty 1992, page 211).
August 12, 2011 - 121 -
Figure C2. Board of Park Commissioners Improvements to Mission Park, March 7, 1946. (Source: San Francisco Division of Engineering & Landscape Design)
August 12, 2011 - 122 -
Figure C3. Board of Park Commissioners Plot Plan of Mission Park, December 16, 1946. (Source: San Francisco Division of Engineering & Landscape Design)
Figure C4. Board of Park Commissioners Surfacing of Tennis Courts at Mission Park, March 20, 1947. (Source: San Francisco Division of Engineering & Landscape Design)
August 12, 2011 - 124 -
Figure C4. Asphalt Concrete Resurfacing at Golden Gate Park and Mission Park, February 1968. (Source: City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering)
August 12, 2011 - 125 -
Figure C5. Aerial view of Mission Dolores Park, July 31, 1979. (Source: Towill, Inc. Aerial Photography, Mission Dolores, Job No. 5727, Negative No. 3571-26-2)
Figure C6. Mission Dolores Park Picnic Areas, 1984. (Source: City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering)
APPENDIX D: CONVENIENCE STATION/CLUBHOUSE DRAWINGS
Figure D1. Board of Park Commissioners Rehabilitation of Convenience Station in Mission Park, June 20, 1946. Note: this project was never undertaken, but the drawings show the original one-story building with viewing platform and original bathroom floor plan. (Source: San Francisco Division of Engineering & Landscape Design)
August 12, 2011 - 128 -
Figure D2. Proposed Alterations to Field House, Toilets, and Storage - November 10, 1958. (Source: Donald Beach Kirby for Recreation & Park Department, City and County of San Francisco)
Figure D3. Alterations and Additions to the Convenience Facility Mission Park, March 24, 1960. Note: This drawing shows alterations that actually occurred to the existing ground floor. (Source: Donald Beach Kirby & Associates for Recreation & Park Commission, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 130 -
Figure D4. Mission Park Convenience Facility, November 16, 1960. Note: This drawing shows the second story addition. (Source: Donald Beach Kirby & Associates for Recreation & Park Commission, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 131 -
APPENDIX E: MUNI J-LINE TRACK AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE DRAWINGS
Figure E1. Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. Line from 18th to 22nd St., 1915. (Source: M.M. OShaughnessy for Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 132 -
Figure E2. Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. Line from 18th to 22nd St., 1915. Note: this drawing shows the elevation changes for the track and parallel walkways between 18th and 19th streets. (Source: M.M. OShaughnessy for Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 133 -
Figure E3. Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. Line from 18th to 22nd St., 1915. Note: this drawing shows the elevation changes for the track and parallel walkways between 19th and 20h streets. (Source: M.M. OShaughnessy for Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 134 -
Figure E4. Footbridge at 19th Street, Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. Line from 18th to 22nd St., 1915. (Source: M.M. OShaughnessy for Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco)
August 12, 2011 - 135 -
Figure E5. Footbridge at 19th Street, Municipal Railway System, Bond Issue of 1913, Contract No. 23, Section B, Church St. Line from 18th to 22nd St., 1915. (Source: M.M. OShaughnessy for Department of Public Works, City and County of San Francisco)
ArCHiteCture PLAnning & reSeArCH BuiLding teCHnoLogy
www.page-turnbull.com 1000 Sansome Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94111 415.362.5154 / 415.362.5560 fax 2401 C Street, Suite B Sacramento, California 95816 916.930.9903 / 916.930.9904 fax 417 S. Hill Street, Suite 211 Los Angeles, California 90013 213.221.1200 / 213.221.1209 fax

Dolores Park HRER Draft 2011-08-12

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dolores Park HRER Draft 2011-08-12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mission Dolores Park

Historic resource evaluation

San FranciSco recreation and Park dePartment

Page & Turnbull

auguSt 12, 2011

imagining change in historic environments through design, research, and technology

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS ............................................................................ 4

III. DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... 7

IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT........................................................................................ 23

V. MISSION DOLORES PARK CULTURAL LANDSCAPE HISTORY...................... 36

August 12, 2011

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

IX. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 97 X. REFERENCES CITED............................................................................................ 98

XI. APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 103

August 12, 2011

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 -2-

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 -3-

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

II. CURRENT HISTORIC STATUS

August 12, 2011

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 -5-

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 -7-

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 -8-

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

Figure 8. Guadalupe Palms west of the playground, looking north.

Figure 9. Guadalupe Palms southwest of the playground, looking east.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

(Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)

(Source: Page & Turnbull, July 2011)

August 12, 2011 - 10 -

Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Historic Resource Evaluation Preliminary Draft Subject to Revision

Mission Dolores Park San Francisco, California

August 12, 2011 - 11 -

Page & Turnbull, Inc.