martinhouseclr

162 DARWIN D. MARTIN HOUSE // CULTURAL LANDSCAPE REPORT The analysis and evaluation of the Martin House landscape compares findings of the documented history and the current existing conditions. This analysis and evaluation is primarily prepared in the context of the National Park Service’s National Register of Historic Places program which, in an effort to identify and protect historic resources, outlines the criteria and methods by which such analysis is performed. The key products of this chapter, namely the Period of Significance, a Statement of Significance, and an evaluation of Landscape Integrity, are essential components of nominating historic resources to the program and, in essence, to document their importance in history. As a property already listed on the National Register, as well as a National Historic Landmark, what this means for the Martin House landscape is that it is already documented and recognized as historically significant. However, the reasons for this significance, as determined (most recently by the NHL nomination) nearly 30 years ago, did not specifically include the landscape as a contributing part of this significance. Therefore, this CLR and the analysis and evaluation of the landscape will identify what themes and features of the historic designed landscape qualify it as significant. The content of this chapter includes the following: • A review of existing preservation program status; • A proposed Period of Significance for the landscape; • A Statement of Significance that identifies reasoning and associations that make the landscape historically important, and recommendations for modification to the existing National Register listing; • A review of the supporting landscape background and contexts, which summarizes the Martin House’s specific landscape associations in history; • An evaluation of Landscape Integrity, providing an objective review of the Martin House’s current ability to convey its importance through extant features; and, • An analysis of landscape characteristics and individual features, identifying characteristics and features as contributing to the landscape’s historic significance, not contributing, or missing from the landscape. 1 One of the challenges of this analysis and evaluation is that the landscape that exists today is fundamentally a series of architecturally and circulatory defined spaces – a canvas on which the historic vegetative landscape materials were once presented. Much of the designed landscape was historically defined by vegetation and has lost a substantial portion of 1 Considering the extensive prior treatments that have taken place, largely the reconstruction of many missing features, some of the reconstructed landscape features may be identified as contributing if they objectively exhibit accurate characteristics of the feature replaced, as it is believed they meet NPS special significance criteria for reconstructions. The features are noted as reconstructions. materials integrity by its absence. Thus, while the landscape may be historically important, and would contribute to the significance of the property if it were completely intact, as it exists today it may not qualify as significant on its own under the program requirements of the National Register. Complicating this evaluation further is the fact that much of the extant features within the landscape are reconstructions of once-missing features. These reconstructions are prior preservation treatments following the Secretary of the Interior Standards, developed through a restoration master plan, reconstructed in situ, and intended to be as accurately executed as documented research allowed. Upon future review, it is under these circumstances that the reconstructions may qualify to be designated as Significant under the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Based on the additional landscape- focused research within the CLR, some of these features are objectively identified as contributing to the landscape significance (along with the qualification of being a reconstruction) if they exhibit accurate known characteristics of the feature replaced. Otherwise they are noted as non-contributing. Finally, the analysis and evaluation serves two other important purposes. One is that the contents provide a foundation on which to develop appropriate treatments, which may constitute restoration, rehabilitation, or in some exceptional cases reconstruction of all or some of the landscape. Second, is that the content, particularly the historical contexts on which the Analysis and Evaluation 4