martinhouseclr

167 4 // ANALYSIS & EVALUATION that took place in subsequent years, mostly outside of Wright’s observation. This 1907 date was used as the target period for restoration and reconstruction work that has taken place on the property over the last decade. The date is also currently used by the MHRC for programming and interpretive purposes. Proposed Boundaries For future interpretive and preservation treatment purposes, including those relating to the landscape, it is recommended that the existing National Register boundaries as indicated in the 1975 nomination are maintained as the recognized historically significant lands. This boundary, referred to as the “historic core,” encompasses lands containing the Martin House (including pergola, conservatory, and garage), the Barton House and the Gardener’s Cottage. Additional lands owned by Martin throughout the family’s tenure, as identified through the research phase of this CLR, are not included in the recommended boundary. These lands include the 53-foot wide “Garden Lot” fronting Jewett (147 Jewett), the landlocked parcel(s) behind both 147 and 143 Jewett, and the narrow connecting parcel that runs north-south along the western boundary and also fronts Jewett Parkway. Though historically documented and part of contiguous Martin-owned lands during the proposed Period of Significance, the parcels were not included in plans developed by Wright (architectural, site, landscape, or otherwise) for the complex. Additionally, all three areas are either currently utilized by MHRC operations / visitor services or are privately owned as a residential lot (147 Jewett has been a private residence since approximately 1930). Statement of Significance and National Register Recommendations National Register Significance Criteria Significance is defined within NPS cultural landscape guidelines as “the meaning or value ascribed to a cultural landscape based on the National Register criteria for evaluation,” adding, “it normally stems from a combination of association and integrity.” 9 To become eligible for the National Register, or in this case, be identified as a contributing feature of an already- 9 Charles Birnbaum and Christine Capella Peters, editor, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington D.C., 1996, 5. listed property, the designed landscape must hold both significance in areas of American history and integrity. Integrity constitutes the authenticity of the extant landscape, based on survival of its characteristic features, and has been evaluated in a subsequent section of this CLR. Areas of American history are broad ranging themes, and may include engineering, art, commerce, politics, among others, and in the instance of the Darwin Martin House, architecture and landscape architecture. Evaluating potential significance in any of these areas of American history requires assessment against four criteria. For a designed landscape to be considered significant it must meet one or more of the following: 10 11 A. Be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. Be associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high 10 J. Timothy Keller and Genevieve P. Keller, National Register Bulletin 18: Evaluating a Designed Historic Landscape for the National Register of Historic Places, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 6. 11 These criteria specifically pertain to the National Register program and not the National Historic Landmarks program. The criteria for evaluation are very similar, however the NHL criteria generally use more restrictive language.