Chestnut Hill Reservoir Pump Stations Study_tcm3-19719

7/30/2019 Chestnut Hill Reservoir Pump Stations Study_tcm3-19719

1/70

as amended September 26 , 1989

CHESTNUT HILLRESERVOIRAND

PUMP STATIONS

Boston Landmarks CommissionEnvironment DepartmentCity of Boston


2/70

as amended September 26, 1989

Report of the Boston Landmark Commissionon the Potent ia l Designation ofTHE CHESTNUT HILL RESERVOIR AND PUMPING STATIONSas a

LANDMARKunder Chapter 772 of the Acts of 1975, as amended


3/70

Grati tude i s expressed to Ellen J . LipseyFor her research and contr ibut ions to th i s study repor t .

CONTENTS

1.0 Location of the Property under Considerat ion 12.0 Descr ipt ion of the Property 33.0 Signif icance of the Property 334.0 Economic Status 475.0 Planning Context 496.0 Alternate Approaches 537.0 Recommendations 558.0 General Standards and Cri ter ia 579 .0 Specif ic Standards and Cri ter ia 6510.0 Bibliography and Notes 69


4/70

1 .0 LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY1 .1 The address for the Low Service2400 Beacon St ree t ; th e a dd re sss ta t io n is 2450 Beacon S t ree t .a re 2439, 2472, most of 2442-5.

re se rvo i r pumping s t a t i on isfor the High Service pumpingThe assesso r ' s pa rce l numbersThe complex i s in ward 21.Boundary: - The area pe t i t ioned for Landmarks des igna t ion i scomprised o f : parce l 2439 which includes the high and lowse rv ice pump s t a t i on s , anc i l l a ry bui ld ings and surroundingproper ty ; parce l 2472, which includes the r ese rvo i r , ga tehouses and surrounding greenbe l t ; and, parce l 2442-5 whichinc ludes the Chestnut Hi l l Driveway, S t. Thomas More Road andsurrounding greenbe l t .

1 .2 Area in which the property i s loca ted : Chestnut Hi l lReservoir i s lo ca ted in Brighton , approximate ly 5 milesso uthwe st o f downtown Boston v ia Beacon S t ree t , and about 11/2 mile sou th of the Charles River and t he Mass achu se tt sTurnpike extens ion (1-90) . The re se rvo i r and i t s f a c i l i t i e sa re named for Chestnut Hi l l , the area where Brookl ine ,Newton, and Bri gh ton conve rg e. Major roads nearby a reCommonwealth Avenue, Chestnut Hi l l Avenue, and Beacon S t r e e twhich crosses the proper ty . The p ro pe rty sh are s b orde rs withth e MBTA Rivers ide l i ne , Brookl ine , Newton, Boston College,Evergreen Cemetery, Cassidy Playground, and the MDCpoo l /Re i l ly Ice Rink park a rea .The Alls ton-Brighton d i s t r i c t i s predominantly r e s i den t i a l ,with three major commercial areas and some i ndus t r i a l l and .The pe t i t ioned property i s ad jacen t to Boston College; t he rei s a l a rge s tuden t popula t ion in the immediate a rea . Thec i ty ranks Alls ton-Br igh ton in the middle o f B oston 's 19d i s t r i c t s with respec t to popula t ion dens i ty and open spaceacreage .

1 .3 Maps showing loca t ion: fo l lowing.

1


5/70


6/70


7/70

2 .0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY2.1 Type and use: The Chestnut Hill Reservoir complex i scomprised of the Bradlee Basin , two gatehouses on i t sembankment, the Chestnut Hill Driveway and greenbel t , twopumping s ta t ions , several anci l lary service s t ructures , andtwo s tructures in Newton which are outside the purview of theBoston Landmarks Commission. The combined land area i sapproximately 135 acres . The reservoir , two gate houses (onein Newton), both pumping s ta t ions and service buildings areused by the Massachusetts Resource Authority (MWRA) on astand-by basis to maintain adequate pressure in the system.Water service can be activated i f i t is needed, and thefac i l i t i e s are s taffed year-round.

Joggers and walkers use the path around the basin; the outerpath is open to the public, the inner one has been sealed offbehind an iron fence for reasons of health and safe ty . TheChestnut Hill Driveway i s posted "For Pleasure VehiclesOnly", i t includes parking and i s framed by a woodedgreenbelt area along the north border of the parkway.Through-traffic on Beacon Street separates the basin from thepumping s ta t ion area; the western end of the Chestnut Hil lDriveway serves t ra f f ic a t the eastern end of the BostonCollege campus.

2.2 Physical descript ion: The s i te was original ly a naturalbasin with marsh and meadow lands. Above the shore, betweenBeacon Street and Commonwealth Avenue is a hi l ly area withrocky outcroppings and mature t rees , including oaks andevergreens. Adjacent to the reservoir fence, on thenortheast s ide , is a par (exercise) course and foot paths.Between the fence and the water 's edge are f ie ld grass ,mature t rees , rock outcroppings and the original inner path.The Driveway and parkway area are on a re la t ively f l a t gradewith well-maintained landscape including mature t rees , grass ,and rock outcroppings. Many of the trees on the propertyappear to date from a t leas t the original development of thereservoir in 1866-70, and from the building of the pumpingsta t ions in the 1880s and 1890s.The following components make up the Chestnut Hil l Reservoircomplex. They are described in chrono logica l o rder bycompletion date.Bradlee Basin - The parcel containing the basin i sapproximately 110 acres . According to f igures a t the time ofconstruction, the water covers 87 1/2 acres . The averagedepth is 20 feet and there is a capacity of about 550,600,000gallons. The elevation of the reservoir is 125 feet . Theembankment is bu il t up in places to a maximum height of 35feet . I t i s sodded, and in places i s topped by the originalgravel footpath, which i s 8 feet wide, 1.57 miles long andc i rc les the basin.

5


8/70

The inner slope of the basin is l ined with dry la id rubblestone 2 1/2 feet thick which extends down 19 1/2 feet on theslope to a berm and r iprap reinforcement a t the foot . Theslope l ining is capped with granite blocks about 3 feet belowthe top of the embankment. Bradlee Basin was original lypaired with an upper (higher) basin, the Lawrence Meadow,which was constructed a t the same time and had less than halfth e ca pa city o f B rad lee. The upper basin was sold to BostonCollege in 1949, and f i l led for a playing f ie ld and otherfac i l i t i e s in 1950. The dam which se para te d the two basinsserves as part of the Bradlee embankment and the road bed forpart of the Driveway. The fence, with pineapple shapedf in ia ls , is extant in many places. Additional new fence wasrequired when the boundary of the Reservoir was moved fromthe shorel ine to the shoulder of the slope to help preventdebris from collecting and en tering the w ater. At the sametime the inner path was sealed off and the outer path wasdeveloped so that the reservoir would continue to serve therecreational needs of the community. The work was done forthe MDC by Coughlan Construction Co, Inc. with landscapeplans provided by Storch Associates.Chestnut Hil l Driveway and Landscaping - Part of theor ig ina l Driveway, constructed around both basins in 1866-70,is extant a t the north and western shorel ine of BradleeBasin, running from Commonwealth Avenue to Beacon Street .In cluding th e parkway greenbelt i t compr is es about 16 acres.The northern port ion i s serpentine in plan . The 1977blacktop surfacing is cut away a t in tervals , exposing theoriginal granite paving blocks which act a's speed bumps.Angle parking is provided in the margins w ithin the or ig ina l80-foot width of the driveway. There i s an overlook areanear the Commonwealth Avenue end bui l t in 1977 with a grani tebench, pavers, and a stone plaque which shows the distancefrom Bradlee Basin to other MDC water supplies . Other 1977addit ions to the landscape include sto ne walls a t eache ntra nc e o f the dr ive, with plaques reading "Chestnut Hil lReservoir , Metropolitan Distr ic t Commission, Commonwealth ofMassachusetts" and pedestrian crossings laid with new grani tepavers . The granite curbing along the drive also appears tohave been done in 1977.The wooded greenbelt area provides a buffer between theDriveway and housing north of the reservoir ; i t abutsEvergreen Cemetery at the northwest bend of the drive. Allof the landscape addi t ions done in 1977 are compatible indesign, scale and materials , with the exis t ing landscape.

G


9/70

Original ly , a large pas toral park was laid out a t the easternedge of the Reservoir a t the current s i t e of the Cassidyplayground (owned by the City of Boston) and Reil ly MemorialIce Skating Rink (owned by the MDC). Remnants of theoriginal landscaping exi s t along the northeast edge of parcel2473 and on ei ther side of the Chestnut Hill Driveway alongthe n orth ern edge of the Reservoir. This landscape i scharacter ized by groves of t rees , rocky outcroppings andother informal, natura l is t ic features .Original Effluent Gate House - Constructed c. 1869, th isgate house is located on the edge of the basin near ClevelandCirc le . I t is a two level square structure with a hip roofand a cent ra l vent i la tor a t the roof apex (the vent i la tor haslos t i t s original cap). The walls are dressed g ra ni te a sh la rin random rangework with darke r rock -fa ced quoins and windowsurrounds. The s tructure i s three bays across; theround-headed windows have been bricked in . The building wa sconstructed on quick sand with rubble piers and brick archesres t ing on bedrock. In addit ion, grani te sidewalls , anearthen bulkhead and brick groined arches a re re qu ir ed . Thegrani te foundation above the water l ine and the monumentalgrani te double stairway facing Cleveland Circle re la te to thebasement structure of aqueduct and main connections.Intermediate Gate House (not within study area) - Buil t onthe dam between the basins th is building belongs to BostonCollege and i s now located a t the edge of thei r playingf ie ld . I t is no longer operated by MDC or"MWRA. This simplelooking grani te block regulated the water between the basins;i t dates from 1866-70. Boston College demolished theoriginal Influent Gate House in 1950 which was located on thenorthwest shore of L a w r ~ n c e Basin and which le t water in tothe reservoir from th e Cochi tuate aqueduct.Sudbury Terminal Chamber (not within study area) Original ly bui l t for the ci ty of Boston, th is building i slocated in Newton on Beacon Street opposite the Drivewayentrance. I t is the terminus of the Sudbury aqueduc t sys temwhich was completed in 1878, and houses five aqueduct gates .The walls consis t of smooth and rock faced grani te ash lar . Arow of five arched windows, mirrored below by f ive stonedisks , symbolize the five p ipe connect ions . The s t r ik ingbuilding appears to have been influenced by the designs ofPhiladelphia archi tect , Frank Furness.High Service Pumping Station - This i s the f i r s t pumpings ta t ion a t Chestnut Hil l , bui l t 1887-88 to supply highpressure water service for dis t r ibut ion to the higherelevat ions of newly annexed areas of Boston. I t i s locatedon the south side of Beacon Street opposite th e reservoirbetween Cleveland Circle and the Newton c ity l ine . The HighService s ta t ion is an asymmetrical picturesque composition inthe Richardsonian Romanesque s ty le .

7


10/70

The massing i s horizontal . Three main gable roofs r i se instages from east to wes t, punctuated eas t of center with a150-foot rear smokestack and in front by a 112-foot, hippedroof tower with an open observatory a t the top. The originals t ructure is comprised of a 84' 10" x 64' 8" engine room; a79' 10" x 56' 2" boiler room; a 62' x 65' 4" coal pocket;and, a 43' 8" x 19' 10" addit ion. The 2 1/2 s tory buildingfeatures assymetrical fenestration, with rectangular andarched windows in groups of two and three.The main Syrian entranc e a rch balan ces th e lef t -hand towersomewhat as i t is offset to the r ight of the cent ra l gabledentrance pavil ion. The doorway leads direct ly into theoriginal engine room. To the extreme l e f t , a t thes t ructure ' s lowest point is ~ h e coal storage area. The r igh tgabled wing i s an addi t ion which was added in 1897-99 tohouse another engine. The date 1897 appears on thecrossgable end which forms the west elevation of thes ta t ion . The original plans allowed for th is expansion. Thepavi l ions forming the separate rooms ar t icu la te functions andare impressive in terms of scale and de ta i l .Character is t ic of the Richardsonian s ty le , the high servicebuilding displays a variety of textures and colors . Thef ront and s id e e leva ti on s of the sta t ion are rockfacedMilford grani te ashlar laid in random rangework. The boldreddish brown trim is Longmeadow freestone, used chiefly forhorizontal banding and window and door surrounds. Theexter ior elevations ar e p rimar ily pink andbrowl1 in color .The roof is blue-grey s la te with oxidized copper f lashing andcornices . A bronze sign over the doorway reads "MetropolitanWater Works", replacing an ear l ie r "Boston Water Works" namepla te .The t a l l smokestack and the rear elevation are red brick .There are railroad tracks behind the building where theBoston & Albany Railroad unloaded coal to power the boi lersfor steam-driven pumps. The tracks now serve the MBTARiverside l ine and the rear elevation of the s ta t ion showsmany addi t ions and a l te ra t ions .The building has masonry walls with iron roof t russes in theoriginal engine room. For the 1897-99 addit ion s tee l wasused for the f loor frame and roof t russ . The engine roomsare separated by an arcaded masonry wall, replacing theoriginal west wall of the building. The engine room areasare clear open spaces to the high room, with pump wellsbelow. The land was cleared of ear l ie r r es er vo ir s er vi cest ructures for the s ta t ion . According to the Boston BuildingDepartment's document jacket for the c on stru ctio n p ermit, theland is f i l l ed and the hard gravel foundation is la id onearth.

8


11/70

Present equipment in the High Service s ta t ion includes two20th century pumps (one i s operable and kept on stand-by) andthree obsolete but impre ssive s team-dr iven engines which aretwo s tor ies in height and trimmed with brass.One i s the Leavit t engine, a unique t r ip le expansion ver t ica lthree crank rocker engine with 575.7 hor sepower and acapacity to pump 20 mill ion gallons of water in 24 hours. I twas taken out of service in 1928. Next to i t i s a HollyCompany double compound engine dated 1921. In the addit ioni s an Edward P. All is Company t r ip le compound engine, bu i l t1897-1900.A bronze plaque in the outside entrance area reads:"1887-88; High Service Pumping Station; Hugh O'Brien, Mayor;Water Commissioners - Horace T. Rockwell, Thomas F. Doherty,William B. Smart, Robert Grant; William Jackson, CityEngineer; Arthur H. V inal, C ity Architect ."Renovations to the High. Service s ta t ion were completed in1977, and cost approximately $300,000. The work includedroof repai rs , replacement of the original windows withmatching sash and glazing, and acid cleaning and repointingof the exter ior walls. MDC used an in-house architec t .Grounds work for the ent i re pumping s ta t ion area was alsodone in 1977 in conjunction with the reservoir basinlandscaping. The lawn, driveway configurat ion, and t reeplant ing appear sim ilar to the features vis ible in an 1890photograph (see following photos). Many of these t rees havematured and the driveway and parking areas are in goodcondition.Eff luent Gate House No.2 - Constructed c.1898 to providethe Low Service s ta t ion with water and increase the flow tothe High Service s ta t io n, th is gate house assumed theoperations of the original Effluent Gate House. I t i slocated on the embankment direct ly across Beacon Street fromthe High Service s ta t ion . I t i s one-sto ry in h eig ht, th re ewindow bays across , and one deep. High s tyle c lass ica lRenaissance Revival features include the rust icated bandingof the dressed g ranite a sh la r, the i ron window gr i l l s , andthe low-pitched copper clad hip roof with b ronze cheneau .This gate house is currently operat ional .

9


12/70

Low Service pumping s ta t ion - This s ta t ion is located onthe south side of Beacon Street jus t east of the High Services ta t ion . I t was bui l t to provide addit ional low pressureserv ice to the Boston area when the downtown began to grow.Cons truc tion da te s from 1898-1901 a lthough th e pumps were inservice before the l a t t e r date. The Low Service s ta t ion i s ac lass ica l building, basically horizontal in form with asymmetrical main block, rear tower that is low enough toresemble a belvidere, and a wing to the l e f t side of the mainblock. The roofs are f la t and encircled with parapets . Thefront and side elevations are clad in l igh t grey finelydressed Ind iana l imes tone ashlar . The foundation and mains ta i rs are pink Milford grani te . Window frames are cast i ronwith g r i l l work. The plas t ic ar t icula t ion of the main blockand i t s entrance pavil ion facade exemplifies the high s tyleof Beaux-Arts Classicism.The s t a t ion ' s focal po int i s the projecting main entrancepavil ion with a colossal order of s tyl ized Corninthiancolumns and pi las ters . The deep arch sof f i t i s coffered, theorder of the recessed. doorway is Ionic. The parapetpedestals repeat the ar t icula t ion of the order below. Acentra l carved panel reads: M etropolitan Water WorksMDCCCXCVIII. The composition i s crowned with a carvedlimestone torch. The main entrance opens direct ly into theengine room.On ei ther side of the entrance, the wall area of the mainblock i s dominated by a large round-headed window with cas tiron sash. The c lass ica l trea tmen t o f the? ;f enest ra tion inthe main block includes c la thr i and f i sh-scale g r i l l work.The south elevation repeats the design of the single dominantround-headed window. A continuous spring l ine molding, fu l lentablature , and para pe t unify the design across the facadeand around the corner on the south wall.The east wing is wide across the f ront and se t back from themain block. The lower roof l ine helps i t recede visual ly andre f lec ts the f loor height here which is lower than in theengine room. The space houses the boi ler room in front andthe coal house in the rear , both of which a re p re se ntly usedfor storage. The facade of the wing has a three- leavedgarage door with the original c la thr i gone from thesemi-circular transom and the l igh t f i l l ed in or paintedover. There are high small windows.The class ica l fr ieze and cornice across the facade and eas televation of the wing and the continuous parapet aresimplif ied version s of the main block features .

10


13/70

The rear of the Low Service s ta t ion is red brick. The quoinsare l imestone. The parapet brick is different than that ofthe wall surface. The main block has a low, f l a t roofedextension across i t with a higher cent ral entrance; the towerr i ses from the ground in the angle of the main blockl imestone c ladding , the fourth in exposed brick. The towerroof is hipped and red- t i led. The smokestack is yellowbrick, r is ing from the roof of the coal house.On the in ter ior , the engine room i s fin ished in buff brickwith red brick tr im, poli shed qua rt ered oak and ash, and agreen s la te t i l e f loor . Alterations are evident a t the rearbut to a lesser extent than on the High Service s ta t ion .Abutting the west elevat ion is a modern wire cage withrust icated concrete side walls which houses mechanicalequipment.According to the Boston Building Departments document jacketfor the building permit (granted September 27, 1898) thef loor i s supported on i ron. Plans dated 1898 show the metalf loor and roof framing, ent i re ly clear open spaces in theengine and boi ler rooms, a gallery in the boiler room, andiron or s tee l columns in the coal house. Although theexter ior reads as two s tor ies th is building has one mainf loor with ext remely h igh cei l ings , l ike the High Services ta t ion . I t contains two operable 20th century turbine pumpsand three obsolete stearn-driven engines. Two of the enginesare ver t ica l t r ip le expansion engines bui l t by the HollyManufacturing Company, dated 1900. The th&rdengine i ssimilar and i s dated 1910.One plaque in the main entranceway bears the followinginformatiOn reg ardin g th e building: "Erected 1899; FredericP. Stearns, Chief Eng ineer; Dexter Brackett , Engineer ofDistribut ion Department; Shepley, Rutan & Coolidge,Architects; Metropolitan Water Board - Henry H. Sprague,Wilmot R. Evans, Henry P. Walcott. Another plaque giveswater system in fo rmatio n: Metro po lita n Water Act recommendedby State Board of Health; Cochi tuate and Sudbury Systems ofthe City of Boston taken January 1, 1898; Wachusett Systemtaken February 23, 1898 and added to Metropolitan WaterSupply March 7, 1898."As mentioned for the High Serv ice, re- landscap ing was done in1977. At that time a fountain was ins ta l led in front of thebuilding; i t s modern simplici ty complements the c lass ica ldesign of the building. There i s ivy on the walls of theeas t wing. Driveways and parking areas connect the twopumping s ta t ions and their anci l lary servi ce bu ildings.Impressively s i ted behind an expanse of lawn, the twos ta t ions are far enough apart to stand as individualmonuments, and they are well balanced in terms of size andscale . As viewed from Chestnut Hil l Driveway scenicoverlook, both re la te well to their surroundings.

11


14/70

Connection Chamber - Constructed in 1901, th is buildingcompliments in s tyle and mater ia l , the adjacent High ServicePumping s ta t ion . This building is constructed of quarryfa ce d Milfo rd granite with brownstone tr im. I t has a hippeds la te roof with wooden bracketed cornice.The following, although not major contr ibut ing features , arelocated w ithin the complex:Garage - A one-story b uild in g, th re e window bays across,located between the two s ta t ions . I t dates from c.1890 andi s similar in s tyle to the original gate houses. Window anddoor openings are segmen ta lly-arched , the roof i s f l a t , trimi s grani te and brick. The building original ly served as acarriage house and there is a re ar a dd itio n of brick withsome windows inf i l led . The MWRA has ongoing plans to add anadd itio n to the garage. Plans ca l l for use of ident icalmater ia ls and compatible scale and s ize . A stable was bui l tbeside i t and la te r converted to a machine shop. The machineshop burned down in the 1960s.P ipe y ards - The yards consist of four wood frame stuccoedverna cu la r build ings lo ca te d a t the east end of the s i t e ,orien ted to form a cou rty ard f ac ing west which i s blacktoppedfo r park ing . Two of the s t ructures are garage shel ters whichflank cottage form buildings, domestic in scale . The pipeyards a re we ll -s ui te d to the s i t e in terms of massing,orienta t ion, date of construct ion, color, and texture .A sm all squ are concrete block shed is a t the south side ofthe high service s ta t ion . I t is non-contr ibut ing.In general , the bui ldings within the complex appear to be ingood condition. All parts of the property are wellmaintained. The to ta l amount spent in 1977 for High Servicerenovation and landscaping work around the s ta t ions andreservoir basin was approximately $1,500,000.

2.3 Photographs:Attached.

12


15/70


16/70


17/70


18/70


19/70


20/70


21/70


22/70


23/70


24/70


25/70


26/70


27/70


28/70


29/70


30/70


31/70


32/70


33/70


34/70

3.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPERTY3.1 Summary - The Chestnut Hill reservior and pumping s ta t ionsare extremely s ignif icant as an unusually in tact example of a19th century complex. I t combines several o f Bosto n's bestexamples of public archi tecture , engineering and technology.

The complex ref lects planning polices which gained importancein the second half of the 19th century and mirrors a growingcivic pride, manifested in public improvements.The complex was created out of a concern for public heal thand safety . The ci ty used t he oppor tuni ty to c on str uc t anumber of high style civic buildings and to create a pas toralpark and drive in tended for use by the public . In addi t ionmany noteworthy archi tec ts and planners were associated withthe works.In a comprehensive report on the ent i re metropolitan watersystem, p rep are d fo r the Metropolitan Dis t r i c t Commission bythe Cultural Resources Group of Louis Berger & Associates ,Inc. t i t l ed The water Supply System of Metropolitan Boston1845-1926, the following is written on the significance ofChestnut Hil l :

Chestnut Hil l is among the most signi f icant , andcerta inly the most highly visible , complex w ithin theMetropolitan Water Supply System. I t marks theconnection between supply (Cochituate and Sudburyaqueducts) and dis t r ibut ion (high ancb.l :owservicepumping s ta t ions) that operated unt i l completion of theCity Tunnel and i t s extension in the m i d ~ 2 0 t h century.The constant development and expansion of fac i l i t i e s a tChestnut Hil l have l e f t a technological legacy ofgravity and pressure conduits, manual and hydraulicgates , and a ver i table museum of 19th and early 20thcentury pumping engines, plus modern gas poweredreplacements.Arranged around Bradlee Basin, the buildings ands t ruc tures a t Chestnut Hill present a compendium of thewater system's archi tec tura l themes. The Greek Revival,f i r s t employed on the Cochituate, is represented in theintermediate and eff luent gatehouses bui l t in 1868-70.The picturesque ec lec tic ism assoc ia ted with the"addi t ional supply" developed in the 1870s i s portrayedto great effect in George Clough's Sudbury TerminalChamber. The addit ion by Wheelwright and Haven, i s anoutstanding example of the Richardsonian Romanesques ty le , and r ight ly , an area landmark. Theturn-of-the-century revival of neoclassical s ty les i svividly i l lus t ra ted in Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge's lowservice pumping sta t ion, a highly successful adaptat ionof the Beaux Arts style to ut i l i t a r ian function, and, ona smaller scale , in contemporary low and high servicegatehouse.


35/70

Although the Chestnut Hill fac i l i ty i s largely obsolete,the buildings and landscaped grounds remainwell-maintained symbols of the Boston and Metropolitanwater supply systems. Combining funct ional ,technological and archi tectural importance, ChestnutHil l must be considered a pivotal element in the systemas a whole, with the prior i ty given to i t s future careand conservation.

Histor ical Overview of the Metropolitan Water System -Boston's f i r s t inhabitants received thei r water from cis ternsand underground wells . The quali ty was often poor and theava i lab i l i ty was sporadic. In 1796, the AqueductCorporation, a private company, began del ivering water fromJamaica Pond by a system of wooden pipes.By the mid-19th century, the water supply was inadequate. I twas thought that th e p revent ion of disease, par t icular lycholera, was l inked with pure water and a i r . In addi t ion,water was required for f i re fighting purposes. In 1846 theCommonwealth g ran ted the City the authori ty to develop awater supply; John Jervis was hired to design and oversee theconstruct ion of a reservoir and aqueduct. Jervis ut i l i zedLong Pond in Natick, l a te r renamed Lake Cochituate.Construction was begun in August, 1846, and the water l ineswere connected on October 25, 1848. The opening wascelebrated a t a ceremony a t the Frog Pond",in the BostonCommon; water was sent through a fountain, 80 feet into thea i r . The water flowed through th e Cochi tuat e Aqueduct to theBrookline Reservoi r ( s t i l l extant on Route 9-Boylston Streetin Brookline). The aqueduct is an egg-shaped, brick conduit ,76 in ches h igh, 60 inches wide, and fourteen miles long.This system su pp lied the ci ty with 18 mi ll ion gal lons per day.By the la te 1870s, Boston needed addit ional water to servei t s rapidly growing population. In 1875-78, the ci tyexpanded i t s water supply by ut i l iz ing the Sudbury RiverWatershed. This system provided water from four reservoirsin Framingham. Water flowed through the Sudbury Aqueductinto the recently completed Chestnut Hill Reservoir ,increasing the ci ty ' s supply to 69 mill ion gallons per day.In 1895, the s ta te Legislature established t he Me tropo li ta nWater Board (forerunner of the MDC and MWRA) to supply waterto seven c i t i e s and six towns in the Boston metropolitanarea. Regional jurs idic t ion was needed t o coo rd in ate effor tsand keep ra tes low.

34


36/70

The Metropolitan Water Board took control of major port ionsof Bosto n's water supply system including Chestnut Hil l . Toexpand the water supply, Sudbury Reservoir in Southboroughwas developed f i r s t . Then, a reservoir on the Nashua Riverin C linton was constructed, now known as the WachusettsReservoir . I t began supplying water to the Sudbury system in1908. A network of 400 miles of tunnels, aqueducts and largepipes and over 6000 miles of smalle r p ip es was la id out; th i ssystem was in place and functioning by the 1930s. Thesefac i l i t i e s served metropolitan Boston unt i l construct ion ofthe Quabb in began in the 1930s.The Massachusetts Water Board's or ig ina l plan, developed byFreder ic S te arns , the Public Health Board's chief engineer,called for a much larger reservoir to be added in thefuture. I t was known that increasing development near theWachusetts Reservoir was detrimental to water qual i ty . In1939, the Quabbin Reservoir was completed. I t held 412bi l l ion gal lons of water, and was f i l led to c ap acity by1946. The reservoir now provides water to 2 mill ion people,an average of 300 million gallons per day.Chestnut Hil l Reservoir - The Chestnut Hill Reservoirplayed a major role in the supply of water to theMetropolitan area. I t functioned as a supply anddis t r ibut ion reservoir for over- ~ O O years,The need for a new reservoir , ~ o $ u ~ p ~ e m ~ p t t h ~ capaci ty ofthe Brookline reservoir , pad been r l " ! p e a t ~ d l y ' b r o u g h t pej:Orathe Cochituate water Board in ~ a 6 5 . Tpe ~ h e s t n u t H i l ~ sl tewas chosen because t h ~ topogrqphy and lqcat ion providedaccess between thp water source and dis t r ibut ion, with theproper intermediary elevat iop for gravity flow. The CityEngineer, N. Henry Crafts recommended the s i te ; theCommonwealth's a u t h o r i ~ a t l o n WaS was granted in 1865. TheBoard decideq to purchase a d d i t i o n a ~ acreage for a secondbasin, the Lawrence Mea40w property then owned by Amos A.Lawrence.Nineteen separate land t ransact ions were needed in order topurchase the ent i re s i t e ; th is was accomplished by 1867 andcost the City $120,000. While Beacon Stree t had to be movedto a more southerly alignment, i t appears that no otherdevelopments were affected. According to John G. Hale 's 1830survey, there were no other s t ruc tures in the area. Thetopography was marsh and meadow land with woodlands andh i l l s .

35


37/70

construct ion of the reservoir basins a t Chestnut Hil loccurred between 1866-70. Albert Stanwood was Superintendentof Chestnut Hil l reserv oir in March 1866. Henry M. Wightman,the Resident Engineer a t Chestnut Hil l , and his s t a f f of fivewere responsible for detailed surveys and plans. Plans andspecif ica t ions for the gate house were made by the off i ce ofthe City Engineer, N. Henry Crafts .Housing was bui l t on s i te for the over 400 workers, many wererecent I r ish immigrants and veterans returning from the Civi lWar. Stables were constructed for teams of horses and oxen;a t l eas t f i f ty animals were ut i l ized. Construction workincluded building the embankment, dam, gate houses andsupport sh eds, la ying brick drainage sewers and blast ingledge rock. Wages were $1.50 per day; a s t r ike in 1867brought them up to $1.75. According to the History of theBoston Water Works from 1868 to 1876, the to ta l cost of landaquisi t ion and construct ion, in the f i r s t decade, was almost2.5 million dol lars . However, revenues from ci ty water salesfor the same period were over $565,000.Lawrence Basin was finished f i r s t ; water was le t in onOctober 27, 1868, the tw entieth anniversary of theintroduction of pure water into Boston. The basin was namedfor Amos Lawrence, the f i r s t president of the CochituateWater Board and former owner of Lawrence Meadow. Acelebrat ion was held, featuring speeches from Mayor Shurt le f fand Nathaniel J . Bradlee, president of the Water Board.Bradlee stated tha t the completed basinsc:ould provide amonth's supply of water in case of a break in the aqueduct.Also on tha t day the Highland Standpipe in Roxbury beganoperat ion. The standpipe was intended to provide highp re ss ur e s er vic e throughout the c i ty .Bradlee Basin was completed and operat ional two years l a t e r ,on October 25, 1870. This basin was named af te r Nathaniel J .Bradlee, noted archi tect and president of the Water Board.An impermeable ear th and stone dam s ep ara te d th e two basins.The chamber of a small granite gatehouse, bui l t on the dam,allowed ei ther basin to be emptied for cleaning or repai rs .The Cochituate Aqueduct runs underneath the reservoir .The Chestnut Hill reservoir was original ly bui l t with two48-inch mains, one to Brookline reservoir and one direct ly tothe c i ty . I t served for many years as the pr inc ipa lreceiving and dist r ibut ing reservoir for Boston, supplyingwater by gravity. When the Sudbury aqueduct opened in 1878,i t was connected to the Chestnut Hil l reservoir as anaddi t ional source through the Terminal Chamber. In the l as tth i rd of the 19th century, Boston's sanitary projec ts were totake one-third of the to ta l City budget. l

36


38/70

When elevated te r r i to ry was annexed to Boston in the mid1870s, addi t ional high service was needed. At th is t ime, theBoston water system serviced the f i f th largest population inthe nation following New York City, Philadelphia, Brooklyn,and chicago. 2 During th is period of growth, Chestnut Hil lsupplied most of Boston's water; i t was chosen as the s i t e ofthe new high service fac i l i ty . The high service s ta t ion wasc on str uc te d, in conjunction with the Reservoir on Fisher Hil lin Brookline, for th is purpose in 1887. The pumps a tChestnut Hil l were used to f i l l Fisher Hill reservoir onemile away, a t the higher elevat ion of 241 feet . From therethe water went to Parker Hil l Reservoir (now McLaughlan f ie ldon Mission Hill) a t 219 feet elevat ion or direct ly todis t r ibu t ion . In 1890, over half of the ci ty required highpressure service in order to be supplied with water fromChestnut Hil l , according to The Manual of AmericanWater-Works 1889-90.In 1897 construct ion began for an engine room addit ion toHigh Service. In 1898 construction of the Low Servicepumping s ta t ion began. The second pumping s ta t ion a tChestnut Hil l was needed to f i l l a "near" storage anddis t r ibut ing reservoir a t Spot Pond (Stoneham) and toincrease low service pressure for a growing downtown. By theend of 1898 the Metropolitan Water Board had increased i t sto ta l storage capacity to 15,755, '00,000 gallons and i t sdaily capacity to over 105,000 ,000 gallons per day.The most important t echnolog ical a spec t O',f\ :c thefaci l i t i e s 'operations was the design and ins ta l la t ion of the Leavit tengine in the original High Service engine room. ErasmusDarwin Leavi t t , J r . , was one of America's foremost designersof large steam engines and his equipment was admired for i t seff ic iency. He was born in Lowell, Massachusetts in 1836 anddied in Cambridge, Mass. in 1916. Leavit t apprenticed in theLowell Manufacturing Company machine shop. Later he was incharge of constructing the engine for the U.S.S. Hartford inProvidence, R.I . After serving in the Navy during the Civi lWar and teaching steam engineering a t the Naval Academy,Annapolis, he opened a private practice as a mechanicalengineer in 1867.Leavit t r eceived recogni tion for a pumping engine constructedin 1874 in Lynn, Mass. His success brought him to Europe,where he met Professor Riedler of the Royal PolytechnicSchool, Berlin, who granted Leavit t r ights to use the Riedlerpump and valve gear in the U.S. Leavit t was the f i r s trecipient of an honorary PH.D. in Engineering from StevensIns t i tu te of Technology in 1884. He was an or ig ina l memberof the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and wase le c ted p re si dent of the ASME in 1883. Leavit t also was aFellow in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

37


39/70

The Chestnut Hill engine i s Leavi t t ' s only known survivingwork. The name plate reads: "Boston Water Works, Riedlerpumping Engine, Designed by E.D. Leavitt . Built by N.F.Palmer, J r . and Co., Quintard Iron Works, New York." Theengine was constructed 1892-94; although the principalcast ings were U.S. manufactured, some parts were forged bythe Krupp works in Germany and are so labeled. The Leavi t tengine was designated a National Historic MechanicalEngineering Landmark by the American Society o f MechanicalEngineers in 1973. The Smithsonian Ins t i tu t ion displays ascale model of i t .The Chestnut Hill complex served Boston for over 100 years .I t began to be phased out in the 1940s with the completion ofthe City Tunnel, direct ly from the Quabbin Reservoir. Earthfrom the City Tunnel was used to f i l l the Lawrence Basin,purchased in 1950 by Boston College. The completion of theDorchester Tunnel in the mid-1970s, ending service fromChestnut Hil l .

3.2 Summary of archi tectural signif icance - Each individualcomponent a t Chestnut Hil l - the Bradlee Basin, the high andlow service pumping s ta t ions , the gate houses, the greenbel tand driveway - - is s ignif icant in i t s own r ight . As anin tac t complex, the structures and landscape achieve evengreater s ignif icance, and are thought to be the f inest andmost in tact 19th century complex of the metropolitan watersystem.Chestnut Hil l Driveway and Landscaping - The Chestnut Hil lreservoir landscaping, dating from 1866-70, i s an excel lent ,ear ly example of the picturesque s tyle . I t i s the f i r s tlarge-scale rural park-l ike set t ing to be developed by theCity of Boston, even before the Park Commission wases tabl ished in 1874. The Water Board decided, based largelyon c i t izen opinion, to create the Driveway in the grandestpossible manner. When completed the Chestnut Hil l reservoiroffered Bostonians a beautiful carr iage drive or promenade inclean a i r , out Beacon Street and over the Brighton Road, farfrom the impure city a i r .The Chestnut Hil l reservoir landscaping was extolled inBoston guidebooks throughout the l a s t quarter of the 19thcentury and the early decades of the 20th century. BostonI l lus t ra ted , 1878, ca rr ied super la ti ves in i t s descr ipt ion:

The Chestnut Hil l Reservoir is not only a great benefi tto the ci ty in i t s pract ical uses , i t i s also a greatpleasure resor t . A magnificent driveway, varying fromsixty to eighty feet in wid th , su rrounds the ent i rework, and is one of the greates t at t ract ions of thesuburbs of Boston. I t i s , in fact , the most populardrive in the vicini ty .

38


40/70

In King's Hand Book of Boston (7th ed. 1885) parks weret i t l ed "The Lungs of the City" and the walks and drives ofChestnut Hil l were l is ted as being "much enjoyed" by i t sneighbors who l ived in at t ract ive estates on the wooded h i l love rlook ing the reservoir from the east .The 1916 publicat ion, A Guide Book to Boston s ta tes :All around the winding out l ines of the basin runs atr im driveway, and ..beside i t a smooth gravel footpath.On a l l sides of the lake are symmetrical knolls ,covered w ith forest t rees and the greenest of tu r f .The banks to the water 's edge are sodded and borderedwith flowering shrubs; and the stonework, which in oneplace carr ies the road across a natural chasm, and thegreat natural ledges, are mantled over the cl ingingvines, and in autumns are aflame with the crimson ofthe Ampelopsis and the Virginia creeper.The park- l ike development of Chestnut Hill reservoir wasf i r s t discussed by the Water Board in 1866. Preliminaryins truct ions to the City Engineer, Craf ts , were for a road noless than 80 feet in width. Crafts laid out a crushed gravelsurface, as was done for Bosto n's f iner s t ree ts . The Boardalso contributed to the aesthet ics of the design. NathanielBradlee describes the drive in the 1868 history of Boston'swater works:

. approximately eighty feet in width; compromisingthat width in cases of f ine shade t rees , and of ledgeswhich may add picturesqueness The road follows ther ise and the descent of the ground, and except where i tpasses t hrough groves or around rocks, l i es upon themargin of the Reservoir , or keeps the water in s igh t ,thus avoiding monotony, and affording beaut i fu l viewsfor the whole distance.

Bradlee, member of th e Cochituate Water Board from 1865-1871,f i r s t b iogr aphe r o f the City water sy stem , and Water Boardpres ident from 1868-71 was most l ikely the person who addedthe aesthet ic pr inciples to Crafts ' engineering knowledge inlaying out the Driveway. At the age of seven teen Bradl eebegan training in the off ice of George M. Dexter, a prominentmid-19th century Boston archi tect . In subsequent yearsBradlee became Dexter 's successor and was well-known inBoston for the design of banks, churches, rai lroad s ta t ions ,hotels and apartments, off ice buildings, schools, and blocksof innumberable bow fronts in the South End. Walter Kilhamin Boston After Bulfinch at t r ibuted 500 Boston build in gs toNathaniel J . Bradlee. Aside from being a pro l i f ic Bostonarch i tec t , Bradlee made a civic contribution as a member ofthe Water Board. He earned the honor of having the largerbasin a t Chestnut Hil l reservoir named af ter him.

39


41/70

Construction of the Driveway was expected to cost $125,000 - the f inal cost was over $200,000. The crowning element was atriumphal granite entrance arch , ere cted in 1870 tocommemorate the water works. In the early 1900s the arch wasremoved for s t ree t widening.According to Cynthia Zaitsevsky's Frederick Law Olmsted andthe Boston Park System, Chestnut Hil l Driveway was includedin a 1887 plan to link the Emerald Necklace with other parksin Boston including Chestnut Hil l Reservoir and Marine Parkin South Boston. The plan was t i t l ed , in part " . PublicWays adapted to Pleasure Travel." Olmsted had designed andimproved sect ions of Commonwealth Avenue in Brighton andBeacon Street in Brook lin e, th e two major roads leading toChestnut Hil ls . This created a loop with the previouslyla id-out Chestnut Hil l Driveway; Olmsted called th is theChestnut Hill C ir cu it.High Service Station - The f i r s t Chestnut Hil l pumpings ta t ion i s an excel lent example of the RichardsonianRomanesque s tyle . I t i s considered one of the f ines t works ofBoston arch i tec t , Arthur Vinal.The High Service s ta t ion was bui l t in 1887-1888. Vinal wasone of many admiring archi tects who worked in the s tyle whichRichardson has been credited with creating. Richardson'sgenius lay in his handling of common la te 19th centuryeclect ic idioms with a powerful simplici ty and coherence.Whereas Victorian designs abandoned focus in favor of surfacer ichness, Richardson made beautiful carvirrgand lush surfacetreatment subordinate to mass, volume, and scale . Largepublic bui ldings became the Richardsonian hallmark, and inthe la te 1880s many ci t ies bui l t l ib ra r ies , c ity h al ls ,schoo ls, p os t off ices , and churches in the s ty le .The Chestnut Hill High Service sta t ion i s bold in i t s use ofgrani te and freestone in cathedral- l ike grandeur for as t r i c t ly ut i l i t a r ian building. The broad, open s i t e i swell-suited to Richardsonian massing and horizontal i ty . TheWheelwright & Haven addition of 1887-89 i s sensi t ive to theoriginal design in terms of form and sur fa ce tr ea tmen t. TheChestnut Hil l pumping s ta t ion is a very l ively design; thede ta i l s in the tower are part icular ly s t r ik ing , and the boldexter ior is well-sui ted to the two-story steam engines whichi t was bui l t to house.According to a 1910 publicat ion by the Metropolitan WaterBoard, the to ta l expenditure made for the original pumpings ta t ion and addition was approximately $265,000. Contractorsfor the original construction of 1887-88 included Coll ins &Ham, builders; Donahue Bros. , masonry; Jeremiah Carew,f ree-stone; Edward Marley & Bros. , copper work; John McLaren,carpentry; Walworth Manufacturing Co., steam pipes; Cofrode &Saylor, iron roofs; and George R. Clarke & Co., t i l e work.C.A. Dodge & Co. was the contractor for the 1897-99 addit ion,and the s tee l work was executed by Edward Kendall & Sons.

40


42/70

Arthur H. Vinal (1854-1923) pract iced archi tec ture in Bostonand was City Architect from 1884-88. At various times he wasin partnership with Fowler, Doge, and Tracy. V inal d esignedmany houses on Bay s ta te Road and Commonwealth Avenue,Colonial Apartments a t 382 Commonwealth, Kelsey Building onTremont Street , the Robert Brigham Hospital , Globe (nowCenter) Theatre a t 686 Washington, Boston City HospitalNurses Dormi to ry a t Harrison Avenue and East Springfield, andhis own residence a t Melville and Allston i n Dor ches te r. AsCity Architect he designed several schools and submitted adesign for the Boston Public Library in the RichardsonianRomanesque s ty le .Some controversy surrounded the construction of the HighService building and the off ice of ci ty archi tect . TheFreestone Cut ter ' s Association of Boston charged tha tJeremiah Carew had supplied infer ior stone and workmanship.There were th i r teen City hearings on the issue which spannedfour months and 524 pages of t ranscr ipts . The f ina l commentby the Freestone Assoc ia tion was that Vinal " . was a t leas tremiss and negligent . . . " in his supervis ion.The off ice of City Architect was held by five men: George AClough, 1874-83; Charles J . Bateman, 1883-84; Arthur H.Vinal, 1884-88; Charles J . Bateman, 1888-89; Harrison H.Atwood (James C. Tucker assis t ing) , 1889-91; and Edmund M.Wheelwrigh t, 1891-95 . The posi t ion was created to ra ise thequali ty of buildings which the City had gotten throughprivate commissions. However, by Vinal 's""teTmthere wereserious questions about the City Archi tect ' s ab i l i ty toimprove matters . The American Architect and Building Newsci ted (Feb. 1886) that schools in Boston cost twice as muchas those in Chicago. Wheelwright prepared a report when hetook off ice to clar i fy the record (City Document N. 136,1891). Much of the blame for high costs of operating theoff ice was placed on the pract ice of sp l i t t ing work intosmall contracts . Wheelwright's report did not help V inal; i tshowed 13.5% administrat ive costs for the years of 1887-88when the High Service sta t ion was being bui l t , almost threetimes the prevai l ing arch i tec t ' s commission rate of 5%.Wheelwright attempted to save professional face by loweringthe cost of the off ice to 3% during his term. However, theCity, fearful that successors might not be so conscientious,abolished i t for an O ffice of Consulting Arch itec t in 1896.Edmund M. Wheelwright (1854-1912), also a prominent Bostonarchi tect , was born in Roxbury, Massachusetts. He was aHarvard graduate, a student a t MIT and the Ecole des BeausArts , and an employee of Peabody & Stearns and McKim, Mead &White. The subway headhouses a t Park Street on the Commonare similar in style to the Effluent Gate House No.2 . AsCity Architect Wheelwright designed several Boston CityHospi ta l bui ld ings and schools.

41


43/70

The partnership with Parkman B. Haven (1853-1943) began in1889; a second par tner , Edward A. Hoyt, joined th e firm inthe 1890s. The firm prepared plans for several la rg e pub licbuildings including Horticultural Hall, New EnglandConservatory of Music, the Opera House of 1908, Jordan Hall ,and the S ta te H i st or ic al Building in the Fenway. Wheelwrightwas a consulting archi tect to GUy Lowell on the design of theMuseum of Fine Arts. He died in Dedham af te r having spenttwo years in a sanitarium in Connecticut as the resul t of anervous breakdown at t r ibuted to ove rwork . Wheelwright waselected a fellow of the American Ins t i tu te of Architects in1901. He authored School Architecture (1901) and ar t i c l esfor professional magazines.Low Service pumping s ta t ion - This building is one ofBoston's very few public buildings designed in the Beaux ArtsClassical s tyle . I t is also signi f icant as a work designedby the nationally prominent firm of Shepley, Rutan &Coolidge. The Low Service s ta t ion was constructed as par tof the mass ive expansion plan in i t ia ted by t he Me tropol it anWater Board. I t ' s pumps provided water to Spot Pond,Stoneham and direct ly to the c i ty . In addit ion to housingpumps and engines, the tower contained an ove rflow tank whichcould hold 31,000 gallons of water. Coal for the engines wasbrought direct ly from a siding of the Boston and Albanyra i l road t racks a t the rear of the s ta t ion.Beaux-Arts Classicalism takes i t s name from the Academy desBeaux Arts in Paris . In the l a s t quarter , 'of"the 19th centurymany American archi tectural students went to Paris andreturned to the U.S. to lead successful careers . The s tylecal led Beaux-Arts Classicism is se t apar t from theNeo-Classical Revival and the Renaissance Revival s tyles withwhich i t was contemporaneous. Character is t ic elements of thes ty le include paired or even clustered columns, deeplysculptura l ornament and a high parapet or a t t i c . Windows maybe enframed by free-standing columns, balustraded s i l l , andpedimented entablature on top. I t i s a s tyle almostexclusively used for c iv ic a rch it ec tu r e.The Low Service s ta t ion exempl if ie s the shi f t in Americanarchi tec ture since the High Service s ta t ion had been bui l t .High s tyle public design was class ical ; Victorian colors andforms were abandoned for symmetry and c la ss ic al l in es .The classicalism of the turn of the century used a l l themodern technology available in i t s s t ructural underpinnings.Even though the exter iors were faced with stone and made toappear to be masonary construct ion, the bui ld ings u sual lycontained s tee l or r einfor ced concr et e. The Chestnut Hil lLow Service s ta t ion is no exception. The foundation s i t s onprevious landf i l l with boulders, rocks, and earth from thereservoir basins. Plans show iron plates below the threeoriginal engines and a metal tank in the tower.

42


44/70

In the event tha t emergency service i s required, two 1974,so lar gas turbine engines, housed in the low servicebuilding, are s t i l l funct ional .The Low Service sta t ion was bui l t by Norcross Brothers ,contractors for many H.H. Richardson buildings and l a ter forShepley, Rutan & Coolidge. The amount of the contract was$182,659.50.*Richardson's suc ce ssor f irm, Shepley, Rutan & Coolidge,designed many noteworthy buildings throughout the UnitedStates , such as the Lionberger, Tiffany, and Mallinkridtb uild in gs in St. Louis; the or ig ina l Stanford Universitycampus; the Art Ins t i tu te and the Chicago Public Library;Vassar Chapel; Government Hospital for the Insane, WashingtonD.C; Brown Univers ity L ib ra ry ; and buildings a t theUniversity of Chicago. The Ames Building, a Shepley, Rutan &Coolidge design, was the highest building in Boston when i twas completed in 1892 - - the firm located their off ices onthe top f loor. Important Boston area commissions includeSouth Terminal Stat ion, Harvard Medical School, the EastonBuildings on State Street , the Weld Building on FederalSt ree t , the Firs t Parish Church in Brookline, the EpiscopalTheological School Library in Cambridge, many houses, thePublic Library in New London, Conn., and the Firs tCongressional Church in Fal l River, Mass.Charles Rutan (1851-1914) was born in Newark, N.J. , andt ra ined in Boston in the off ice of Gambrill & Richardson.George Shepley (1860-1903) was born in S t;\I iouis and educatedthere a t Washington University and a t MIT. He marriedRichardson's oldest daughter and died an untimely death a tthe age of 43. Charles Allerton Coolidge (1858-1936) wasborn in Boston and educated a t Harvard and MIT. His l a terpartners inCluded George C. Shattuck from 1914-1922, and alsoCoolidge, Shepley (Henry R., son of George), Bulfinch, andAbbott in 1925. Coolidge was married to George Shepley'ss i s te r . He was elected a Fellow of the AlA in 1891, hereceived an honorary Doctor of Arts degree from Harvard in1906, he was president of the Boston Society of Architects ,and he held many public and honorary posi t ions in the courseof his long career .Eff luent Gate House No. 1 This is the f i r s t st ructurebu i l t in the Chestnut Hil l Reservoir complex. Constructedbetween 1869-70, th i s gate house contained the major controlgates for the Chestnut Hil l Reservoir . The st ructure wasconstructed to house four pipes, although only two wereused. In 1874, two hydraulic gates were ins ta l led.*Given the pro l i f ic work of the Olmsted firm in and a round Bos ton athe time of the construction of the Low Service building, an attempwas made to investigate the possibi l i ty tha t landscape work by Olmsmay have been done a t Chestnut Hil l . Information derived from theL ibrary of Congress Manuscripts Department, holders of the Olmstedf i rm's papers, has revealed tha t the f irm's only involvement inprojec ts a t Chestnut Hil l was an instance of the recommendation ofpossible sub-formen in May, 1904 (work related to the construct ionthe Low Service building) .

43


45/70

Effluent Gate House No. 2 - This gate house was bu i l t in1900-01 as a major component of Metropolitan water Board'sexpansion plans, to supply water to the low and high servicepumping s ta t ions . The Renaissance Revival design is byWheelwright & Haven, who also designed the High Serviceaddit ion. I t was bui l t by John S. Jacob & Sons for anest imated cost of $10,000. The s t ruc ture houses threehydrau li c gat es which control three 60" mains, beneath a casti ron f loor .Connection Chamber - This s t ructure , adjacent to the HighService s ta t ion, was used to take water from t he Cochit ua teAqueduct by a four foot main, to the High Service s ta t ion .This simple, Milford granite s t ructure , was bui l t by theNorcross Brothers.Buildings and s t ructures with contributing signif icance The puddingstone garage i s a rch it ec tu ra ll y s i gn if ican t interms of i t s relat ionship to th e p rope rty as a whole.Contributing background bui ldings and st ructures - The fourPipe Yard bui ldings, while not s ign i fi c an t ind iv idual ly , arepar t of the completeness of the complex; they do not det ractarchi tectural ly from the whole composition.

44


46/70

3.3 Relationship to the cr i t e r i a for Landmark designationThe Chestnut Hill Reservoir and Pumping Stat ions meet a l lfour cr i t e r i a for designation as a Landmark, as es tabl ishedin Section 4 of Chapter 772 of the Acts of 1975, as amended.They are:- - inclusion in National R eg ister o f Historic Places asprovided in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966;(voted el igible by the Massachusetts Histor ical Commission in1977)- - s t ruc tures , s i t e s , objects , man-made or natural , a t whichevents occurred that have made an outstanding contribut ionto , and are ident i f ied prominently with, or which bestrepresent some important aspect of the cul tura l , pol i t i ca l ,economic, mili tary or social his tory of the c i ty ,commonwealth, the New England Region or the nat ion.- - s t ruc tures , s i t e s , objects , man-made or natural , associatedsigni f icant ly with the l ives o f outs ta nd ing his tor icpersonages;- - s t ruc tures , s i t e s , objects , man-made or natural ,representat ive of elements of archi tectural or landscap edesign or craftsmanship which embody dis t inct ivecharacter is t ics of a type inherently valuable for study, of aperiod, s tyle or method of construction or development, or anotable work of an archi tect , landscape archi tect , designer,or builder whose work i nfl uenced the development of the c i ty ,the commonwealth, the New England region or the nat ion.

45


47/70

4 .0 ECONOMIC STATUS4.1 Current assessed value and p roperty tax - Assessor 's parcelnumber 2472 which encompasses the Bradlee reservoir basin anda portion of the driveway is 4,804,748 square feet ; i t i sassessed a t $21,865,000. Asse ssor 's p arc el number 2439 i s345,780 square feet and contain s th e High Service and LowService pumping s ta t ions , the two stone kiosks, the stonegarage, the Pipe Yards buildings, l andscaped grounds , parkingarea and driveways. I t is assessed a t $1,440,000. Theincluded port ion of assessor ' s parcel number 2442-5(approximately 9/10 of the to ta l parcel) contains a portionof the Driveway and a l l of the parkway along the north ernboundary of the property. The land area i s approximately688,030 square feet . The assessed value for th is City-ownedland i s $3,551,000. Total assessed value of the parcelsabove as l i s ted is $26,856,000. All three parcels , two ownedby the MDC and one owned by the City, are tax exempt.4.2 Current ownership, occupancy and s ta tus - Parcel number 2472and 2493 containing the Bradlee Basin and pumping s ta t ionsare owned by the Metropolitan Dis t r ic t Commission,Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and are under the control andmanagement of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authori ty,Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Parcel number 2442-5 is ownedby the City of Boston, Park Depar tment and was leased to the

MDC for 99 years, unt i l November 20, 2077. The MWRA i sdeveloping a use plan for the Pumping s ta t ion and i t sgrounds. The MWRA i s proceed ing with the' , '!'ev:iewofprospect ive firms for the development of the fac i l i ty . Afterthe select ion process is completed, the MWRA expects a designby January of 1990. The proposed plan is discussed furtherin the planning sect ion of th is report .

47


48/70

5 .0 PLANNING CONTEXT5.1 Background - The Metropolitan Distr ic t Commission WaterDivision had developed plans for the Chestnut Hil l fac i l i tybefore transfer of ope ra tio ns to the Massachusetts WaterResources Authority took place in July, 1985. The MDC's

plans for reuse of the Low Service building included movingi t s archives into an adapted space, ins ta l l ing a generalWater Division operations and control center , and addinganother turbine to the present pumping equipment.The MDC present ly owns the Chestnut Hill property (except forparcel 2442-5 which is owned by the City of Boston and i sleased to the MDC), and the MWRA operates and manages thef ac i l i t y . Beginning in July , 1985, the MWRA received controlof the fac i l i ty , and a memorandum of understanding createdl a ter se t the specif ica t ions of the MDC-MWRA agreement. I ti s the MWRA which has planning and developmental control overthe property.

5.2 Current planning issues direct ly or. i nd ir e ct ly a f fe c ti ng theproperty The Massachusetts Water Resource Authority hasdeveloped a plan for use of the Chestnut Hill fac i l i ty andthe summary of the project as p re se nte d here i s from theScope o f S erv ices Project Summary, an MWRA planning documentfor the select ion of a firm for the project . The currentplans of the MWRA propose the use of the two pumpings ta t ions , the garage, the pipe yard buildings, and theircommon grounds. The fa ci l i ty is no longer"used for pumping,although two pumps in the Low service building and one in thehigh service building are operable and will be retained foremergency use. The "Scope o f Serv ices" describes in i t s"project Summary:"The MWRA p ro je ct cons is ts of the rehabi l i ta t ion of a l lthe usable space within the low and high servicebuildings and rehabi l i ta t ion of the existing pipe yardbuildings and/or construction of new buildings a t theChestnut Hill s i te to consolidate several WaterworksDivision functions. I t is anticipated the s i t e wil lhouse Waterworks Division 's Metropolitan Operationss ta f f , a la bo ra to ry , tr ad e shops, archives, parking andstorehouse fac i l i t i e s , and the new operations center forthe centra l monitoring system.

The intended uses of the buildings on the Chestnut Hil lReserv oir as s ta ted in the Scope o f Serv ices "ProjectSummary" are as follows.1. High Service Buildinga. museum, including "hal l of machines" and publicd is pla y a re as (not part of th is project)

49


49/70

(1. con ' t )b. office area, enclosed and open typing andconference rooms, auditorium, drafting area and recordcenterc. archives2. Garagea. ope ra ti on s cen te r and centra l monitoring system (not

part of th is project)3. Low Service Buildinga. laboratoryb. office areasc. support areas, such as lunchroom, lockers , showersand to i l e t s for men and women, work area for on-the-roads taf f to f i l l out reports , area for receiving uniforms4. Pipe Yard Buildinga. t rade shops for carpentry, elec t r ica l , machine,plumbing and painting act iv i t iesb. storehousingc. garage space5. Groundsa. parking for the Authori ty 's vehi cl es and heavyequipmentb. parking areas for s taf f and vis i to rsc. pipe stock storageThe "Project Summary" makes some other specif icat ionsre gard ing th e use of these buildings. I t s ta tes that theproposed museum for the High Service Building i s planned tobe a combined ef for t of the MWRA and various privatein te res ts ; and although the museum design i s not a par t ofth is contract , the museum space must be considered in theoveral l design. The "Summary" also s ta tes that anyrehabi l i ta t ion of the High Service Building s t ructure i t se l f ,the roof repair in par t icu la r , will be done as a part of th isproject . The museum will occupy approximately 13,000 squarefeet and wil l consis t of various display areas .The planned laboratory for the Low Service building is to bean expanded version of the MWRA laboratory a t Somerville tomeet the new requirements of the 1986 Amendments to the SafeDrinking water Act. The design should take intoconsidera tion spec ia l ized needs of a water quali ty laboratorysuch as vent i la t ion, exhaust, and room pressure requirementsfor tr ac e a na ly sis .The t rade shops, maintenance fac i l i ty , equipment housing andstorage requirements are generally expected to be thecombination of present operations a t the Authority 'sfac i l i t ies located a t Glenwood Yard, Mysti c Shops, andRutherford Avenue (electronic maintenance personnel only) .The MWRA's goal i s to relocate as much of the OperationsDepartment to th is s i t e as is possible within s i t econstraints .

50


50/70

The fac i l i t i e s a t Chestnut Hil l are expected to accommodatean aggregate s taf f of approximately 175 persons, with about50 to 75 s ta t ioned at Chestnut Hil l and the others on theroad and report ing in and out. The Scope of Se rvices s ta testhat the consul tant must take into account the surroundingenvironment for archi tectural and landscape design. TheScope also s ta tes that there are emergency pumps in thebasements of both the Low and High Service buildings and theconsul tant must identify provisions for keeping these pumpsin tac t during t he const ruct ion phase.The MWRA i s aware of his tor ic prese rva tion conside rat ionsre ga rd ing th e property. The Scope of Work "project Summary"s ta tes"

The buildings, surroundings, and select pieces ofpumping equipment have been ident i f ied as beingarchi tectural ly and his tor ical ly s ignif icant . Everyeffor t must be made to preserve th is heri tage and a l ldesign must conform to the guidelines of the Histor icaland Landmark Commissions.The MWRA's Scope of Services s ta tes in the "PreliminaryDesign Phase" that the consultant must "determine requiredguidel ines by State , Federal and other regulatory agenciesand Landmark/Historical Commissions appl icable to thef ac i l i t y , and coo rd in ate th e project with t he se agenc ie s andcommissions." In the "project Management f or P re lim in ary &Final Design Phases" i t is s ta ted that the"consultant"prepare for and at tend meetings with regulatory agencies andHistoric/Landmark Commissions and neighborhood groups."In 1983, the MDC received a Survey and Planning Grant fromthe Massachusetts Histor ical Commission to conduct anhis tor ic inventor y o f Metropo lita n Boston's water supplysystem. The survey ident i f ied over 120 s tructures including11 in Boston, 8 which are a t Chestnut Hil l . A MultipleResource Area Nominat ion to the National Register of Histor icPlaces has been completed. I t is expected that theMassachusetts Histor ical Commission will hear the nominationin Fal l , 1989. If accepted by the Massachusetts His tor ica lCommission, and then the Department of the In te r io r , theChestnut Hil l Complex would be l i s ted on the NationalRegister of Historic Places.

51


51/70

5.3 Rela tio nship to current zoning - the Chestnut Hil l reservoirand pumping sta t ion property is divided in to se ve ra l zoningc lass i f ica t ions involving housing. They cons is t of S-.3s ingle family; R-.5 two family; H-l, H-2, and H-3 apartmentzones. The adjacent propert ies of the MDC Cleveland Circlepark/recreation area and the Cassidy Playground/Chestnut Hil lPark area are zoned H-2 and S-.3 respectively.Other planning issues deal with the Chestnut Hil l fac i l i ty orhave the potent ia l to ef fec t i t . The BRA's Allston-BrightonI ter im Planning Overlay Dis t r ic t (IPOD), effect ive August 18,1987, s ta tes in i t s statement of purpose the desire "toprevent overcrowding of land [and] to p res erv e, enhance, andcreate open space." Under the IPOD's "Open Space Plan," theAllston-Brighton Planning and Zoning Advisory Committee(PZAC) i s considering designating the Chestnut Hil l Reservoiras open space. The plan is an attempt to recognize"his toric , geographic and functional links to his tor icAlls ton-Br ighton , t o act iv i ty modes within Allston-Brighton,and to the open space and park system of Boston." Ful lconsiderat ion of th is open space designation would take placein the fa l l of 1989. I f approved, designation would place onthe pr op erty specif ic land use res t r ic t ions defined by thec lass i f ica t ion given the property by the PZAC (Le . ,parkland, recreat ion, urban wild, e tc . ) .

52


52/70

6.0 ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES6 .1 Alternatives:

Alternatives open to the Boston Landmarks Commission includedesignation of the ent i re complex as a landmark, or anycomponent(s) w ithin the complex. The nature of the property,a cohesive unit in terms of development history, commonpurpose, ownership and/or jur isdic t ion, suggests designat ionas a Landmark. The commission may also designate par t of thes i t e , within 1200 feet of a Landmark, as a p ro te ct ion a re a.The Commiss ion re ta ins the option to not designate specif iccomponents or the ent i re complex. Not designating elementsas a Landmark would mean that the City could offer noprotection or guidance under future owners.Landmark designation under Chapte r 772 would require thereview of physical changes to the exter ior of th e b uild in gsand speci f ied landscape elements in accordance with thestandards and c r i t e r ia adopted as part of the designation.An al ternat ive would be the inclusion of the propert ies onthe National Register of Historic Places. The property wasvoted e l ig ib le for l i s t ing on th e National Register in 1977.I f accepted, l i s t ing on the Reg iste r would offer a l imiteddegree of p ro te ct ion aga in st federal or s ta te undertakings.

6 .2 Impact of al ternat ives:Landmark designation under Chapter 772 would require thereview of physical changes to the exter ior of the bui ldings ,included in the designation, as well as the reservoir groundsin accordance with th e s ta ndar ds and c r i t e r ia adopted as par tof the designat ion. I t would not, however, affect the use ortreatm ent of the in te r io r of the buildings.List ing on the National Register of Historic Places wouldprovide protect ion from federal , federally-licensed orfederal ly-assis ted actions undertaken by Section 106 Reviewprocess. Similar protect ion from state-sponsored ac t iv i t i e si s achieved by th e concurrent l i s t ings of a l l NationalRegister proper t ies to the State Register of Histor ic Placesunder Chapter 254, General Laws of Massachuse tt s.

53


53/70

7 .0 RECOMMENDATIONS7.1 Recommended action - The s taf f of the Boston LandmarksCommission recommends that the Chestnut h i l l reservoir andpumping sta t ions complex be designated a Landmark underChapter 772 of the Acts of 1975, as amended.

The boundaries of the proposed des igna ti on a re thefollowing: a l l of Parcel 2439; the Bradlee Basin, definedon the east and south sides by the boundary of parcel 2472(s tar t ing a t the in tersect ion with Commonwealth Avenue) andon the north and west sides by the Chestnut Hil l Driveway;Chestnut Hil l Driveway, from the in tersect ion a t BeaconStree t , proceeding north along the fenceline bordering theBoston College playing f ie ld to a l ine extending across theDriveway along the eastern fenceline of Evergreen Cemetery,and the remaining port ion of parcel 2442-5 to the north andeas t .See attached map.

55


54/70


55/70

8 .0 GENERAL STANDARDS & CRITERIA8 .1 In t roductory Statement on Standards and Cri t e r i a to be usedin Evaluat ing Applicat ions for Cer t i f i ca tes

Per sec t ions 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the enabl ing s t a tu t e(Chapter 772 of the Acts of the 1975 of the Commonwealth ofMa s sa chu se tt s) S ta ndar ds and Cri t e r i a must be adopted fo reach Landmark Designat ion which sha l l be app l ied by theCommission in evalua t ing proposed changes to the p rope r t y .Before a Cer t i f i c a t e of Design Approval or Cer t i f i c a t e ofExemption ca n be issued fo r s uc h c ha ng es , the changes mustbe reviewed by the Commission w ith regard to t h e i rconformance to the purposes of the s t a t u t e .The Standards and Cr i t e r i a es tab l i shed thus note thosefea tu re s which must be conserved and/or enhanced to maintainthe v iab i l i t y of the Landmark Designat ion.The i n t en t of these guide l ines i s to help l oca l o f f i c i a l s ,des igners , and ind iv idua l property owners to i d en t i f y theCharac te r i s t i c s t ha t have led to designa tion , and thus toi d en t i f y the l imi t a t ion to the changes t ha t can be made tothem. I t should be emphasized t ha t conformance to theStandards and Cr i t e r i a a lone does not n e ce ss ar ily in su reapproval , nor are they abso lu te , but any req ues t fo rvar iance from them must demonstra te the reasons fo r , andadvantages gained by, such var iance . The Commission 'sCer t i f i c a t e of Des ign Approval i s only granted a f t e r care fu lreview of each appl ica t ion and publ ic hearing, in accordancew ith the s t a t u t e .As in tended by the s t a t u t e a wide var ie ty of bui ld ings andfea tu re s are included within the area open to LandmarkDesignat ion, and an equal ly wide range ex is t s in thel a t i t ude al lowed fo r change. Some proper t i es of t ru lyexcep t iona l a r ch i t e c tu r a l and/or h i s t o r i c a l value wi l lpermi t only the most minor modif ica t ions , while for someothe rs the Commission encourages changes and add i t ions witha contemporary approach, cons i s t en t with the p rope r t i e s 'ex i s t ing fea tu res an d changed uses .In genera l , the in ten t of the Standards and Cr i t e r i a i s topreserve exis t ing qua l i t i e s tha t cause designat ion of aproper ty ; however, .j.n some cases they have been sos t ruc tu red as to encourage the removal of addi t ions t h a thave lessened the i n t eg r i ty of the proper ty .I t i s recognized t ha t changes wi l l be required in des ignatedproper t i e s for a wide va r i e ty of reasons , not a l l of whicha re under the complete con t ro l of the Commission or theowners. Primary examples a re :

57


56/70

(a) Building code conformance and sa fe tyrequirements .(b) Changes necess i ta ted by the in t roduc t ion ofmodern mechanical and e l e c t r i c a l systems.(c) Changes due to proposed new uses of a p rope r t y .

The response to these requirements may, in some cases ,presen t conf l i c t s with the Standards and Cr i t e r i a for apar t i cu la r proper ty . The Commission's eva lua t ion of anapp l i ca t ion wi l l be based upon the degree to which suchchanges a re in harmony with the charac te r of the p rope r t y .In some cases , p r i o r i t i e s have been ass igned within theStandards and Cr i t e r i a as an a id to proper ty owners ini den t i fy ing th e most c r i t i c a l design f ea tu res .The Standards and Cri t e r i a have been divided in to twol eve l s : (1) those genera l ones tha t are common to almost a l llandmark designat ions (subdivided in to c ate go rie s forbui ld ings and landscape fea tu re s ) ; and (2) those spec i f i cones t h a t apply to each pa r t i cu l a r proper ty t ha t i sdesignated . In every case the Speci f i c Standard andCr i t e r i a fo r a par t i cu la r proper ty sha l l take precedenceover the General ones i f there i s a con f l i c t .

58


57/70

8 .2 GENERAL STANDARDS AND CRITERIAA. APPROACH

1. The design approach to the proper ty sh ou ld b eg in withthe premise t h a t the fea tures of h i s to r i c a l anda rch i t e c t u ra l s ign i f i cance described w ith in th e StudyReport must be preserved . In genera l t h i s wi l lminimize the ex te r io r a l t e r a t i on s th a t w il l bea l lowed.2. Changes to the proper ty and i t s environment whichhave taken place in the course of t ime are evidenceof the hi s to ry o f the proper ty and the neighborhood.These changes to the property may have developeds ign i f i cance in t h e i r own r igh t , and t h i ss ign i f i cance should be recognized and respec ted .("Later i n t eg r a l fea tu res" sha l l be the term used toconvey t h i s concep t . )3. De te ri or at ed ma t er ia l or a rch i t e c t u ra l f ea tu res ,whenever poss ib l e , should be repai red ra ther thanreplaced or removed.4. When replacement of a rch i t e c t u ra l fea tures i snecessary it should be based on physical ordocumentary evidence of or ig ina l or l a t e r i n t eg ra lf ea tu res .5. New mater ia l s should , whenever poss ib l e , match themate r i a l being replaced in p hy sica l p rope r t i e s ,des ign , co lo r t ex ture and other visua l qua l i t i e s .The use of imi ta t ion replacement mater ia l s i s

genera l ly discouraged.6. New add i t ions or a l t e r a t i on s should not di s rup t th ee s sen t i a l form and i n t eg r i ty of the proper ty andshould be com patib le w ith the s ize , sca le , co lo r ,mate r ia l and charac te r of the proper ty and i t senvironment .7. Contemporary design i s encouraged fo r new add i t ions ;thus , they must not necessar i ly be imi t a t ive of anea r l i e r s ty le or per iod .8. New add i t ions or a l t e r a t i on s should be done in such a

way t h a t i f they were to be removed in the fu tu re ,the essen t i a l form and i n t eg r i ty of the h i s to r i cproperty would be unimpaired.9. P rio r i ty s ha ll be given to those por t ions of theproperty which a re v i s ib l e from publ ic ways or which

it can be reasonably infe rred may be in the fu tu re .

59


58/70

10. Color wil l be considered as pa r t of spec i f i cs tandards and c r i t e r i a t ha t apply to a pa r t i cu l a rproper ty .B. EXTERIOR WALLSI . MASONRY

1 . Retain whenever p o ss ib le , o rig in al masonry and mortar .2. Duplicate o r ig ina l mortar in composi t ion, co lo r ,t ex tu re , j o in t s i z e , jo in t p ro fi l e and method of

app l i ca t ion .3. Repair and rep lace de te r io ra t ed masonry with mate r i a lwhich matc he s as c lose ly as poss ib le .4. When necessary to clean masonry, use gen t l e s t methodposs ib l e . Do not sandb las t . Doing so changes th ev is ua l q u al i ty of the mate r i a l and acce le ra tesde t e r i o r a t i on . Lest patches should always be car r iedout well in advance of cleaning (including exposureto a l l seasons i f poss ib l e ) .5. Avoid app ly ing wa te rp roo fi ng or water r epe l len t

coat ing to masonry, unless required to so lve aspec i f i c problem. Such coat ings can acce le ra t ede t e r i o r a t i on .6. In genera l , do not pa in t masonry surfaces . Pain t ingmasonry sur faces wi l l be considered only when therei s documentary evidence t h a t t h i s t rea tment was useda t some po in t in the hi s to ry of the proper ty .

I I . NON-MASONRY1. Retain and repa i r or ig ina l or l a t e r i n t eg r a l mate r i a lwhenever poss ib l e .2. Retain and r epa i r , when necessary , de te r io ra tedmate r i a l with mater ia l tha t matches.

C. ROOFS1. Preserve the i n t eg r i ty of the or ig ina l or l a t e ri n t eg r a l roof shape.2. Retain o r ig ina l roof covering whenever pos s i b l e .3. Whenever poss ib l e , rep lace de te r io ra t ed roof coveringwith mater ia l which matches the old in composi t ion ,s i z e , shape , co lo r , t ex tu re , and i n s t a l l a t i on de t a i l .4. Preserve a r ch i t e c tu r a l fea tu res which give the roofi t s charac te r , such as corn ices , gu t t e r s , i ronf i l l i g r e e , cupolas , dormers, bracke t s .

60


59/70

D. WINDOWS AND DOORS1 . Reta in or ig ina l and l a t e r i n t eg ra l door and windowopenings where they ex i s t . Do not en large or reducedoor and window openings fo r the purpose of f i t t i ng

s tock window sash or doors , or a i r condi t ioners .2. Whenever poss ib le , repa i r and r eta in o rig in al orl a t e r in teg ra l window elements such as sash , l i n t e l s ,s i l l s , a rc hi t r av es , g la ss , s hu tte rs and other

decora t ions and hardware. When replacement ofmater ia l s or elem ents i s necessary , it should bebased on phys ica l or documentary evidence .3. On some proper t ies cons idera t ion wi l l be given tochanging from the or ig ina l window de t a i l s to o the r

express ions such as to a minimal anonymous t rea tmentby the use of a s ing le l i gh t , when cons idera t ion ofcos t , energy conservat ion or appropr ia teness over r idethe des i re for h i s t o r i c a l accuracy. In such cases ,considerat ion must be given to the re su l t ing e f f ec ton the i n t e r io r as well as the ex te r io r of thebui ld ing .E. PORCHES, STEPS AND EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS

1. Retain and repa i r porches and s teps t ha t a re o r i g i na lor l a t e r in teg ra l fea tu res including such i tems asr a i l i ng s , ba lus te r s , columns, pos t s , bracke t s , roofs ,i ronwork, benches, foun ta ins , s t a tue s and decora t ivei tems.F. SIGNS, MARQUEES AND AWNINGS

1 . Signs , marquees and awnings i n t eg r a l to the bui ld ingornamentat ion or a r ch i te c tu r a l d e ta il in g sh a l l bere ta ined where necessary .2. New s igns , marquees an d awnings sha l l not de t r ac tfrom the es s en t i a l form of the bui ld ing nor obscurei t s a r ch i t e c tu r a l fea tures .3. New s igns , marquees, awnings sha l l be of a s ize andmate r i a l compatible with th e b uild in g and i t s cur ren tuse .4. Signs, m arquees and awnings appl ied to the bui ld ingsha l l be appl ied in such a way tha t they could beremoved without damaging the bui ld ing.5. All s igns added to the bui ld ing sha l l be par t of onesystem of des ign , or r e f l e c t a d es ig n c on ce ptappropria te to the communication i n t en t .

61


60/70

6. L e t t e r i n g forms or typeface w i l l be e v a l u a t e d fo r thes p e c i f i c use i n t e n d e d , but g e n e r a l l y s h a l l e i t h e r becontemporary or r e l a t e t o the period of t h e b u i l d i n gor i t s l a t e r i n t e g r a l f e a t u r e s .7. L ig htin g of s i g n s w i l l be evaluated f o r t h e s p e c i f i cuse i n t e n d e d , but g e n e r a ll y i ll u m i n a ti o n o f a s i g n

s h a l l not dominate i l l u m i n a t i o n of the b u i l d i n g .8. The foregoing not w i t h s t a n d i n g , s i g n s a r e viewed asthe most a p p r o p r i a t e v e h i c l e for imaginat ive andc r e a t i v e e x p r e s s i o n , e s p e c i a l l y i n s t r u c t u r e s beingreused fo r purpose d i f f e r e n t from the o r i g i n a l , and

it i s not the Commission's i n t e n t t o s t i f l e ac r e a t i v e approach t o signage .G. PENTHOUSES

1 . The o b j e c t i v e of p r e s e r v i n g the i n t e g r i t y o f theo r i g i n a l or l a t e r i n t e g r a l roof shape s h a l l providethe b a s i c c r i t e r i a i n judging whether a penthouse canbe added t o a r o o f . Height of a b u i l d i n g , prominenceof roof form, and v i s i b i l i t y s h a l l gover n whe th er apenthouse w i l l be approved.2. Minimizing or e l i m i n a t i n g the v i s u a l impact o f t h epenthouse i s the g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e and t h e fol lowingg u i d e l i n e s s h a l l be fol lowed:

(a) Location s h a l l be s e l e c t e d where t h e penthousei s not v i s i b l e from the s t r e e t or a d j a c e n tb u i l d i n g s ; s e t b a c k s s h a l l be u t i l i z e d .(b) Overa l l h e i g h t or othe r dimensions s h a l l be keptt o a p o i n t where the penthouse i s not seen fromthe s t r e e t or a d j a c e n t b u i l d i n g s .(c) E x t e r i o r t r e a t m e n t s h a l l r e l a t e to t h em a t e r i a l s , c o l o r and t e x t u r e of t h e b u i l d i n g ort o o t h e r m a te ri a ls i n t e g ra l t o t h e p e r i o d andc h a ra c t e r o f the b u i l d i n g , t y p i c a l l y used fo rappendages.(d) Openings i n a penthouse s h a l l r e l a t e t o theb u i l d i n g i n p ro p o rt i o n , type and s i z e o f

opening, wherever v i s u a l l y a p p a r e n t .H. LANDSCAPE FEATURES

1. The g e n e r a l i n t e n t i s t o p rese rv e th e e x i s t i n g orl a t e r i n t e g r a l landscape f e a t u r e s t h a t enhance t h elandmark p r o p e r t y .

62


61/70

2. I t i s recognized tha t of ten the environmentsurrounding th e p ro pe rty has cha rac te r , sca l e ands t r e e t pa t te rn qui t e d i f f e r en t from th at e xis t in gwhen the bui ld ing was cons t ruc ted . Thus, changesmust f requen t ly be made to accommodate the newcond i t ion , and th e landscape t rea tment can be seen asa t rans i t ion fea ture between the landmark and i t s newsurroundings .

3. The ex is t ing landforms of the s i t e sha l l not bea l t e r ed unless shown to be necessary for maintenanceo f the landmark or s i t e . Addi t iona l landforms sh a l lonly be considered i f they wi l l not obscure theex te r io r of the landmark.4. Orig ina l layout and mater ia l s of th e walks, s t ep s ,and paved areas should be maintained . Cons idera t ionwi l l be given to a l t e ra t ions i f it can be shown t h a tbe t te r s i t e c i rcu la t ion i s necessary and tha t thea l t e r a t i on s wi l l improve t h i s without a l t e r i ng thei n t eg r i t y of the landmark.5. Exis t ing heal thy plan t mater ia l s should be maintainedas long as poss ib l e . New plan t ma te r i a l s should beadded on a schedule tha t wi l l assure a con t inu i ty inthe o r ig ina l la nd sc ap e des ign and i t s l a t e radapta t ions .6. Mai

Chestnut Hill Reservoir Pump Stations Study_tcm3-19719

Documents

Transcript of Chestnut Hill Reservoir Pump Stations Study_tcm3-19719