Bandelier Historic Structure Report: CCC Buildings

BUILDING COMPONENTS

The CCC buildings at Bandelier were constructed with similar details. To avoid repetition, these details are divided by category and described in this section. Specific building information, which includes deviations from the usual construction techniques and other pertinent data, is described in "The Buildings."

NPS architects and landscape architects made plans and working drawings and wrote specifications for all the CCC projects. The old plans are on file at the monument, at the Southwest Regional Office, and at the DSC and are easily reproducible from microfiche cards. Only selected drawings are reproduced in this study. Some specifications are on file at the park. Others undoubtedly exist in several federal depositories, but the budget and time limit on this project did not allow further research. The specifications that were found included such similar information that seeking out the additional ones would probably add only minor bits of information. As in any construction project, deviations from the original plans and specifications occurred.

Park Service designers worked from a general philosophy that provided guidelines for new construction in park areas. At Bandelier, landscape architect Chuck Richey chose the architectural theme of the pueblo revival style for the monument's development. Indigenous to the area, the style was also undergoing a resurgence in popularity in the Southwest. This mix of Native American and Spanish colonial design elements and construction techniques was perfectly suited to the site. The style had a basic look of having been constructed by native craftsmen using primitive hand tools — one of the precepts of rustic architecture. The rugged stonework, the peeled vigas, and the hand-built furniture created that nostalgic and fitting sense that the designers sought. The style also had the advantage of using on-site and locally available materials — another of the rustic guidelines. The pueblo revival style adapted well to the building site.

The layout around a central parking plaza, the gentle terracing that followed natural landscape contours, and the broken masses of the building forms were traditional elements of the style. All these characteristics of the style accomplished what the agency wanted to do: provide visitor access and facilities in a limited building site and divide the overall development into individual projects that could be constructed for small amounts of money. By following this sensible approach to traditional local architecture, the agency could accomplish its goals with the utmost taste and make the development look as if it belonged there.

Foundations

Excavations and site grading were required for all the foundation work. Specifications for building projects most often called for excavations for footings to be carried down 12 to 18 inches below grade, depending on the project. The specifications also required that "all foundation or footing walls shall be carried down to solid earth as in no case any such masonry be placed on soft earth or fill" (figure 22). Excavated materials were stored in piles next to the building site. Topsoil was used for grading and backfilling, and other excavated materials were "disposed of as directed by the custodian." Thus, archeological fill, if any, was removed and redistributed. [3]

Figure 22. The specifications for foundation and footing walls called for excavations down to solid earth — usually 1 foot to 1-1/2 feet below grade. In this photograph the foundation for Frijoles Canyon Lodge buildings B-15 and B-16 was under way. (Photo: Bandelier)

Although archeological reconnaissance and ruins stabilization were under way during the period of CCC construction, no evidence of archeological clearance on the proposed building site appeared in the construction records or the custodians' monthly narratives. Considering the awareness of the crew and NPS staff and the relatively constant presence of an archeologist (Paul Reiter and others) working on nearby ruins, it seems likely that anything of archeological importance would have been noted. The records did indicate noteworthy archeological discoveries in other areas of the monument, but they made no mention in connection with construction. The landscape architect was very cautious about his placement of the baseball field, but no similar concerns have been found on the placement of the buildings.

Building foundations varied slightly. Some of the buildings were constructed with stone spread footings; others were constructed with the increased wall batter extending to solid earth as the only foundation. (A batter is a backward or receding slope in the face of a wall as it rises.) In most instances, the footing was built with a small shelf projecting a few inches toward the interior to support an interior floor slab.