.gif)
Presenting Nature
MENU
Design Ethic Origins
(1916-1927)
Design Policy & Process
(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 |
|
IV. THE WORK OF THE WESTERN FIELD OFFICE, 1927 TO 1932 (continued)
EXPANDING THE BUILDING PROGRAM
From 1927 to 1932, the building program of the National Park Service made substantial progress in providing each park with administrative buildings that were functional and harmonious in design. Utilitarian industrial buildings such as garages and workshops were arranged to form enclosed compounds where their activities did not interfere with visitors' use of the park. At campgrounds, community buildings served a number of functions, including quarters for rangers, central showers, and gathering places for relaxation and evening lectures. Each building, whether an administration building or an employee residence, was designed for its site and setting, fitting the development scheme determined for the area. Each reflected an architectural theme based on native materials, method of construction, and sometimes a cultural theme drawn from the region's pioneering or indigenous architecture. Designers often created buildings to match the style of preexisting structures felt to be in keeping with the natural character of the park.
The idea of an architectural theme for all park structures in keeping with a park's natural character had been promoted by Daniels, Punchard, and Hull. In the late 1920s, Thomas Vint realized that architectural themes could be imposed on standard plans that met the broad functional needs of parks in general. The designs for new buildings were therefore standardized according to type, providing model floor plans and elevations that could be adopted elsewhere in the park. The materials, type of construction, and details of park structures, on the other hand, were determined by the natural qualities of each site, including climate, weather, presence of local stone or timber, topography, and the scale of surrounding forests. While larger structures, such as administration buildings, were generally unique designs, structures such as patrol cabins or comfort stations could follow a common design that was repeated throughout the park. The same design might be used again and again in one park, provided the external characteristics of the structure fit harmoniously into the natural setting.
For this reason, a number of successful designs developed in the late 1920s reappeared in the public works and emergency conservation programs of the New Deal era. For example, about 1928, an efficient design for a duplex comfort station was developed. The building was divided into separate sections for men and women, which were entered by doors with screens and roofs on opposite ends. A utility room separated the two sections in the center of the building. The prototype for this design appears to be the Union Point comfort station at Yosemite, which was repeated several years later at Tuolumne Meadows and whose floor plan and utilities layout appeared in many forms throughout the 1930s. With separate paths and screened entrances, the solution proved efficient for utilities and still maintained the privacy of separate structures.
Also important was the development of standards for the construction of housekeeping cabins. In the mid-1920s, housekeeping camps were first introduced in the national parks as an experiment. They proved particularly popular among tourists and profitable for concessionaires. Soon concessionaires were demanding that they be allowed to build large numbers of such facilities, preferably laid out in rectangular grids so that their allotted space could be filled with as many cabins as possible. Because of the increasing demand, Director Horace Albright requested that Vint's division make a special study of housekeeping cabins and draw up plans for a cabin suitable for the automobile tourist in the national parks.
In consultation with the service's sanitary engineer, the division developed "Standards for Housekeeping Cabins" to be followed by both the government and park operators. Issued in November 1929, the standards took the form of three sheets of drawings that specified physical requirements such as equipment, size of cabin, and number of windows, rather than preferred floor plans or designs. The study proved useful to the development of concessionaires' facilities and to the service's landscape program. Albright recognized the effect that large units of house-keeping cabins would have on the national parks. Perceiving the study's far-reaching value, he remarked, "The question developed a great deal of thought on the development of all tourist facilities. The benefits will bear fruit in all future programs." [70]
Within the next few years, the demand for cabin development and housekeeping accommodations increased, and the standards enabled the park designers to review the adequacy of concessionaire's plans. By 1932, these lower-priced accommodations had become increasingly popular, and a definite trend toward housekeeping camps became apparent and continued into the 1940s. The Landscape Division reviewed many plans submitted by concessionaires to meet this demand by modernizing their existing complexes or by constructing entirely new ones. Unlike the lodges at Zion and Bryce, which offered accommodations in several types of cottages that were spaciously arranged in keeping with the natural contours and blended harmoniously into the wooded areas, the new housekeeping camps called for large numbers of uniform cabins situated closely together, replacing what previously would have been a tent platform. In their best configuration, the camps were laid out in courts with curving walkways and roads; in their least desirable form, they were densely clustered in a rectangular grid with only enough space for parking a car alongside. Whatever the configuration, the Landscape Division did require that wiring for utilities be placed underground to overcome the spider-web effect of cabin camps.
Mount Rainier's concessionaire sought approval for developments of this type at Yakima Park and Paradise. The camp at Paradise illustrates the scale of these developments. Located in the upper half of the free public campground, the camp included a large service building, containing a cafeteria, salesrooms, shower-baths, comfort stations, and forty bedrooms. It also served as a winter lodge for 100 guests. In the fall of 1930, 275 cabins had been completed, and an additional 250 were slated for construction in 1931. The old tent camp was abandoned, and the cold storage building was converted for summer offices and a dormitory and dining hall for employees. A new warehouse was constructed to house a laundry, an ice cream plant, and supplies.
Keeping pace with the government development of the northeastern side of the mountain, the Rainier Park Company opened a similar, but less ambitious housekeeping cabin camp, in the summer and fall of 1931 at Yakima Park. A service building, referred to as the lodge, had a cafeteria, salesroom, and about forty bedrooms. There were 200 housekeeping cabins. [71]
Rather than artlessly massing standard cabins, several concessionaires developed communities that provided model solutions for maintaining a harmony between the manmade accommodations and the natural setting. The two most noteworthy were the North Rim development of the Utah Parks Company designed by Gilbert Stanley Underwood, and several years later, Mary Colter's Bright Angel Lodge and cabins for the Fred Harvey Company at Grand Canyon.
The standards made it possible for the park designers to draw up model designs useful in other aspects of park architecture. They would have the strongest influence in the development of recreational cabin areas in state parks through the work of the Civilian Conservation Corps and later the Works Progress Administration. In 1934, Conrad Wirth compiled a portfolio of the variations on housekeeping cabins that had been developed by the Landscape Division, by then called the Branch of Plans and Designs, and the Resettlement Administration. These plans served as models for conservation work and other relief work in state parks and in recreation demonstration areas. Architect Cecil Doty of Herbert Maier's District III office for New Deal Emergency Conservation Work in the state parks developed blueprints for a number of standard cabin designs that were used extensively in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and other southwestern states. Unlike the crowded communities built by the concessionaires, the cabin clusters built in state parks were constructed and arranged to harmonize with the natural site and setting. Outstanding early examples were the cabins in the Virginia state parks, which illustrated how a standard plan could be varied by altering materials, methods of construction, and features such as porches. Also noteworthy were the cabins designed by state park architect Arthur Fehr at Bastrop State Park in Texas, which strongly resembled and may have influenced the prototypical designs issued by Herbert Maier's district office. [72]
From the early years of the National Park Service, designers had recognized pioneer and traditional forms of construction as suitable prototypes for park structures, for several reasons. Such forms used native materials such as timber or stone that blended with forests, boulder-strewn rivers, or canyons. These forms offered an economical and practical approach to harmonization in keeping with the 1918 policy. Furthermore, pioneer traditions used construction techniques yielding irregular lines, roughened textures, and handcrafted finishes that were compatible with the character of nature. [73]
Within these requirements, there was a great deal of latitude. Vint's early experience as a draftsman working on bungalows and residences in Los Angeles and Pasadena were formative for integrating building and landscape. He continued to draw on Bungaloid and Craftsman motifs, designs, and plans. Park buildings constructed by the concessionaires, the creative achievements of the Underwood firm and Mary Colter, the work of Jesse and Aileen Nusbaum at Mesa Verde, and Herbert Maier's highly individual and successful designs for park museums provided a wealth of inspiration and a climate of free expression. While Vint's staff perfected the design of log and stone structures, they also studied other cultural and indigenous traditions and explored new materials and methods. In 1929, Vint asked Colter for copies of her photographs of the cave dwellings and temples at Mesa Verde that had inspired her own work at Grand Canyon. In 1930, Vint began to examine the possibilities of adobe construction, which had been traditionally used in the Southwest, and Charles Peterson gathered notes on the method of construction and the various uses of adobe in the buildings of Santa Fe.
To Vint, the lodges at Glacier and Zion represented the best of park architecture. He was extremely satisfied with the developments at Bryce and the North Rim of the Grand Canyon as well. In December 1930, the Department of the Interior issued a press release praising the variety of facilities at the North Rim and naming the development the "best all-around public utility development in the national parks." [74]
If the early 1920s were a period of experimentation with forms, materials, and architectural themes, then 1927 to 1932 were the years when principles and practices borrowed from Downing, Vaux, Olmsted, and Hubbard and a variety of architectural styles coalesced to form a mature ethic of rustic and naturalistic design that would be carried over into the 1930s and affect the character of national and state parks nationwide. In 1932, Vint compiled a portfolio of representative administrative buildings and structures that was circulated to various parks. Today this document indicates what Vint considered the most successful and representative designs that merged from his office from 1927 to 1932. Illustrated in the portfolio are the administration buildings at Longmire (1928) and Yakima Park (1931), the comfort stations at Union Point in Yosemite (1928) and Logan Pass in Glacier (1931), the Tioga Pass entrance at Yosemite (1931), a ranger dormitory at Crater Lake (1932), a community building at an unidentified location (1927), the fire lookout at Crane Flat in Yosemite (1931), and checking stations at Sequoia and Mount Rainier (1926). Residences were drawn from the work at Yosemite Village, where there had been a serious shortage of housing in the late 1920s. Among these were a dentist's residence (1931), a four-family residence (1930), and a cabin designed for the new Indian village. Other examples of housing included a staff residence built at Mount Rainier (1930) and the superintendent's residence and ranger dormitory built at Crater Lake (1932). [75]
The buildings selected for the portfolio reflect not only the maturing architectural vision of Vint and his staff but also their collaboration with other programs of the National Park Service. By this time, several other programs had reached maturity, such as engineering, sanitation, and forestry, and had become a permanent park of the administration of national parks. As these projects demanded facilities and made changes in the park landscape, the Landscape Division collaborated with them. Moreover, one of the advantages of the Western Field Office was that it brought together the park service's various programs.
Continued >>>
Top
Last Modified: Mon, Oct 31, 2002 10:00:00 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mcclelland/mcclelland4c.htm
.gif){kind=small}