.gif)
Presenting Nature
MENU
Design Ethic Origins
(1916-1927)
(1916-1927)
Western Field Office
(1927-1932)
Decade of Expansion
(1933-1942)
State Parks
(1933-1942)
|
Presenting Nature:
The Historic Landscape Design of the National Park Service, 1916-1942 |
|
III. A POLICY AND PROCESS FOR DESIGN, 1916 TO 1927 (continued)
DEVELOPMENT OF PARK ROADS (continued)
THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S ROLE
Punchard, Hull, and Vint brought valuable expertise to the road construction program. As stewards of the park landscape, they endeavored to protect the scenery from damage and ensure that all built features harmonized with the natural setting of the park. They were concerned with selecting the route that provided access to major attractions in the park and that offered the best views of park scenery along the way. Their challenge was to do this without destroying the beauty of the park scenery. Paramount in designing a park road from a landscape standpoint was locating it in reference to scenery. Downing's principles on creating a sequential experience in which the visitor would pass through spaces of varying character and past picturesque features and then arrive at scenic vistas were central to their recommendations.
One of the first roads resulting from the collaboration of park service civil and landscape engineers was the Carbon River Road on the west side of Mount Rainier. Mather had urged the construction of this road in his report, and in 1921, Goodwin and Hull together located the new road, which was described in the annual report as being laid out so as to develop and save such scenic accents as individual fine trees and springs gushing from the rocks—in short, to make the most of every scenic detail in making travel over the road enjoyable." This route opened up the particularly beautiful northwest area of the park to motorists. In Hull's opinion, because of its careful preliminary planning, it also promised to be one of the national park system's "finest scenic routes." [105]
The success of many park roads lay in their ability to present the splendors of nature. Vista was of primary importance in locating a road, and selecting viewpoints for visitor enjoyment was an important role of the landscape engineer. Hubbard wrote,
If this enjoyment of views from the road is a matter of considerable importance in the whole design, pains should be taken that the spectators come to the various outlooks and objects of interest without retracing their course, in pleasant sequence, and prepared by each one for the next to come, as where, after passing through a shady wood, a road comes to an outlook over a sunny landscape. Views taken up and down the road must be considered: they are inevitably seen by every one who travels upon it. Where a road changes direction, a view out at the point of change, continuing the line of the road which approaches it and centering on an interesting distant object suitably enframed by the planting about the road itself, is a desirable possibility which the designer should have in mind. Views to be enjoyed from a road where the spectator looks sharply to the right or left should of course be enframed by the planting along the road itself, but they should not be enframed with so small an opening that the traveler has been carried by before he has had time to enjoy the view. It is usually desirable also that interesting views should not be seen to the right and left of the road at the same time, if it can be arranged that they be seen alternately. [106]
One of the first to understand and articulate ideas about wilderness roads was Frank Waugh. Waugh wrote in 1917 that the landscape designer should utilize to the utmost all the natural scenery, fully developing every good view. Development required at least three things: "First, the line of the best view must be determined and kept open; second, this view must be framed by suitable plantings; third, inferior views must be blocked out or reduced to more promissory glimpses." [107]
According to Waugh, vistas were to be open and have a clear focal point such as a mountain, lake, or waterfall. In keeping with Downing's principles, he urged that roads be designed to draw attention to each view. He wrote,
As a rule such special views require further to be fixed, marked and advertised by placing at the optimum point of observation an appropriate seat, carriage turn, rest house or similar accessory. Thus the stranger is directed unmistakably to the main feature, the desirable vista or the glorious outlook. [108]
Waugh carried out his own ideas in his work for the U.S. Forest Service. His design for Mount Hood Road, a curving mountain road with a panorama of unraveling vistas and parking turnouts to provide scenic views, is the most complete example of Waugh's own theory. Waugh also worked at Bryce Canyon in the years just before it was made a national park and may have influenced the design of the scenic road with its spur roads to scenic viewpoints. During the 1930s, Waugh, at the request of his former student Conrad Wirth, then assistant director of the National Park Service, conveyed his ideas on roads, trails, and other aspects of development for natural areas in a manual for the Civilian Conservation Corps entitled Landscape Conservation. [109]
Waugh saw roads and trails as the framework for the entire design of a recreational area, providing transit between principal points in the park and a means of "revealing pleasant scenery." The designer's role was to locate the main points of scenic value, such as fine outlooks, stately groups of trees, and objects of local interest, and to lay out trails connecting these. The angle at which hikers approached scenic features was particularly important. In Waugh's theory of trail design, scenic objects or features were to be viewed straight ahead and at proper distances, while broad outlooks over valleys, mountains, or water, were to be viewed at varying angles to the trail. This was accomplished by giving a "convenient" turn to the trail at the point of view and by widening the trail and providing a stopping place, perhaps with seats facing the outlook. Waugh believed that scenery should be arranged along a trail like a series of themes or motives arranged in "paragraphs" that drew attention to the unique natural features of a variety of landscape types. He wrote,
For example, there will be repeated pictures of the brook which will be the subject of principal interest. The stream supplies the motive to be developed. View after view, picture after picture, will be shown at the most effective points. It is desirable that these views should present considerable diversity. In one place the water will be singing over the rocks, in another there will be a quiet pool with reflections, in another the brook will drop over a cliff forming a fine waterfall. [110]
Henry Hubbard also gave substantial advice for designing roads in natural parks. Roads were to lay gently on the ground, interrupting the natural topography as little as possible. They could be made inconspicuous by concealing them with vegetation and by carefully shaping the roadway and selecting materials. Influenced by the naturalistic gardening techniques that Repton and Downing had espoused and that the Olmsted firm practiced, Hubbard wrote,
In a naturalistic landscape, as far as it is possible, the road should seem to lie upon the surface of the ground without interruption of the natural modeling. The surface of necessary cuts and fills should simulate the natural surface where possible; where this is impossible their modeling should still be as sequential and unbroken a continuation of the natural surface as the designer can arrange. Usually, if the road lies somewhat below the adjoining surface, it will be less conspicuous. Where a road must cross a view over an open area, in a naturalistic scheme, it may be impossible to conceal the road by planting without thereby interrupting the view. It may be still possible to lead the road across the open space in a depression, deep enough at any rate to conceal the road surface, perhaps deep enough to conceal any traffic as well, and in any case so arranged that the line of sight passes from a surface on the farther side, apparently continuous with it, and the mind is thus led to suppose that the intervening surface, not seen, is of the same character. [111]
Hubbard further suggested that roads be surfaced with gravel and broken stone. If asphalt was to be used, the surfaces and edges of the road should softened so that the appearance was similar to that of macadam. Hubbard recommended the construction of gutters made of cobblestones to form an irregular line along the edge of the road; along with turf gutters, these could provide adequate drainage. [112]
Mather and Punchard had both been concerned about roadside conditions. Their first reports expressed their concerns over the problems of park roads passing along private lands and the problems of dead and decaying timber in the woodlands alongside park roads. One solution lay in the acquisition of additional lands for a park, a solution that was realized in a number of parks including Sequoia. The other, often more difficult to justify and thus to fund, was to clean up roads within existing boundaries. The best that could be hoped for was that new work would avoid such unsightly practices. Hull continued to encourage roadside improvements. Although he first urged that utility wires be placed on poles equipped with brackets that gave an appearance like that of a branching tree, by 1925, he recommended that the telephone lines that commonly followed the roads be placed underground. [113]
Private concern for the appearance of park roadsides emerged in Yellowstone, where fallen and dying trees as well as utility poles and wires disfigured the scenery along the roads. The first work in what became known as roadside cleanup began with private funds in 1924. Roadside cleanup entailed the removal of dead and fallen trees and other debris that accumulated in the woodlands along the park roads and the placing of telephone wire underground. With funds from John D. Rockefeller, workers cleared and beautified ten and a half miles of roadside between Mammoth Hot Springs and Obsidian Creek in the fall of 1924 and spring of 1925. The work generated a favorable response from park visitors, and the following year, at a cost of $9,068, nine miles of roadside were improved between Mammoth Hot Springs and Norris Junction and along Yellowstone Lake on the new route between Lake Junction and Bridge Bay. Rockefeller, pleased with the results, extended his funding of this work for another year and planned to fund similar work at Crater Lake. Hull considered the cleanup of roadsides and other park areas (such as the abandoned area in Sequoia's Giant Forest) to be the most important improvements in the mid-1920s. It was not until the end of the 1920s that this work became an integral part of park service work and was funded under annual appropriations. [114]
Armed with justifications prepared by park superintendents, Mather annually sought increased congressional appropriations for road construction and improvements. Finally on April 9, 1924, "an act authorizing the construction, reconstruction, and improvement of roads and trails, inclusive of necessary bridges, in the national parks and monuments," made possible annual appropriations for park roads and trails. Recognizing the need to reconstruct most of the existing park roads to modem standards, Congress approved the same year a general road program authorizing a total appropriation of $7.5 million over a three-year period. Appropriations for the years 1924 to 1928 amounted to $6.5 million; an additional $2.5 million was appropriated under the Appropriations Act of 1928. By October 1927, 89.38 miles of modem automobile roads had been completed, and 184.65 miles were under construction; 337.75 miles of surveys had been completed, and 676.88 miles of surveys authorized. In order to keep up with increasing visitors and provide adequate modern road systems in all parks and monuments, $50 million, at a rate of $5 million annually over a ten-year period, was estimated as necessary in October 1927. [115]
The Leavitt Approach Road Act of January 31, 1931, further authorized the park service to spend funds on construction and improvement of approach roads leading to parks but located outside park boundaries. This made possible the improvement of state highways and roads through national forests. By controlling approaches to parks, the National Park Service was able to provide a graceful transition into the park from the surrounding countryside. Such a transition prepared visitors for the park experience and oriented them to an environment where nature dominated. [116]
With annual appropriations ensured, each park superintendent developed a three-year plan for road improvements. Under this arrangement, superintendents could program the construction of individual roads in segments and develop a well-coordinated system of circulation that met administrative needs, provided visitors access to the key points within the park, and met the demands of a society increasing reliant on the automobile. At the end of 1925, Yellowstone, for example, had 298 miles of roads that included a Grand Loop of 137.4 miles, 79.1 miles of approach and connecting roads, and 81.5 miles of secondary roads, many of which led to points of scenic interest. Here improvements entailed thirteen different projects to be phased over a three-year period and included the reconstruction of entire or portions of roads, the widening and surfacing of others, and the construction of new sections. [117]
Continued >>>
Top
Last Modified: Mon, Oct 31, 2002 10:00:00 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mcclelland/mcclelland3g1.htm
.gif){kind=small}