Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutBrigham Study 1630 .A Town of Watertown • }v Lr Administration Building 149 Main Street Watertown,Massachusetts 02472 Historic District Commission Tel: (617)972-6473•Fax: (617)972-6484 Harvey Steiner,Chairman Christopher J.Hayward,Preservation Agent Victoria J.Carter Audrey Jones Childs Amleto"Mel'Martocchia Margaret Pasulka Matthew C.Petrie Linda Sternberg November 17, 2005 Mr. Christopher Skelly Director of Local Government Programs Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard Boston,MA 02125 Dear Mr. Skelly: Please find enclosed the "Preliminary Report of the Brigham Historic District Study Committee,"that has been prepared at the request of the Watertown Historic District Commission, which voted on October 26, 2005 to forward it to the Massachusetts Historical Commission pursuant to the requirements of M.G.L. Chapter 40C. This proposed new district, which is adjacent to Watertown's current Mt. Auburn Street Historic District, would operate under the aegis of the current Watertown Historic District Commission, and it is proposed that it would operate under the ordinance which covers the current district. The only suggested change to the existing ordinance is language, which is highlighted in Section III of the attached draft, amending the ordinance to include the proposed new district. If the Massachusetts Historical Commission has any questions about the Preliminary Report,please do not hesitate to contact Christopher Hayward, Preservation Agent or me. 1630 4.. Sincerely, Harvey Steiner, Chairman Watertown Historic District Commission Enclosures cc: Watertown Historic District Commission Pam Piantedosi, President, Watertown Town Council Clyde Younger, President-elect, Watertown Town Council Gregory Watson, Director, Dept. of Community Development and Planning Michael Driscoll, Town Manager John Hawes, Chairman, Planning Board Robert Shay, Chairman, Brigham Historic Work Group Town of Watertown Administration Building 149 Main Street Watertown, Massachusetts 02472 Historic District Commission Tel: (617)972-6473•Fax: (617)972-6484 Harvey Steiner,Chairman Christopher J.Hayward,Preservation Agent Victoria J.Carter Audrey Jones Childs Amleto"Mel'Martocchia Margaret Pasulka Matthew C.Petrie Linda Sternberg Preliminary Report of the Proposed Brigham Historic District November 17, 2005 Brigham Historic District Study Committee Preliminary Report Introduction The initiative to create an historic district in the residential neighborhood first developed in the late 191h century by Charles Brigham, one of Massachusetts most renowned architects, was taken by a group of neighbors concerned that recent trends in development were jeopardizing the neighborhood's historic character. These neighbors first began meeting in February 2005 to inform themselves about how establishing an historic district might help preserve the historic character of the neighborhood, and the process for establishing such a district. Information Gathering The group met with David Russo and Roberta Lane of the Watertown Historical Commission who explained the workings of an historic district and suggested that they contact Christopher Skelly at the Massachusetts Historical Commission for the Commission's guide, Establishing Local Historic Districts. The group also met with Harvey Steiner, Chairman of the Watertown Historic District Commission,which oversees the Mt. Auburn St. historic district, established in 2001. Individuals from the group spoke to Victoria Carter and John Hawes, two members of the study committee that led to the creation of the Mt. Auburn historic district to learn about the issues that arose in the creation of that district, and obtained copies of the study committee's final report recommending the creation of that district. In addition they spoke to the consultant who created the inventory of properties in the Mt. Auburn district, as well as to historic district commission members in Brookline and Newton. As a result of this research, the group concluded that the creation of an historic district could in fact help preserve the historic character of their neighborhood by encouraging gradual, compatible change. It also found that the neighborhood did meet the requirements of Massachusetts' Historic Districts Act, MGL Chapter 40C, for becoming an historic district, and that they had sufficient volunteer expertise and resources to undertake the work required to prepare a study report without retaining a consultant. Initial Public Discussion Following the suggestion of the Massachusetts Historical Commission's guidelines the group dropped a leaflet at every house in the district inviting residents to a meeting in the Council Chambers of Watertown's Town Hall to learn about historic districts and express their views on establishing an historic district in their neighborhood. The meeting was held on March 17, 2005 and attracted more than sixty neighbors. Robert Shay moderated the meeting and David Russo and Roberta Lane provided the overview of why and how historic districts are created. There was active discussion of the pro's and con's of creating a district, and at the end of the meeting a significant number of residents offered to join the group to undertake the work needed to create a district. On April 12, 2005 the enlarged group of neighborhood volunteers met to discuss the steps that it needed to take leading to the creation of a district, consider more carefully the boundaries of the district that would be proposed, and to decide who would undertake which tasks. The group decided that it would be most efficient to work with the existing Watertown Historic District Commission to establish the new district under its aegis, rather than go through the process of having the Town Council establish a separate study committee leading to the establishment of a separate Historic District Commission. Bob Shay was delegated to represent the neighborhood group at the April 27 meeting of the Watertown Historic District Commission, and request that they establish a study committee to oversee the development of a report recommending the creation of a new district. The primary task undertaken by the volunteers at the meeting was the preparation of the inventory of all 114 properties in the proposed district on the Form B required by the Massachusetts Historical Commission. David Russo took the lead in this with support from Susan Steele, Joseph Ferreira and Deborah Rosen. Watertown Historic District Commission Establishes Studv Committee On April 27, 2005 the Watertown Historic District Commission voted to initiate a study to create a new historic district in the Russell Ave., Garfield St., Bailey Rd., Stoneleigh Circle/Rd. area. It established a sub-committee made up of two Commission members, Harvey Steiner and Matthew Petrie, to oversee the work of the ad hoc study group made up of neighborhood residents. That group is made up of David Russo, Bob Shay, Bob Flack, Susan Steele and Donna Smerlas, with support from other neighborhood volunteers, and is acting in the role of consultant in preparing the report for the Commission's study committee. The study group met subsequently to develop an information sheet about the proposed district and a survey to be mailed to all homeowners in the proposed district, and to consider what should be included in the Bylaw that would create the district. After consideration of possible alternatives, the study group decided to recommend that the same Bylaw used to establish the Mt. Auburn Historic District be used to establish the new district(Exhibit I). Joseph Ferreira digitized the street maps of the district provided by the assessor's office to create the map of the proposed district(Exhibit II). All these materials have been submitted to the Historic District Commission's Study Committee. In addition, the study group has provided monthly updates on their work to the Historic District Commission. Historical and Architectural Significance The historical and architectural significance of the area encompassed by the district is detailed in Exhibit III. In summary, the proposed district lies on the lower portions of Meeting House Hill (also referred to as Strawberry Hill in some narratives), east of Common Street, and was farmland from the early days of European settlement through the mid-19th century. As the local economy in Watertown became more industrial with the development of the U.S. Arsenal, and later the Hood Rubber Company and Whitney &Pratt, demand for residential housing grew. In the early 1880's the farmland in the district began to be sold off for development of large, architect designed single family homes, and two of Watertown's most prominent citizens and architects, Charles Brigham and Alberto Haynes began to design and develop houses in the area. This development accelerated with the completion of the electric trolley line along Mt. Auburn St. in the 1890's, which made commuting into Boston from Watertown significantly easier. During this time many found the garden suburb a great improvement over the congestion of Boston because they did not have to sacrifice the closeness of neighbors they had enjoyed in the city to attain the healthful rural atmosphere of Watertown. The cultural offerings of Boston also remained comfortably close. The area offered large homes in landscaped settings with limited upkeep. The homes built in the area between the early 1880's and 1930, when development of the area was completed, include a range of important architectural styles including the Queen Anne, Colonial Revival and Shingle style homes built in the late 191h century, which were augmented by homes built in the neo-Federal style after the turn of the century. While the homes were built in different architectural styles, because they were situated on similar sized lots and built on the same scale, taken together they complement each other, creating a neighborhood that is exemplary of the nineteenth century's vision of the garden suburb. The significance of this neighborhood lies not only in its large number of architecturally important homes, but in fact that its overall appearance as one walks its streets is essentially the same as it was 75 years ago. Justification of Boundaries On the advice of Christopher Skelly, of the Massachusetts Historical Commission, and of other experts, the group decided to scale back the size of the proposed district to include Russell Ave., Garfield St., Bailey Rd., Stoneleigh Circle, Stoneleigh Rd., Brigham St., and a portion of Bellevue Rd. The rationale for going forward with this configuration of the district was the concentration of important structures within the district, and the coherence of the district in terms of architectural styles and scale. The proposed district comprises a truly varied treasure-trove of architectural styles and ornament consistent with the contemporary design and composition from the 1880- 1920s. The proposed district is anchored by the 18 houses designed and developed by Charles Brigham, including his former residence at 84 Garfield St., his wife's studio next door and the servants' quarters next to that. The Brigham houses cannot be classified in any one particular style or genre, rather, they represent a varied and versatile expression of his skill, comprising Queen Anne, Stick Style, Tudor Revival and the Craftsman Style. It is in recognition of Charles Brigham's significant role in the Town of Watertown, his prominence as one of the leading American architects of the time, and the fact that he both lived in this district and designed so many of its outstanding residences that it is proposed that the historic district be named after him. The Brigham houses are complemented by houses in the Queen Anne, Colonial Revival and Shingle Styles built on lower Russell Avenue and Bailey Rd. between the early 1880's and 1900, and the neo-Federal Style homes built on upper Russell Ave. and Stoneleigh Circle and Rd. between 1900 and 1930. Many of those homes were designed and developed by Alberto Haynes of Watertown, who was Watertown's other outstanding architect of the time, as well as the Boston firms of Putnam& Cox and Titus and Porter, two important architectural design firms of the late 19th and early 201h centuries. To illustrate the varied and significant nature of the proposed district, it contains one of the few remaining 18th century farmsteads from the era when this entire district was open farmland. That house is the Bailey farmstead at 10 Bailey Rd. designed in the Federal style in ca. 1735. Farther up Bailey road is the most recent house constructed in the proposed district, a Contemporary built in 1971 at 90 Bailey Road. Both houses represent a very different time in the development of Watertown and each brings significance. Of the 114 houses in the proposed district, three were built prior to 1880; 59 from 1880— 1919; 40 from 1920— 1930; and 12 from 1931 to 1971. Taken together the collection of different style residences in the district are an excellent example of the middle class garden suburb that developed in the communities around Boston as a result of the trolley lines built out from Boston in the late 19th century. They complement each other in terms of both scale and design, which results in the neighborhood looking very much as it did in the 1920's. In short, the boundaries of the proposed district are justified by the high concentration within the district of important structures that are outstanding examples of the architectural styles of their time (24 of the 114 homes were listed in the 1982 inventory of historic homes in Watertown), and the coherence of the neighborhood as a whole in terms of its scale and appearance. Significantly, in 1982, the Massachusetts Historical Commission recommended that Meeting House Hill, including specifically Russell Ave., Garfield Street and Bailey Road be nominated as an Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places. Clearly, in addition to the work we have done showing that this area is significant, an independent organization specializing in identifying important historic resources has also identified this area as being important. The Survev of Residents' Opinions about the Proposed District In May the group prepared a fact sheet on historic districts and a survey of resident's opinions about the creation of a district and the architectural features they would prefer to be excluded from review if an historic district were to be created. These were mailed out on Commission letterhead in June, and the results presented to the Commission at its July 27 meeting. Forty-nine of the one hundred and eighteen households in the proposed district returned surveys, a response rate of nearly 42%. 67% of those responding favored creating an historic district, 20% opposed it, while 13%were undecided. Exhibit IV provides a summary of the results of the survey. Property Street Address Index and Inventory of Structures David Russo, with the assistance of Susan Steele, Joseph Ferreira and Deborah Rosen have prepared the Property Street Address Index (Exhibit V) and Inventory of Structures (Form B's). This has been the most labor and expertise intensive part of this project. Everyone involved in this project thanks them for their extraordinary efforts, which have enabled us to bring this completed preliminary report to the Commission in a timely manner. On the basis of these findings, the Study Committee recommends that the Watertown Historic District Commission vote to receive this Preliminary Report and initiate the process leading to its decision whether or not to recommend to the Town Council to establish the Brigham Historic District as Watertown's second Local Historic District. Watertown Charles A. Brigham Historic District Summary Sheet Study Committee • Harvey Steiner—Chairman 18 Marshall St. Watertown, MA 02472 Phone: 617-923-7044 Email: harvevaartrelated.com • Matthew Petrie Work Group • Robert Shay—Chairman 139 Russell Ave. Watertown, MA 02472 Phone: 617-926-9943 Email: bob(a,rpshay.com • David Russo • Susan Steele • Robert Flack • Susan Smerlas • Joseph Ferreira Expected Date of Public Hearing—January/February 2006 Expected Date of Council vote—February/March, 2006 Total Number of Properties in Proposed District - 114 Exhibit III Brigham Historic District Narrative History A. Native American Watertown to 1630 Watertown's fundamental development is the result of geography and early use patterns. As its name indicates, water has been of paramount importance. The falls on the Charles River in Watertown marked the farthest navigable point on the river from its mouth, and provided a natural fording place across the river. Two natural ponds within the river, Cook's and Boyd's, provided spawning areas for the rich fishing grounds near the falls. The indigenous population developed a network of paths, many of which survive as Watertown's important streets. A crucial path was the east-west trail connecting the Cambridge fishing grounds to the ford near the present-day Galen Street bridge, which archeologists know as the Connecticut Path, and is more commonly known today as Mount Auburn Street. Archeologists have found evidence of human occupation of this area from about 7000 B.C., however there is no evidence of continuous settlement by Native Americans in Watertown. Nonetheless, the Native American patterns of communication and their techniques for fishing the river were of primary importance to the development, growth and sustainability of Watertown. The first Europeans in Watertown settled on the river bank near the present-day tower of the Perkins School for the Blind. John Oldham, who had claim to a large land grant, had a but here. B First Period - 1630-1676 The first permanent settlers arrived in 1630, having been sent by the Massachusetts Bay Company. Led by Sir. Richard Saltonstall, they settled at Gerry's landing near the present-day Mount Auburn Hospital on land that was later annexed by Cambridge in 1754. These first European settlers chose this site for its open fields, which were adjacent to a good landing site on the river. By 1634, a mill was built at the falls further up the river in order to harness its power. By 1640, a footbridge on the site of the present-day Galen Street bridge was constructed and was enlarged for horses in 1648. By 1650, Watertown had two centers, one at Gerry's landing and the other at the falls, by the present-day Watertown Square, which were connected by today's Mount Auburn Street. Other ancient Native American paths were also enlarged for cart traffic. During this period the current day Russell Avenue area was surveyed by the town and parcels were granted to freeman for farming. The area of present-day Garfield Street, Bailey Road, Brigham Street, Stoneleigh Circle, Stoneleigh Road and westward almost to School Street was one large parcel of land owned by three freemen, William Jennison, John Knowles and William Bond, M.D. The area of present-day Russell Avenue was composed of three plots of land, the first one covering the lower portion of Russell Avenue, owned by J. Strickland, M. Underwood, Joseph Whitney and N. Fiske. The upper portion of Russell Avenue were composed of two horizontal parcels, one owned by A. Mixer and the other by J. Reynolds and M. Null. All of this land north of the present day Mt. Auburn Street lay on the southeastern slope of Meeting House Hill, also known as Strawberry Hill. In 1649 the first school house was built on the top of the hill on Common Street. C. Colonial Period- 1676-1776 Watertown's 2nd Parish Meeting House was constructed at the top of the Hill near the school in 1723. However the residents tired of trudging up the hill, and in 1755 tore down that meeting house and rebuilt it as the 3rd Meeting House at the corner of Common and Mount Auburn Streets on land donated to the town by Nathanial Harris, a prosperous local rum dealer. As a result, the administrative, commercial and religious centers of the town moved closer together. The location of the meeting house on Mount Auburn Street reinforced its importance as a main artery, and set the pattern for the large string of churches found along the street today and an important precursor to residential and business development of the area. D. Federal Period- 1776-1830 Although business and industry were springing up along the Charles River and around Watertown Square, Watertown still retained an important agricultural base, raising crops such as asparagus, apples, strawberries and celery. A number of farmsteads were established in present-day Russell Avenue area, including the Bailey farmstead, which is one of the few remaining 18th century farmsteads in Watertown. It is presently located at 10 Bailey Road. Originally owned by Jonathan Bemis in 1795, the house is an excellent example of the late federal style, in a simple vernacular design with symmetrical fenestration and pilasters from the original door surround. E. Industrial Aize - 1830-1874 Business developed in Watertown and the town became a hub for transportation to the west, using the Boston Post Road(now Main Street)to areas west of Boston, including Connecticut and New York. Agriculture still flourished in Watertown generally, and in the present-day Russell Avenue area, specifically, which retained its original agricultural complexion. In the late 1860s and early 1870s, new residential structures began to be developed with several competing styles being introduced to Watertown. The Stick Style appeared first in a few locations : 26 Russell Avenue and 99 Russell Avenue are two good examples. In this style, the means of construction are indicated on the exterior of the building by use of decorative pieces indicating plates, sills and beams. The balloon frame method of constructing buildings using light wood members, closely spaced together instead of the heavy timbers required for mortise and tenon construction began to be used in the 1850s. It enabled architects and builders to increase their design vocabulary enormously during this period to include, among other things, towers,bays, oriels, complex cross-gables and dormers which could be easily erected. At the same time, the use of the jig saw and lathe allowed the more complex massing of the buildings to be decorated with incised brackets, scrolls, consoled,patterned shingle work, turned balusters, finials, bosses and a myriad of other decorative devices that added a visual liveliness to the exteriors. While the Russell Avenue area was still largely agricultural, the new stick style and other advances in architecture and building that resulted from mechanization created a strong foundation for the future development of the Russell Avenue neighborhood. F. Suburbanization and Further Industrialization- 1874-1900 In 1874, Watertown was built up around its center at Watertown Square as far Russell Avenue and Walnut Street along Mount Auburn Street. Mount Auburn Street was sparsely settled east of Common Street to Cambridge. The balance of the area was composed of large estates like the William Pratt estate on the top of Meeting House Hill. In the 1880s,profound changes with far-reaching effects on development occurred in Watertown that shaped the creation of the Russell Avenue area. 1. Factors of Change The first change came about when a second, more highly concentrated, industrial area developed around the U.S. Arsenal, Hood Rubber Company, Whitney&Pratt Company and the Union Market Stockyards. While the U.S. Arsenal was relatively quiet until Work War I, Hood Rubber Company and Whitney&Pratt grew rapidly requiring an ever larger number of employees, managers and new housing. The second change was one of improved transportation to and from Boston. While the steam railroad to Boston had been operating efficiently since 1846, four electric trolley lines were created in the early 1890s which ran into the city more rapidly. Commuting into Boston, which had been taking place on a limited scale, suddenly became much easier and the market for upper and upper middle class housing expanded proportionally. One of these lines traveled along Mount Auburn Street, making the farmland north of Mt. Auburn Street between Common Street and School Street highly desirable for residential development. In 1878, the population of Watertown was 6,000 and by 1900 it had jumped to 10,000. This increase in population led to the subdivision of large estates and farms for residential development. The density of the development was determined by the economic class of the citizens for whom it was intended; however the styles in which the buildings were designed were the same, no matter whether they were large single family homes, multiple family dwellings or cottages. Besides the size of the structure, only the amount of ornamentation varied. 2. Trends in Architecture: Queen Anne. Colonial Revival and Shin'2le Stvle Aesthetically, architects were aiming to create structures with complex interior volumes and a richness of exterior surfaces using a variety of building materials, patterns and textures. The result was to be a highly picturesque ensemble which was inspired by the English Queen Anne movement, instigated by Richard Norman Shaw in England in the 1850s. The Queen Anne style in Watertown began with the Stick Style in the late 1860s and early 1870s. It fully blossomed in the 1880s and 1890s,persisting until the first decade of the twentieth century, when it was supplanted in popularity by the Colonial Revival style. With the Centennial of 1876 came a new pride in America and a new way of looking at its past. Architects saw the American past in a romantic light and used elements of Colonial Georgian and Federal styles, adapting them to the more complex massing and picturesque detail inherited from the Queen Anne period. Massing regularized and symmetry prevailed as designers returned to the forms of the pre- Romantic styles. A third style co-existing with the Queen Anne and Colonial Revival in the 1880s and early 1890s, was the Shingle Style, which originated in nearby Cambridge, Massachusetts, with the Stoughton House of 1876 by H.H. Richardson. This style, in its purest form in the northeast, was restricted to a number of wealthy patrons of architecture. Elements, however, appear in Watertown in combination with the Queen Anne and Colonial Revival styles. Shingle Style architects approached a building as if it were a series of volumes exerting pressure outward on the exterior walls. Roof and walls no longer simply defined the spaces within, rather they acted to contain the interior volumes. In practice, this meant that shingles alone were used on the exterior of the building, covering the rounded forms and expanses of the wall like skin. Roofs became major design elements, descending in unbroken lines in a similarly encompassing manner. Decorative devices which made historical references were omitted and replaced, if at all, with simple forms. 3. The Russell Avenue Area The first to appreciate the opportunity for large-scale development in Watertown was the Russell family, celery farmers, who were among the three largest farming landholders in Watertown. In 1882, they began selling off their property to develop Russell Avenue as an affluent development in the suburbs. Large lot, single family houses for architect-designed homes were aimed at attracting upper middle class commuters from Boston. The ease of transportation for commuters due to the electric trolley on Mount Auburn Street to Boston, was a major factor in the success of the area's development. Many found the garden suburb a great improvement over the congestion of Boston because they did not have to sacrifice the closeness of neighbors they had enjoyed in the city to attain the healthful rural atmosphere of Watertown. The cultural offerings of Boston also remained comfortably close. The area offered large homes in landscaped settings with limited upkeep. This development was highly successful and remains today as an exemplary example of the nineteenth century's vision of the garden suburb. The success of the Russell development led Charles Brigham and his fellow investors, Harwood&Whitcomb, to buy property from the Bailey farm and establish Garfield and Brigham Streets. Eighteen of these houses, architect Brigham designed himself for upper middle class Bostonians and local people. Those who settled there, like those in the Russell Avenue development, could commute to Boston with greater ease than previously and wished to live outside of the city in a garden-like setting with large houses set near their neighbors to retain urban proximity. Russell Avenue, Garfield Street and Bailey Road formed one of the most successful garden suburbs in the Boston area. Control on size, architectural design and landscaping, while not formally explicit, was nevertheless maintained. Reverend Edward Rand, first Rector of the Church of the Good Shepherd and President of the Historical Society, described the development in 1892 as a neighborhood whose architecture was sure to be good; and the adjoining grounds garden-like; improved by the fact that they were on the line of cars running to Newton, Cambridge and Boston. The houses that were built are ever-varying Queen Anne, Colonial Revival and Stick Styles ranging in dates from the 1880s to the early 1900s. Full of confidence about the area, 59 Garfield Street was built, which is a compact Queen Anne, nevertheless displaying most of the style's decorative devices from patterned shingle work,pendant overhang, and windows with multi-paned upper sashes, to the use of cross-gables, hipped dormers and eaves brackets. The picturesque Queen Anne is also represented by 50 Garfield Street, whose gable roof is intersected by transverse gables, dormers and bays. Again, the surface is vigorously decorated with shingles, clapboards and strap work, while turned balusters,porch supports and brackets vary the trim. The Colonial Revival house at 43 Bailey Road is an excellent example of this style, for while there are no towers and the house has taken on a symmetry, although it has not yet become completely regular. In addition, the Palladian window, the bowed bay, columns, pilasters and moulded friezes are reintroduced into the architect's design vocabulary. The scale of the house also increased in many instances. There are many shades between the Queen Anne and the Colonial Revival, and 77 Garfield Street illustrates the transition between these two styles. Shingle Style elements appear at 90 and 99 Russell Avenue, but 77 Russell Avenue comes closer to being a modest but rather pure Shingle Style house. F. Watertown in the Twentieth Century- 1900-1935 The first three decades of the twentieth century in Watertown brought ethnic diversity, substantial industrial activity and the demise of the market gardens and estates which had given nineteenth century Watertown its identity. From a population of 10,000 in 1900, the number of residents increased to 35,000 by 1930. Armenians, Italians, Greeks added to the expanding Irish population. Employment opportunities spurred by World War I industrial activity increased rapidly. As in many industrial areas of the country, the need for housing was great, increasing pressure on land holders to sell for residential development at an unprecedented scale. Previously, the development of large sections of land had taken place slowly enough to allow for planning and for a variety of building types to be constructed. But now the profits to be made were considerable and a few economical styles were repeated by developers and builders for entire streets. Single family buildings continued from 1900 to about 1915; from then until 1925, two-family houses were predominant. After 1925,builders returned to a mix of one and two-family types. 1. Stvlistic Trend-Historic Revival Stvle Taking inspiration from the past, the romantic movement in architecture persisted into the twentieth century with a series of Historical Revival styles, including the Neo- Federal style. Large portions of upper Russell Avenue and almost all of Stoneleigh Road and Stoneleigh Circle are Neo-Federal in design. This style is characterized by a low pitched or flat roof that was usually concealed behind a balustrade; moldings of a low relief and delicate ornamentation. When a classical order is present(i.e., doric, ionic, etc.) the capital is diminutive and the columns are slender. Emphasis is placed on the central entrance, which is often set apart with a small, one story portico, a crowning fanlight and narrow sidelights. Other ornamentation is primarily based on curved lines, as well as a Palladian window set within a recessed wall arch, and circular or elliptical windows. G. Watertown's Architects - Charles Brigham and Alberto Havnes Two architects were extremely active in Watertown, Charles Brigham, who was a successful Boston architect and Alberto F. Haynes whose practice was extensive but substantially limited to Watertown. Brigham, the son of a major Watertown lumber dealer, was born in about 1840, lived in the Coolidge Tavern as a child and was in the first class of Watertown High School, graduating in 1857. He served in the Civil War, returning to begin the study and practice of architecture. Brigham resided at 84 Garfield Street in a home he designed, along with two outbuildings: his wife's studio at 92 Garfield Street and the servants' quarters at 100 Garfield Street. He was active in civic matters, serving the town as Selectman, School Committee Member, Water Commissioner, and was Library Trustee for more than thirty- three years (1889-1922). He was also the first President of the Watertown Cooperative Bank, and also Director of the Union Market National Bank. Brigham also gave back to his community by donating the plans for Watertown High School (later the East Junior High and presently an assisted living facility). Among his more notable designs are three major public buildings in Fairhaven, Massachusetts, the Maine State House, an extension on the Massachusetts State House, a major addition to the Christian Science Mother Church in Boston and Church of the Advent in Boston. Charles Brigham's work reflects the eclecticism and historicism prevalent in the last quarter of the 19th century. In 1887, he designed the Stoughton Railroad Station in a Richardsonian manner, in 1889-95, he was responsible for the fine north addition to the Boston State house showing great sensitivity to the original Federal Bulfinch structure, and in 1899, Brigham introduced the French Chateauesque style to New England, designing the Burrage House at 314 Commonwealth Avenue in Boston, mixing Renaissance Italian with Gothic influences. When he was asked to provide a design for the Coddington School in Quincy, Massachusetts, he had already finished the First Church of Christ in Boston, one of the most impressive Classic Revival buildings of the city. He brought to the school the same clarity of design with classic details,but refrained from endowing the school building with a panoply of ornamentation. Instead, the elegance of the facade is manifested with few architectural details and an emphasis on the classic fenestration of the central pavilion. A member of the First Parish Church in Watertown, he designed its social hall located at 36 Church St. Constructed in 1888 it serves today as the sanctuary of the First Parish Church. He designed his own home at 84 Garfield Street as well as his wife's studio at 92 Garfield Street and his servants' quarters at 100 Garfield Street. In addition he designed and developed 15 other houses along Garfield and Brigham Streets. Brigham died in 1925, Charles Brigham was and is an architect of the highest order and is of national importance. Alberto Haynes was an architect fully versed in the fashionable styles of his time. He worked with the Watertown Land Company designing homes in their residential developments. On Russell Avenue, he designed#90 in the Queen Anne style and a few years later the Colonial Revival homes at#43 and#50 Bailey Road. His other buildings similarly illustrate Haynes' versatility, with Rational Revival homes on Bates Road, commercial buildings in Watertown Square, a municipal fire station on Main Street and additions to two churches along Mount Auburn Street: all in different styles. Haynes was involved in the Historical Society's efforts to preserve the town cemeteries and maintain public records of them. He also served briefly as the town Assessor. Bibliography Allen, Edward, Best From the Past, the Perkins Institution for the Blind, 1979. Barfield, Thomas J., and Barber, Russell J., The Amphitheater Site: A Late Archaic Settlement in Watertown, Massachusetts, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, 1982. Bond, M.D., Henry, Genealogies of the Families and Descendants of the Early Settlement in Watertown, Massachusetts, 2 volumes,New England Historic Genealogical Society, Boston, 1860. Burke, Charles T., Centennial History of Watertown, Watertown Free Public Library, Watertown, 1968. Burke, Charles T., A Topo2_ra_)hical History of Watertown, Watertown Free Public Library, Watertown, 1975. Burke, Charles T., Watertown in the Eighteenth Century, Watertown Free Public Library, Watertown, 1977. Burke, Charles T., Watertown in the Revolution, Watertown Free Public Library, Watertown, 1975. Burke, Charles T., Watertown, Town on the Charles, Watertown 350t'Anniversary Celebration Committee, 1980. Elliott, Clark A., An Historical Sketch of the Eighth Meetin!House, First Parish Unitarian, Watertown, 1975. Hodges, Maud deLeigh, Crossroads on the Charles, Canaan,New Hampshire, 1980. Massachusetts Historical Commission, Reconnaissance Survev Report, Watertown, 1980. Perkins Institution for the Blind, The Lantern, Winter, 1980, Watertown. Rand, Edward Augustus (Rev.), Watertown Historical Society Scranbook, volumes 1-5. Ripley, Margaret E., Early Churches of Watertown, 1975. Robinson, George F., and Robinson Wheeler, Ruth, Great Little Watertown, Watertown, 1930. Wallace, Joseph D., A History of Watertown, Massachusetts to 1900, 1950. Watertown, Massachusetts, Free Public Library, Bicentennial Tour of Historic Watertown. Watertown Bicentennial Celebration Committee, 1975. Watertown, Massachusetts, Free Public Library, Watertown: 5 Walking Tours, Watertown Free Public Library, 1976. Watertown Redevelopment Authority, Massiello &Associates, Architects, Inc., Watertown Arsenal Proiect, Watertown, 1975. Whitney, Solon F., Historical Sketches of Watertown. Massachusetts, Watertown, 1893. Whitney, William H., A Watertown Farm in Eight Generations, Cambridge, 1898. Proposed Historic District • July 2005 Survey Exhibit IV Yes No Not Sure Blank 1. Do you think the proposed district is historically significant? 36 7 1 5 2. Do you think the proposed district should be preserved? 34 8 1 6 3. Do you think the following should be exempt from review? Exterior Light Fixtures 25 20 4 Walls and Fences 18 28 3 Satellite Dishes 19 26 4 Storm Windows, and Storm Doors 35 8 6 Terraces, Walks and Driveways 28 14 7 Solar Panels, 34 9 6 Air Conditioners 31 13 5 Roofing Color 30 13 6 Signs: size and illumination 9 35 5 Exterior Paint Color 30 14 5 4. Overall, do you support creating a local historic district in our neighborhood? 33 10 6 Exhibit V List of Houses by Address in the Proposed Historic District Bailev Road 10 19 26 27 34 42 43 50 51 59 69 75 80 86 89 90 99 112 Bellevue Road 232 238 Brigham Street 2 3 39 42 45 46 Garfield Street 18 19 24 25 31 32 37 40 43 50 51 59 60 68 69 74 77 84 85 92 93 100 105 110 116 117 121 122 Russell Avenue, 16 25 26 31 32 37 38 43 46 49 54 57 60 64 65 71 74 77 80 85 90 93 96 99 100 105 106 112 115 119 122 125 128 131 136 139 142 145 148 152 153 158 159 Stoneleiizh Circle 10 14 22 27 30 35 40 50 Stonelei2h Road 11 14-16 15 19 20 27 34 37 41