CHAPTER FIVE
HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR CAMBRIDGE
This chapter provides a historic context for Cambridge and originally appeared in Architectural
Reconnaissance Survey Circumferential Transportation Improvements Urban Ring Corridor: Phase 2,
Volumes I, 2, and 3 (Mair et al. 2004).
Introduction
The city of Cambridge contains 6.2 square miles of heavily developed land on the west side of 80Ston.
It is bordered on the west by Belmont and Arlington, and on the north by Somerville. The eastern
border runs down the center of the Charles River, with Boston on the east bank. The Charles River
continues southwest to form Cambridge's southeastern boundary, before turning south again at the
begilU1ing of Cambridge's southwestern border with Watertown. The city is primarily flat, with low
hills in the westem pOltion terminating at Mount Auburn, just over the city line in Watertown. West of
these hills, the land drains into the Mystic River, to the north, predominantly by way of Alewife Brook,
while the eastem portion of the city drains into the Charles River, to the south. In the westem part of the
city, the dominant water feature is the kettle hole known as Fresh Pond. A significant amount of low­
lying salt marsh along the Charles River has been filled to create what, in the nineteenth century,
became largely industrial land along the riverbank.
Historic Overview
When European settlers arrived in the area of present-day Cambridge in the seventeenth century, they
found that Native Americans, likely members of the Massachusett tribe, occupied the land with
transportation, subsistence, and settlement networks already established. In 1630, the settlement of
Newtowne (renamed Cambridge in 1638) was established by the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and over
the next 20 years grew to encompass a massive area. With its original designation as the seat of
government for the colony, Newtowne held great promise as an important town. When the colonial
government and the General Com1 moved to Boston in 1631 and 1638, respectively, the newly chartered
Harvard College became the civic center ofNewtowne. A largely agrarian town developed, expanding
rapidly, only to be broken up as other towns were established from its lands.
During the late seventeenth and into the late eighteenth century, the focus ofmost of Cambridge remained
on agriculture. The area around Harvard was populated more densely than any other part of the town,
with both residential and limited commercial development occurring.
The late eighteenth and early nineteenth century saw the arrival of industrial concerns in Cambridge.
The introduction of these companies created the need for larger population and infrastructure
PAL Report No. 1396.01
59
Chapter Five
improvements in the town. The construction of bridges across the Charles River from Boston to
Cambridge and the extension of street railway lines out of Boston caused a boom in the residential
development of Cambridge throughout the century. The growth of industry in Cambridge during this
period also increased the need for cOlmections with Boston. Rail lines into and out of Boston through
Cambridge created opportunities for the construction of factories along the rights-of-way, and for the
construction of spur lines to allow for ease of transportation of raw materials and finished goods. The
areas of Cambridge closest to Boston developed similarly to the capital city. Brick row houses were
constructed in East Cambridge, while further from Boston, smaller single and multi-family residences
developed.
The continued growth of industrial activity in Canlbridge through the early twentieth century fostered
residential growth in the city, and with it, a more dense relationship of buildings and people. By the
mid-twentieth century, however, growth had subsided because ofthe decline of industrial activity in the
city. and in New England. as a whole. Education centers in Canlbridge. most notably Harvard University
and the Massachusetts Institute ofTecimology, continued to grow and to build new facilities throughout
the mid- and into the late twentieth century. These institutions attracted research and development
companies to Cambridge, creating a new market to fill the void left by the industrial departure. Cambridge
continues to grow, in pmt thanks to these new companies and, as it historically has. because of its links
to Boston.
First Settlement Period (1620-1675)
Prior to the early-seventeenth-century alTival of European settlers in the area of present-day Cambridge.
the land was used by Native Americans, likely of the Massachusett tribe. The area was important as the
junction of trails from the coastal fishing grounds to the Mystic Valley. the Charles River oyster beds.
and Fresh Pond. In December 1630 the Massachusetts Bay Colony's Governor. John Winthrop.
established a fortified settlement to be built 1 mile east of Watertown, on the Charles River, to serve as
the center of the colony's government. The settlement was initially known as Newtowne, and by 1633
had established a building code that, among other regulations, stipulated that the town would not be
enlarged until all of the 64 vacant lots were built upon. By 1636, two rings of gated defenses were
constructed around the settlement, however, friendly native peoples and the diminishing threat of attack
negated any defense concerns by the 1650s (Sullivan and White 1980).
Though established as a govenmlental center, the settlement at Newtowne had an agrarian focus. The
division of land followed the medieval system of house lots and common lands. Soon after its
establishment, the continued influx of settlers necessitated the expansion of the town. By 1632,
Newtowne consisted of I,000 acres of private and common land. This was expanded over the next four
years to include present-day Brighton, Newton, Arlington, Lexington, and pal1s of Lincoln and Bedford.
With a later grant extending its area to the Merrimack River, the settlement consisted ofland stretching
in a 36-mile-long Y shape, with the original, I-mile-wide p0l1ion of the settlement at the Charles River
(Sullivan and White 1980).
The role ofNewtowne changed dramatically in the 1630s with the relocation of the government seat of
the Massachusetts Bay Colony to Boston in 1635. The void created by this depatture was filled by the
establislunent of Harvard College in 1636. Harvard was created by a grant from the General Court and
60
PAL Report No. /396.0/
Historic Context for Cambridge
a legacy from John Harvard, an English minister who lived in Charlestown. Two years after the General
Court made its founding grant to Harvard, it relocated to Boston, completing the removal ofgovernmental
power from the town. Later in 1638, the name ofNewtowne was changed to Cambridge (Sullivan and
White 1980:5).
Transportation in the town took the fonn of Native American trails in the early days, however, roads
were soon developed, including the Concord Highway (present-day Massachusetts Avenue) northwest
from the town conunon, and a street grid at Harvard Square. Ferries and fords established as early as
1635 were used to cross the Mystic and Charles rivers. The earliest focus of settlement came at Dunster
Street, along the route to one such ford and ferry location on the Charles. Roads continued to be
developed within the settlement area around Harvard throughout the mid-seventeenth century. In 1662,
the Great Bridge was constructed across the Charles River at Boylston Street, allowing direct access to
Boston through Roxbury. The simplified flow of commerce created by this link led to the expansion of
commercial interests in Cambridge, and to a shift in the settlement pattern of the town, from Harvard
Square to the area near the bridge. Among the early buildings that were constructed in Cambridge in
the first 45 years of its existence were a meetinghouse constructed in 1650, a schoolhouse in 1669, a
parsonage in 1670, and a hall constructed at Harvard College between 1672 and 1677 (Sullivan and
White 1980:5). While the settlement centers at Harvard Yard and the Great Bridge developed, the
agricultural component of the town remained on its fringes, with farmsteads located primarily along the
major routes between surrounding towns, and around Fresh Pond (MHC n.d.:3-4).
Colonial Period (1675-1775)
The Colonial Period in Cambridge continued the trends set in motion during the First Settlement Period.
Harvard Square continued to develop as the college grew, while along Boylston Street, development
continued to occur in a more linear fashion. The population of Cambridge in 1680 was approximately
850 persons, 300 to 400 of whom lived within the present-day boundaries of the town (MHC n.d.:3).
With this compact development in the center and eastern parts ofthe town, the western portion continued
to serve as an agricultural area: the fonner goverlUllent center produced fruit, vegetables, and livestock,
rather than verdicts. The area of Porter Square, along the turnpike road to the northwest, developed
during this period as a tavern stop for travelers.
Cambridge becanle known among the elite of Boston as a nearby, but decidedly rural area. Along
Bratlle Street, these wealthy Bostonians constructed rural estates to take advantage of the vistas of the
Charles River and access to Fresh Pond. During the Revolutionary War, many of these properties were
owned by Loyalist families, and thus Brattle Street was known for a time as Tory Row (Sullivan and
White 1980:7). The original grid street pattern at Harvard Square remained, however, beyond it, streets
developed in a more organic fashion. Seventeenth-century highways and bridges continued to be used
throughout the town, and the Great Bridge continued to be an important link to Boston for the developing
commercial ventures of Cambridge.
Construction of public buildings in Canlbridge continued throughout the Colonial Period. The town
was an important strategic location during the Revolutionary War because of its position on the Charles
River. As a result, defensive fortifications were constructed by the American forces in 1775 on Dana
Hill in East Cambridge, and along the Charles River, including a battery at FOlt Washington. A number
PAL Report No. 1396.01
61
Chapter Five
of Georgian-style buildings, including Christ Church (1760) and several for the college at Harvard
Yard, were constructed during the period.
Federal Per;od (1775-1830)
The Federal Period in Cambridge was dominated by the effects ofthe construction of bridges across the
Charles River. The West Boston bridge, constructed in 1793 between Boston and the tidal flats on the
eastern side of Cambridge (at the present-day Longfellow Bridge location), had the greatest impact of
any of the bridges that would follow in the period. It shortened the travel distance from Boston to Old
Cambridge from 8 to 3 miles by providing an almost straight-line route between the town centers. In
the seven years that followed the opening of the bridge, a new village, Cambridgeport, was born at the
Cambridge end of the bridge. Bolstered by the expectation that the area would become a new shipping
center for the towns, wharves were constructed, canals cut through the tidal flats, and dams erected for
drainage and as power sources. Streets were laid out as speculative housing areas were established.
The Embargo of 1807 and the War of 1812 effectively put an end to the development of Cambridgeport
as a shipping center, reducing its commercial interest to a few shops along Main Street and scattered
tanneries and soap works. It would be later in the century before the village was fully developed as
Boston spread into the suburbs (Sullivan and Wh;te 1980:8-10).
Central Square, at Massachusetts Avenue on the route between Harvard Square and the West Boston
Bridge, also experienced development during the Federal Period as a result of the presence of the
bridge. Brick commercial buildings were constructed at the square, as were vernacular Federal-style
cottages (MHC n.d.:6).
The construction of the Craigie, or Canal Bridge, between the North End of Boston and The Point in
East Cambridge (present-day Charles River Dam location) was the impetus for the development of the
neighborhood of East Cambridge. Constructed in 1807, the bridge made Cambridge Street a primary
thoroughfare for the movement of people and material between Harvard Square and Boston. Industries
were soon located along Bridge Street in East Cambridge, and worker housing followed on secondary
streets. Grid patterns were laid out as speculative land purchases consumed the area. The status of East
Cambridge was secured when the Middlesex County courthouse, registry of deeds, and jail were moved
from Harvard Square to the new neighborhood in 1814. The first major industry in Cambridge was also
located in East Cambridge near this time. The Boston Porcelain and Glass Company provided an
industrial base for the area that was followed by companies in the soap, leather, and pipe-organ
manufacturing industries. Residential construction in East Cambridge consisted of vernacular Federal­
style homes, and modest, side-hall Greek Revival-style homes.
The town also benefited from other transportation improvements during the Federal Period. Bridges
were constructed across the Charles River at River Street and Western Avenue by 1820, fornling a link
to the southwestern community of Brighton. A network of turnpikes also spread out across Cambridge
from the end of the West Boston Bridge to the northern and western parts of the town.
Harvard Square continued to be the perceived Cambridge town center during the Federal Period. High
style, temple-front. side-hall plan Greek Revival style residences were constructed, as was Harvard's
Divinity Hall, also in the Greek Revival style. The college expanded slowly to the north, to Kirkland
62
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Cambridge
Street, and incorporated a botanic garden into its campus. It also constmcted at least two Federal-style
buildings: Stoughton Hall (1804) and University Hall (1813). Though it had lost the county courthouse
to East Cambridge in 1813, the Harvard Square neighborhood was the center of public affairs for more
than half of the period, and continued to be, though in a diminished role, after 1813.
Further away from Boston, POlier Square continued to develop as a roadside carriage stop. The area
around Fresh Pond was also developed more intensively during the latter part of the Federal Period.
Resort hotels, including the Fresh Pond Hotel (1796) were constructed, and the pond area became a
modest resort area. Fresh Pond was also the site of the first ice harvesting business in Cambridge,
begun by Frederick Tudor (MHC n.d.:5).
The combination of new development at East Cambridge and Cambridgeport in the first two decades of
the nineteenth century did not seem to affect the steady but slow increase in the population ofCambridge
that had emerged as the pattern in the eighteenth century. When industrialization began to take hold in
the 1820s, however, the town population saw a marked increase, doubling between 1820 and 1830 to
reach 6,072 in the latter year (MHC n.d.:5).
Early Industrial Period (1830-1870)
From its 1830 population of6,072, the population of Cambridge increased over six times in the next 40
years. The primary motivation behind this increase was the industrialization of the eastern part of the
town, specifically at the villages of Cambridgeport and East Cambridge (MHC n.d.:7). A significant
factor in the industrialization of Cambridge during the period was the extension of rail lines throughout
the tOWll. The Boston & Lowell Railroad was the first line to pass through, with active track in East
Cambridge in 1835, East Cambridge was the first stop outside of Boston's North Station on the way to
the newly established town ofLowell (founded 1822) (Karr 1995:229-235). The Grand Junction Railroad
also connected through East Cambridge and Cambridgeport by 1870, with a crossing of the Charles
River under the Brookline (Boston University) Bridge, which had been constructed in 1850 at the
southem end ofBrookline Street. Rail lines were also constructed through the western parts ofCambridge
in the period, including an extension of the Charlestown Branch Railroad, which reached Porter Square
in 1842 and became part of the Fitchburg Railroad in 1845. The Fitchburg constructed a Watertown
Branch in 1846 starting from the West Cambridge brickyards, and a three-quaI1er-mile-Iong Harvard
Branch starting from the Somerville station in 1849. While parts of the Watertown Branch remain
active, the Harvard Branch was abandoned in 1855 and the rails subsequently removed (Karl' 1995:200­
205).
The railroads helped to establish industry in Cambridge by connecting the town to distant inland suppliers
of raw materials and to inland markets for finished products. They also proved to be a market in
themselves. The Cambridge finn of Kimball & Davenport, makers ofthe first onmibus in 1833, designed
the first modern railway carriage for the Boston & Worcester Railroad in 1834. Railroads opened
inland food markets, allowing the meatpacking and baking industries in Cambridge to ship products
overland that would have spoiled during transport by horse and wagon or canal. Heavy industry, including
Kendall & Davis, makers of steam boilers, and others manufacturing engines, presses, and stamped
metal goods, were located in Cambridge during the period. Companies that had established themselves
PAL Report No. 1396.01
63
Chapter Five
in the early days of Cambridge's industrialization continued to flourish. By 1855, the three largest
industries in Cambridge were the manufacture of soap (16 factories), bricks, and glass (MHC n.d.:?).
The Early Industrial Period saw the expansion of the previously established population centers in
Cambridge. Harvard Square continued to be the public center of the town until the 1850s, when the
town hall was relocated to Central Square. Harvard University continued to expand, extending to
Kirkland Street and more densely filling in its original land at Harvard Yard. Before the relocation of
the town hall, Central Square had been steadily developing as a commercial area, a trend that continued
throughout the period with street railway links to Boston via the West Boston Bridge, and to the affluent
neighborhood on Dana Hill along Harvard Street. At Porter Square, the presence of the rail junction
spawned increased residential development along Massachusetts Avenue and the bi11h of an affluent
neighborhood on Avon Hill. The large houses of BrattIe Street from the Federal Period were joined by
new construction of equally impressive homes during the Early Industrial Period as the population of
successful merchants and business owners rose. Extensive clay deposits at North Cambridge gave rise
to a highly successful brickmaking industry at the area. This, in turn, spawned workers' housing
developing amid the brickyards. At Fresh Pond, farming, ice harvesting, and a smaller brickrnaking
industry continued throughout the period, with less residential development resulting than occurred in
other parts of the town. Continuing industrial development at East Cambridge also saw an increase in
the number of residents, most of whom lived in new worker housing (MHC n.d.:?).
Much of the worker housing that was constructed during the period was executed in simple vernacular
variants ofthe Italianate style, though other styles, including Greek Revival, Second Empire, and Gothic
Revival, are also present in these utilitarian buildings. The largest concentration of high-style Italianate
residences are found near Inman Square, in Cambridgeport, and to the northwest of Harvard Square.
Cambridgeport also had a large number of more modest Italianate style houses in both single and
double fonns constructed during the period, as did the area northeast of Central Square. Worker housing
was also constructed in the Greek Revival style, with East Cambridge having several of these properties.
In the older neighborhoods of the town, three-and-four story, mansard-roof, brick row houses began to
appear toward the end of the period.
Commercial construction during the period was limited, with the majority of the buildings designed
with utilitarian forms and vernacular styles. Of the period's commercial buildings, most of which are
located in East Cambridge and at hunan, Harvard, and Porter squares, Italianate and High Victorian
Gothic styles were the most often used.
A wider range of styles is present in the large number of institutional buildings that were constructed
during the period. The Mount Auburn Cemetery gates, constructed in 1840, are in the Egyptian Revival
style, while the North Cambridge Baptist Church shares the Egyptian influence, but, with elements of
the Greek Revival style. The Greek Revival style was also used by Ammi B. Young in designing the
Middlesex County Courthouse in 1848. The Cambridge Almshouse was designed in the Neo-Classical
style, and built in 1850, while the Prospect Congregational Church was constructed in the Romanesque
style in 1851. Harvard University used architects Ware and Van Brunt to design two of its important
buildings during the period. While the buildings were constructed concurrently, they are in different
styles: Memorial Hall was designed in the High Victorian Gothic, while the Episcopal Divinity School
was executed in the Gothic Style. The foremost example of landscape architecture of the period was
64
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Cambridge
the design of Mount Auburn Cemetery, which straddles the Watel10wn boundaly at the southwest corner
of Cambridge. It was established in 1831, and set the stage for the development of garden cemeteries
throughout the country.
Late Industrial Period (1870-1915)
The development of an industrial core in Cambridge, begun during the Federal Period and greatly
expanded during the Early Industrial Period, reached its zenith during the Late Industrial Period. The
expansion of industry in Cambridge, in addition to the suburbanization of the town by Boston, created
a population explosion that was unprecedented in the town, and, for a time, in the nation.
Industrialization in Cambridge during the Late Industrial Period was centered on the development of
heavy industries, primarily in the East Cambridge and Cambridgeport neighborhoods. The company
that initiated the move toward heavy industry in Cambridge, Kendall and Davis, continued to manufacture
boilers and steam plants throughout the period. The Broadway Iron Foundry (1864) and Dover Stamping
continued their operations from the Early Industrial Period and were joined by both new companies and
established concerns who moved their operations into Cambridge. The Boston Bridge Works, begun in
1876, produced bridges used throughout New England, some of which survive to this day. The firm of
Lamb and Ritchie developed the manufacture of galvanized steel pipe in Cambridge, the George F.
Blake company produced pumping engines, the Boston Woven Hose company produced a new cloth­
coated, rubber hose, and Lally Column and several other sheet metal stamping companies produced a
multitude of products for residential and commercial use. The leading product of Cambridge's
manufacturing industries in 1875 was sugar, with the Revere Sugar Refinery (1871) producing $4,000,000
WOl1h of the product. At $1,036,000, the manufacture of pianos and organs was the second largest
industry in the town. The lumberyards of East Cambridge spawned furniture manufacturing concerns,
and supported the expansion of Lockhardt's Casket Company, begun in 1854, into National Casket.
The merger of three candy companies in 1901 created the New England Confectionary Company, one
of the largest companies in the region. Artificial refrigeration methods brought about ice cream firms
and altered the methods of meatpacking companies in Cambridge in the 1890s. Other manufacturing
facilities in the town during the period included producers of cotton twine and fishing nets, linseed oil,
petroleum products, asphalt products, and paving machinery. The older industries of Cambridge
continued to operate tlu'oughout the period, with the soap industry remaining the third largest in the
town (by product value) in 1775, and brickmaking and pottery manufacture continuing in North
Cambridge (MHC n.d.: 10-11).
While railways aided the development of heavy industry in Cambridge. light rail supported residential
development as Cambridge began to become more suburhanized throughout the late-nineteenth and
early- twentieth centuries. Street railways had been developed earlier in the nineteenth century, however,
it was with the extension ofroutes and addition of new lines that they significantly affected development.
Boston's Back Bay neighborhood was connected to Cambridgeport via a bridge at the end of
Massachusetts Avenue carrying an electric trolley line, while a subway line from Boston to Harvard
Square under Main StreetlMassachusettsAvenue crossed the river at the rebuilt West Boston (Longfellow)
Bridge. Between 1885 and 1900 the town grew by an average of2,150 persons per year, due in part to
the increased need for employees in the industrial centers, and in part to ease oftravel between Cambridge
and Boston. By 1915, the population of Cambridge reached 108,822, nearly three times the number
PAL Report No. 1396.01
65
Chapter Five
from 1870. Growth continued up to 1910, when it began a period of leveling off that lasted through
World War I. Foreign inunigration in the first halfofthe period rose slightly, from 28 percent in 1865
to 33 percent in 1905, though the percentage ofIrish immigrants, once as high as 65 percent, dwindled
and was replaced by Canadian, Polish, and Italian inunigrants (MHC n.d.:9).
The increasing population of Cambridge required the construction oflarge amounts ofhousing throughout
the town. In Harvard Square, this development reached density familiar in urban areas, but new to
Cambridge. Dormitories constructed for the school prompted the construction of Colonial Revival­
style apartments on surrounding streets. Extending away from Harvard Square, Brattle Street continued
to be built up with large, high-style houses, the majority of which were in the Shingle, Queen Anne, and
Colonial Revival styles. At Central Square, multistory, wood and brick tenements were constructed,
while neighboring streets on Dana Hill were lined with high-density, suburban housing. In the industrial
neighborhoods of East Cambridge and Cambridgeport, three-decker tenement housing was constructed
for immigrant laborers and their families. An isolated apartment district was constructed in the first
decades of the twentieth century near the Massachusetts Avenue bridge, at the southeastern part of the
industrial area. Simple Queen Anne and Colonial Revival style single houses were also constructed,
though in smaller numbers. At P0l1er Square, residential development was not as intensive as in the
more heavily industrialized neighborhoods. Some multi-family buildings were constructed to house
brickyard workers, but smaller, suburban-style, single houses and Queen Anne and Colonial Revival­
style, double houses were more common. Large, high-style houses were constructed on Avon Hill.
Conmlercial construction during the period was centered at Harvard Square, where several Italianate
and Georgian Revival five-and-six-story, brick, conmlercial buildings were constructed. The lower
density conunercial districts at Central Square and Porter Square had similar buildings, though these
tended to be smaller, and were executed in the Queen Anne, Romanesque, and Colonial Revival styles.
Harvard Square was also the focus for institutional construction during the period, with many high­
style structures erected, including Sever Hall, Austin Hall, Widener Library, and the Busch-Reisinger
Museum, among others. In Cambridgep0l1, the Beaux Arts Classical campus of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) was constructed beginning in 1913. Many municipal buildings were
constructed during the period, including a number offire stations in the Romanesque style, the Canlbridge
Public Library (1888), and Cambridge City Hall (1889).
Modern Period (1915-Present)
Cambridge began the Modern Period as an industrial center, and ended the period as an education and
research center. Like many of the cities of the Northeast, Cambridge suffered from the migration of
manufacturingjobs to southern markets in the mid-twentieth century. The heavy industry that developed
during the Late Industrial Period reached its peak in 1929, when its products were valued at $175
million, before beginning to falter in 1930. After three years of sharp decline, industry began a slow
ascent until 1940 before falling again, from which it would never fully recover. The initial rise in value
was led by the confectionary industry, which grew by 45 percent during the 1920s. Baking companies
were also strong in the begilming of the Modem Period. With 47 concems in 1929, the bakery industry
produced $13.2 million worth of goods. Other leading industries in Cambridge during the modern
66
PAL Reporf No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Cambridge
period were printing, with 44 finns in 1923, furniture making, soap making, rubber goods, electrical
machinery, foundry and machine shop products. Blake and Knowles continued to be the largest of the
machined products manufacturers until 1927, when it moved its facility to Holyoke, leaving 700 people
jobless (MHC n.d.: 13).
As the industrial fortunes of Cambridge faded, Harvard University and MIT became increasingly
important to the town. The presence of the university at Harvard Square had been largely responsible
for much of that neighborhood's development since the town govenmlent moved to East Cambridge in
1814. Established in Boston in 1861, MIT had begun constructing a new campus in Cambridgeport in
1913. Throughout the twentieth century, MIT lured electronic, engineering, scientific instrument, and
industrial research finns to the area, creating a high-tech research and education center in Cambridgeport.
The population of Cambridge has fluctuated throughout the Modern Period, with sharp rises and declines
in the first half of the twentieth century followed by a general decline in the latter half ofthe century. At
the beginning of the period the population was 108,822 persons, while in 1925 it had risen to 119,669
residents. By 1940 the population had fallen to 110,879, before rising to 120,740 in 1950, the city's
peak population. The population then declined through the second half of the century to reach 101,355
in 2000 (MHC n.d.:15).
The small anlount of subdivision that occurred in the Modern Period was centered on the farms and
open lands in the Fresh Pond area. In the more urban neighborhoods ofthe city, construction continued
on the few remaining open parcels and in the lots ofdemolished buildings. Harvard University continued
to expand its facilities throughout the period, growing southward to the banks of the Charles River,
with the construction of new donnitories and classroom buildings. High rise, brick apartment buildings
in the Colonial Revival style (and some in the Art Deco style) were constructed in the first half of the
period in some parts of Harvard and Central squares and northwest to Porter Square. These were
located primarily along Massachusetts Avenue, where access was facilitated by a subway link with
Boston. Massachusetts Avenue was also the conduit of the commercial expansion of Central Square, as
high rise office blocks were constructed approaching Harvard Square.
When the Charles River Embankment Company began eff0l1s to reconstruct and solidify waterfront
land in 1866, it intended the land to become residential property. MIT, however, saw this "new" land as
an excellent area for the expansion of its campus, and purchased most of the land for its own use.
Construction at the MIT campus in the 1930s and 1940s left it with fine examples ofArt Deco buildings,
including the Alumni Pool (1940), and of International Style buildings along Memorial Drive, where
private finns also constructed buildings in the International Style. Kendall Square became a secondary
commercial center as MIT expanded n0l1h to Main Street. In Cambridgep0l1, the departure of some
industrial concerns left vacant buildings and opportunities for infill, particularly along the right-of-way
of the Grand Junction Railroad. By the 1950s, Cambridgeport's nineteenth-century tenement district
along Windsor Street had been cleared for redevelopment. In North Cambridge, the industrial district
continued to grow, if only slightly, including the construction of Colonial Revival style two-family and
three-decker homes, despite the end of the brickmaking industry in the area. Brattle Street remained an
affluent neighborhood with Colonial Revival houses added in the Modern Period, wh.ile Dana and
Avon hills saw more modest residential development.
PAL Report No. 1396.01
67
Chapter Five
addition to the expansion of MIT, the improvement of the Charles River embankment provided the
land for the construction of Memorial Drive, from East Cambridge around the southern border of the
town to Watel1own. The parkway system constructed by the Metropolitan District Commission included
Memorial Drive and the Fresh Pond and Alewife Brook parkways, in the western and northern areas of
Cambridge, respectively. These parkways were supplemented with mass transit in the form of electric
and gas-operated buses, and subway service to Boston and surrounding suburbs.
[n
The latter part of the Modem Period in Cambridge has seen most of its growth in the MIT area of
Cambridgeport and in East Cambridge, where some large industrial buildings have been rehabilitated,
while others have been razed and modern high-rise office and research and development buildings
constructed in their place. The juxtaposition of old and new buildings is most apparent in this
neighborhood, however it is an important characteristic of Cambridge as a whole, from Harvard Square,
to Central Square, to Fresh Pond.
68
PAL Report No. /396.0/
CHAPTER SIX
HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR CHELSEA
This chapter provides a historic context for Chelsea and originally appeared in Architectural
Reconnaissance Survey Circumferential Transportation Improvements Urban Ring Corridor: Phase 2,
Volumes J, 2, and 3 (Mair et al. 2004).
Introduction
The city of Chelsea occupies 1.86 square miles on a peninsula formed by the Mystic and Charles rivers
and Mill Creek. It is bordered on the north by Revere; on the east by the Chelsea River, which separates
it from Revere and East Boston; on the south by East Boston and Charlestown; and on the west by
Everett. The city was formerly surrounded by marshes that were divided by several small streams.
From the salt marshes, the surface of the town rises to four considerable drumlins that dominate the
topography: Mts. Washington and Bellingham, Powder Hom Hill (230 feet), and Naval Hospital Hill.
The western slope of Chelsea drains into the Island End River, a small tributary of the Mystic, while the
rest of the city is drained by the Chelsea River.
Historic Context
The European settlement known as Winnisimmet was originally established about 1625 by Samuel
Maverick. It was annexed to Boston in 1634 with the original 8-mile border of 1636 surviving today as
the Everett boundary. Winnisimmet was included as pal1 ofthe Chelsea town grant of 1739 and separated
from Boston by a boundary along the Chelsea Creek. Chelsea was formed as an independent town in
1847 with the settling ofNorth Chelsea (Revere) along the Mill Creek, and it was incorporated as a city
in 1857.
During the mid-seventeenth century, early ferry service to Boston was established by Thomas Williams.
He was granted the right to operate a ferry between Winnisimmet and Boston about 1631. The ferry
provided efficient passage to the Shawmut peninsula from the first county road, known as the Salem
Turnpike, which ended at the ferry slip. The ferry service operated until about 1917. The original
landing site in Chelsea was located on Samuel Maverick's estate near Admiral Hill (MHC 1980d:3).
By the mid-nineteenth century, operation of the steam ferry and railroad access to Boston created
speculative building developments in Chelsea, including the original depot at Washington Street. The
town center extended from the landing site to the civic focus along Broadway. Affluent suburban
neighborhoods developed along Washington Street to Powder Horn Hill and up Mount Bellingham.
The Ferry village area included brick conunercial buildings and residential rows of Boston-style row
houses along Winnisimmet Street.
PAL Reporl No. 1396.01
69
Chapter Six
An extensive industrial district with intermixed worker housing developed along the railroad corridor
across the Chelsea Creek to the Island End River flatlands. The pattern of expansion continued through
the late-nineteenth century with the development of multifamily houses along Eastern Avenue and
Broadway. The secondary focus at Prattville, which included a resort hotel on Powder Horn Hill, was
around the base of Mount Washington.
The devastating fire of 1908 destroyed an extensive portion ofthe original Chelsea town center, including
the affluent residential district on Mount Bellingham. The fire area was rebuilt as multiple family
districts of three-deckers and apartments. The town center was reconstructed on the original site,
including the pre-fire City Hall, and the brick commercial blocks along the Broadway axis. Through
the mid-twentieth century, industrial fringe development expanded around the Chelsea Creek and the
railroad corridor.
Contact Petiod (1500-1620)
During the Contact Period, the area along the Mystic and Malden rivers, from the estuaries to the
headwater ponds and lakes, was within the settlement area ofa people identified in 1628 as "Aberginians,"
an Algonquin people thought to be part of the Pawtucket/Penacook tribes (MHC 1980d:2). Chelsea
was an area of diverse food resources, especially shellfish in tidal estuaries and fish, with good
horticultural land available. It was also an area with prime accessibility to coastal trade, probably a
major location for period trade between natives and European settlers. A primary native trail appeared
as Washington-Park streets around Mount Washington, Powder Horn Hill and Mount Bellingham with
the western branch as County Road to the Malden Ri vel'.
First Settlement Period (1620-1675)
The European settlement of Chelsea began about 1625 with the arrival of Samuel Maverick, who
constructed an early English trading post on the Mystic River tidelands (Naval Hospital site). By the
1630s, the Winnisimmet Ferry (one of the earliest ferries to operate in New England) created a landing
site around Maverick's faml. During the mid-seventeenth century, there was a division of the Maverick
estate by Richard Bellingham, deputy governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, for tenant farmers around
Chelsea. By the end of the period, four farms were established that probably fixed the population at no
more than 50 until the early pat1 of the nineteenth century. The economy at the time was limited by
subsistence agriculture and fishing. Native trails were improved as local highways with the primary
route from Lynn and Malden as Washington Street to the early ferry landing.
Colonial Period (1675-1775)
The population in Chelsea remained relatively constant during the Colonial Period. The agricultural
economy of tile town continued to be limited to fanning and some fishing. Local native trails remained
from the seventeenth century to Winnisimmet ferry landing as Washington-Park streets. Roads around
Mt. Bellingham and Fenno Hill were cut to provide access to the Cary and Shurtleff estates on Chelsea
Creek.
70
PAL Report No. /396.01
Historic Context for Chelsea
Two schools were constructed during the Colonial Period, one between 1709 and 1739, at the town
center, and the other, in 1749, at WilUusimmet. Chelsea was the site of the area's earliest known building
(fortified Maverick House, 1624), and at least one tavem related to the establishment ofthe WilUusinunet
Ferry is known. Period structures are not known to survive but records indicate that most were simply
detailed central chimney vernacular houses.
Federal Period (1775-1830)
By the early nineteenth century, a tavern settlement was created at the Broadway bridgehead, after the
opening of the Chelsea Bridge to Charlestown. An additional settlement center was created at the
Naval Hospital complex on the original Maverick Farm site. During this period, there was a secondary
focus around the Pratt Farm on Washington Avenue at the head of Mill Creek.
The population of Chelsea was stable during this period: only three new buildings were built in the
town and only 30 people lived within the present limits of the city. The Chelsea Bridge and Salem
Turnpike Company established a toll bridge to Charlestown. Despite this new route, the town was
known only as a market garden and thoroughfare. Brickmaking was the central industry during the
period. Transportation improvements included access to Boston via the Chelsea Bridge over the Mystic
River from Charlestown, with an extension of Broadway from the bridgehead as the Salem Turnpike
between Mount Bellingham and Powder Horn Hill.
The architecture of the period included Federal Style double houses on lower Broadway and on
Washington Street north of the railroad tracks. At a time during which Chelsea was noted as a summer
resOl1 for wealthy Bostonians, little is recorded about the architecture of the period. Public institutions
included a poor fann established in 1792, and a school built in 1805 at the town center. The most
notable construction project was the establislunent of the three-story, granite, Marine Hospital building
in 1827.
Early Industrial Period (1830-1870)
Residential architecture at Ferry Village began to develop after 1831. In conjunction with the lowering
of the Wilmisimmet Ferry fare in 1846, came an increase in the population and a rise in residential
construction. By 1870, the town's population had grown to 18,547, of which 20 percent were foreign
born.
Well-preserved modest neighborhoods began to be built during this period. They consisted oftransitional
Federal/Greek Revival houses with interior chimneys and side-hall plans. The area south of Washington
Street developed somewhat later, with similarly modest, side-hall, Italianate, single and double houses,
while more ambitious and elaborate center-entrance ltalianate houses were constructed along Waslungton
Street and on the lower slopes of Powder Hom Hill. Toward the end of the period, in neighborhoods to
the nOl1h, mansard cottages began to be built as a modest alternative to multiple unit dwellings like the
double house. A number of important mmucipal and institutional buildings were built during this
period, including two schools built in 1833 and 1845, and an engine house. The most architecturally
important structure built before 1850 was the brick Greek Revival Style town hall. Expansion at the
Naval Hospital included the construction of a brick, Italianate Style, Commandant's House and several
PAL Report No. 1396.01
71
Chapter Six
other utilitarian brick-and-stone structures. In 1832, John Low built a store, which also housed the post
office. Low's store was similar to other two-and-three story frame Greek Revival/Italianate conunercial
buildings constructed during this period. In 1858, a four-story ltalianate brick hotel with an mansard
roof was constructed on Powder Horn Hill.
The Chelsea waterfront sUPP0l1ed most of the town's manufacturing businesses during this period, in
addition to commerce already present at the town's docks and wharves. These industries were served
by the growing rail line that transp0l1ed raw materials and finished goods. Transportation-related
construction included steam ferry service to East Boston and rail line connections with Boston, LYJlll,
Everett, and East Boston. Chelsea supported various manufacturing plants, including an India Rubber
factory, wallpaper producers, clay works, brickyards, elastic webbing manufacturers, and paint companies
and related industries. Also present during this period were five shipyards along Chelsea's waterfront.
Although industry was well established at Ferry Village, few industrial structures of the Early Industrial
Period are known to survive, with the exception of the Italianate/Gothic Revival railroad depot (ca.1855)
on Heard Street (MHC 1980d:4).
Late Industrial Period (1870-1915)
In the Late Industrial Period, residential development continued within the affluent Mount Bellingham
neighborhood, with further expansion along Washington Street at Powder Horn Hill. By the late
nineteenth century, the industrial district extended along Chelsea Creek around the base of Mount
Bellingham with similar infilling around the Island End River along the railroad corridor. Tenement
areas followed around the peripheral lowland, from the Chelsea Bridge along Everett Avenue and
Broadway to Mill Creek. The commercial and civic center of the town was focused at Washington
Street and Broadway, with the warehouse district at the ferry landing on Winnisinunet Street. The
affluent suburban neighborhoods were limited to the remaining area around Powder Horn Hill on
Washington Street. A tenement district on the Mill Creek backslope continued to expand to Prattville.
Chelsea's population continued to rise rapidly, as increasing industrialization attracted large numbers
of immigrant workers. In 1890, inunigrants had amounted to 28.5 percent of the city's population,
mostly from the British Isles and Canada. By 1908 Chelsea had become the most heavily populated
city in the United States in proportion to its area, and by 1915 Chelsea's immigrant population increased
to 84 percent (MHC 1980d:7).
Industrial development continued during this period, with 155 manufacturing establishments in operation
by 1870. In 1871, the Cary Improvement Company constructed an extensive steam brickyard near
Clark Street, and Jolm 0. Low founded the J.o. and J.F. Low Art Tile Works. Both companies enjoyed
great success. The leading industry at the time was leather currying, followed closely by the
manufacturing of elastic webs, linseed oil and oil cakes, stoves and furnaces, and cigars and tobacco.
The 1890s saw a large influx of new industries including foundries, machine shops, several large shoe
factories, a rubber company, and a manufacturer of the first flexible tubing for electrical wire.
By 1900 the institution of fire codes in Boston's North End and the reduction of the ferry company's
fare to 3 cents prompted an influx of immigrant merchants into Chelsea. During this period, Chelsea
became the center of the rag and junk industry. On April 12, 1908, a fire began in Chelsea's industrial
72
PAL Repol'l No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Chelsea
district. By the time it had been completely extinguished, the fire had burned through the industrial
district, across the town center, and into the neighborhood on Mount Bellingham. Nearly half the city
was destroyed and fifteen thousand people were left homeless. Chelsea faced an enormous rebuilding
project, one that would change the face of the town's industrial and residential structure. By the late
nineteenth century, there was further expansion of the streetcar service from Chelsea Center, with local
routes on Central Street to East Boston, Everett Street to Everett, and Hancock-Washington streets to
Revere.
The bulk of Chelsea's residential architecture dates from the Late Industrial Period. Most neighborhoods
south of the railroad tracks consisted offour-and-five story, brick tenements and the north side included
single and multifamily Second Empire, Queen Anne and Colonial Revival styles. The more elaborate
Second Empire and Panel Brick, bowfront row-houses of the late nineteenth century were located in
the South Broadway area of Chelsea. Several Stick Style and Queen Anne houses in the Mount
Bellingham neighborhood were lost in the fire of 1908. The area was later rebuilt with trip1e~deckers
and two-family houses. Much of Chelsea's municipal and institutional architecture consisted of
conservative, post-I 908, Beaux Arts classical and Georgian Revival construction. Examples include
buildings designed by noted architectural firms such as Peabody and Steams (City Hall, 1910) and E.L.
Tilton and Guy Lowell (Public Library, 1910). Other styles include the Renaissance Revival Police
Court Building designed by Wilson and Webber in 1897 and several schools in the northern section of
town. Chelsea's high style architecture included the Romanesque First Congregational Church in a
well-integrated Roman brick design, and the First Baptist Church, of fieldstone in the Gothic Revival
Style. Several Renaissance Revival schools and a fire station were also built, as well as a Georgian
Revival high school, and a castellated AnnOlY and a municipal stable in reinforced concrete.
Despite the fire of 1908, several brick conunercial buildings along lower Broadway survived, including
a wedge-shaped "flatiron" warehouse. Other commercial structures consisted primarily of three- and
four-story, brick blocks, with Renaissance, Neoclassical and Georgian Revival elements. Also surviving
along Eastern Avenue were early-twentieth-century, brick and wood, industrial complexes such as the
three-story, wood frame, D. and L. Slade Spice Works (1885), an extremely rare extant tidemill, and the
corbelled brick, Queen AIme Style, Chelsea Clock Works factory (1896).
Modern Period (1915-Present)
The Modem Period in Chelsea saw only limited expansion because of post-fire rebuilding. Residential
construction on the backslope of Mount Bellingham replaced the formerly affluent neighborhood with
multifamily housing, changing the demographic ofthe area completely. Everett Street and its surrounding
side streets were also rebuilt with duplexes and triple-deckers. On Mount Washington, at the northern
edge of the town, modest suburban~scale development continued with its focus on Washington Square.
While residential development was slow, the rebuilding and expansion of industrial properties was
extensive. These activities were centered at the Island End River and the Chelsea Creek. The two
industries that are most illustrative of this early~ to mid-twentieth-century growth are the shoe
manufacturing and oil transp0l1ation industries. In 1930, there were 15 active shoe manufacturers in
Chelsea, with one of the largest, A.G. Walton & Company, employing 1,000 workers. At least five oil
companies constructed tenninals during the Modern Period, including the Texas Company, American
PAL Report No. 1396.01
73
Chapter Six
Oil, and Gulf Oil. Into the mid-twentieth century, the Broadway axis remained the civic and commercial
center of Chelsea, though a secondary area of commercial use was developing along the Revere Beach
Parkway. At the town center, civic and commercial buildings were rebuilt to maintain the historic
importance of the Broadway streetscape.
The population of Chelsea continued to grow into the third decade of the twentieth century, peaking in
1925 at 47,247. It then began a gradual decline into the 1970s, when, in 1975, it fell to 25,006. Since
then, the number has climbed again, reaching 35,080 in 2000, likely as a result of the growing financial
and teclmology-related career markets in metropolitan Boston (DHCD n.d.:4; MHC 1980d: 12).
Residential development, limited as it was in the early twentieth century in Chelsea, took the fonn
primarily of duplexes and three-family buildings, most of which were located along upper Broadway
and on the north side of Powder Hom Hill. These were predominantly constructed ofwood, in simplified
versions ofthe Colonial Revival and Craftsman styles. While single-family homes from this period are
not common, examples of the bungalow and ranch fomls exist (MHC 1980d: 13). Conullercial blocks
from the 1920s, many of which have Georgian Revival or Tudor detailing, are found in the Broadway
town center area, and less frequently in the residential neighborhoods, where their fonns are often less
elaborate. Later, Modeme-style commercial buildings exhibiting the glazed brick and glass block
detail characteristic of the style were also constructed in the town center area. Public buildings constructed
during the Modem Period include elementary and high schools, churches, and the Modeme-style, Chelsea
Memorial Stadium, constructed in 1935.
Transportation systems in Chelsea followed nationwide trends in the Modem Period. Railroads
dominated land transportation throughout the first three decades of the century, then began a decline as
the automobile captured an increasingly large share of the market. Trolley routes, once numerous
between Chelsea and Boston, also were affected by the rise of the automobile. Beginning in 1900, the
Revere Beach Parkway was constructed through Chelsea, though it was 1934 before it was widened to
reach its current configuration (MDC 2002:306-313). The Parkway has long been one of the most
heavily used roadways in the Boston area, and certainly in Chelsea.
74
PAL Reporl No. 1396.01
CHAPTER SEVEN
HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR EVERETT
This chapter provides a historic context for Everett and originally appeared in Architectural
Reconnaissance Survey Circumferential Transportation Improvements Urban Ring Corridor: Phase 2,
Voillmes 1, 2, alld 3 (Mair et al. 2004).
Introduction
The city of Everett is located to the n0l1h of Boston Proper and west of Chelsea. It is bounded on the
south by the Mystic River, on the west by the Malden River, on the north by Malden, and on the east by
Chelsea and Revere. The 3.75 square miles of the city are primarily flat and below 50 feet in elevation,
with three dnllnlins, Mount Washington (175 feet), and Corbett and Belmont hills rising in the northeast
part of the city. Everett has a large amount of residential architecture, with its industrial sector running
along most of the city's shoreline of the Mystic and Malden rivers. The town was originally established
as Mystic Side in 1629. In 1730, after existing as a part of Malden for a number of years, South Malden
parish was established as an independent entity. This status was lost during the Revolutionary War, and
it would be 1870 before Everett would regain its status as a town, and 1892 before it would become a
city,
Contact Period (1500-1620)
Prior to European settlement of the Massachusetts Bay area, the area of present-day Everett was likely
used as a seasonal gathering point for Native Americans of the Pawtucket group. The area may have
been the southem terminus of a transportation corridor that stretched from the large lakes and ponds of
Wakefield and Stoneham, south to the Mystic River. Access to the tidal flats of the Mystic River, and
to the shellfish and other marine resources found in them, was likely the prime reason for Native
American concentration in the area. In addition, nearby lands provided ample horticultural opportunities,
and the eastem shore of present-day Massachusetts was a known trading locale for Europeans and
Native Americans.
First Settlement Period (1620-1675)
European settlement of the Everett area began in the 1630s, likely along the tidal lands of the Island
End River. The population of the area grew slowly, probably amounting to not more than a dozen
families by 1675. The primary industries of the settlers of the area were subsistence agriculture and
fishing pursuits. Transportation in the settlement was carried out primarily on Native American trails,
some of which cOlmected to neighboring settlements. An early ferry between the settlement and
PAL Report No. 1396.01
75
Chapter Seven
Charlestown was operated at the site of the Malden Bridge, just south of tile confluence of the Mystic
and Malden rivers.
Colonial Period (1675-1775)
The Colonial Period in the settlement was not greatly differentiated from the First Settlement Period.
The slight growth of the population throughout the period was similar to that in neighboring towns,
with the total population of Malden, Melrose, and Everett at 983 persons by 1765. Agriculture and
fishing on a subsistence level remained the most important activities of the small group of settlers. In
addition, some agricultural products began to be shipped to Boston by ferry. Transportation routes
during the period remained largely the legacy of Native American activity in the area, with little
improvement or new road construction. Architectural development in the period consisted primarily of
small, wood-frame cottages, in addition to the construction ofa new meetinghouse at Belmont Hill.
Federal Period (1775-1830)
Absent ofany definite population figures for the Federal Period, it can be extrapolated that the population
continued to expand slowly in the years between 1775 and 1830. Fewer than 50 houses were present in
South Malden (later Everett) in 1835. The construction of the Malden Bridge in 1787 and the
Newburyport Turnpike in 1806 spurred the development of Everett Square at the beginning of the
nineteenth century. Industrial development began in South Malden in the last decades of the eighteenth
century. The production of brick and some shoemaking activities were the first industries to develop in
the town. Architectural styles progressed during the period to include houses built in the Federal style.
Both modest and high-style Federal residences were constructed during the period, though few, if any,
remain today.
Early Industrial Period (1830-1870)
The Early Industrial Period in South Malden saw the birth of some industries, however, large-scale
industrial growth would not come until the 1880s and 1890s. From outside of the town, railroads
arrived as the precursors of the new industrial age. In 1854, the Eastern Railroad was extended into
Boston via a bridge across the Mystic River. In the following decades, railroad development along the
Malden and Island End rivers would accompany industrial growth. While brickmaking remained the
primary manufacturing activity in the town throughout the middle of the century, a tide mill and rope
walk were in operation before the arrival of tile railroads. No other significant industrial concerns were
started in South Malden until after the Civil War. In 1868, Everett's legacy as a chemical producer
began when the New England Chemical Company opened (Hengen 1983:13; MHC 198Ic:5-6).
Pedestrian transp0i1 was maintained during the period by improvements made to extant highways and
the introduction of some new roads in newly developed areas. Turnpikes provided travelers with the
best routes, however, their owners charged a premium for passage. While railroads traversed longer
runs, horse railways linked the Malden Bridge to Boston and traveled into some of the neighborhoods,
linking South Malden to the city.
Though subdivision of tracts of farmland had begun as early as 1845, the introduction of the railroads
and other transp0i1ation improvements of the mid-nineteenth century fostered residential growth in
76
PAL Repol'I No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Everett
South Malden. The 1859 cessation of tolls on the Malden Bridge also contributed to the expansion of
residential property. Despite these factors, population growth in South Malden was slow throughout
the mid-nineteenth century. The population ofSouth Malden in 1850 was approximately 1,600 persons,
and had risen to 2,200 by 1870, when the city of Everett was incorporated (MHC 1981 c:5).
The slowly growing population in South Malden settled in newly platted neighborhoods alongside the
town's highways. The dominant style of houses built during the period was Greek Revival, with many
side-hall-plan residences constructed. Houses in the Italianate style were also constructed, both in
modest and, though fewer, in high styles. The civic and commercial focus of South Malden, though
small in scale, was at present-day Everett Square where the route to the Malden Bridge and a turnpike
to Saugus came together. Few commercial buildings are known to have been constructed, but there is
evidence of small, simple, wood-frame stores having been built (MHC 1981 c:6).
Late Industrial Period (1870-1915)
The Late Industrial Period was the period during which Everett both fonnally came into existence and
came of age. In 1870, South Malden was incorporated as the town of Everett. In 1893, Everett became
a city. The population of the town increased markedly throughout the period, becoming one of the
fastest growing towns in the state. The population of 2,200 doubled between 1870 and 1880, then
nearly tripled in the next decade before doubling again between 1890 and 1900. By 1915 the population
of Everett had reached 37,718 persons. Though fueled partially by the continued expansion of streetcar
lines into Everett, the population increases were largely tied to increases in industrialization (MHC
1981c:6).
Industrialization in Everett was both a cause and result of the population explosion. As the population
of the town increased, industrial concerns were more easily able to find employees, which grew the
industrial sector, causing more people to come to Everett seeking employment. Approximately 28
percent of the 1905 population of Everett was foreign born, with a large portion of these employed in
industrial jobs. Other important factors in the industrialization of the town included its separation from
Malden and incorporation as a city, proximity to Boston, and the availability of land close to two rail
lines for shipment of both raw materials and finished goods. Major industries to establish themselves
in Everett during the period included chemical manufacturing (begun in 1868), paint and varnish
production, iron and steel working, and gas, oil, and coke products. Among the steel works of the
period was Norton Iron, begun in 1892, and later to become the New England Struchlral Company, a
major supplier of bridges and steel for buildings. In the 1890s, New England Gas and Coke and Boston
Consolidated Gas constructed major works on the shores of the Mystic River. In the last 10 years of the
period, a number of concerns opened facilities in Everett, including three shoe factories, and
manufacturers of tin cans, ornamental iron, elevators, paper and twine, and shoe shanks (MHC 1981 c:6­
8).
The workers in Everett's new industrial core moved into a city where housing stock was increasing at a
rapid rate. With the arrival of extensive streetcar service throughout Everett in the 1880s, residential
areas outside of the industrial core became more popular. Multiple-family tract housing took over large
areas of the town, surrounding existing and newly developed upscale housing areas. Many two-family,
Queen Amle style houses were constructed, as side-hall-plan, worker housing continued to be built.
PAL Report No. /396.01
77
Chapter Seven
Threewdeckers also arrived in Everett during the period, in Queen Anne and Colonial Revival styles.
Along the main thoroughfares of the city, brick apartment blocks were constructed in Tudor, Georgian,
and Romanesque Revival styles, alongside well-detailed examples of the Shingle and Colonial Revival
styles (Adams et al. 2003; MHC 1981c:8).
The primary civic and commercial center of Everett remained at Everett Square throughout the Late
Industrial Period. Civic buildings, including two libraries, a number of schools, churches, a police
station, and cemetery gates were constructed during the period. The Queen Anne style was used in the
Shute Library (ca. 1890) and the vocational high school, while the Parlin Library was a Georgian
Revival style building. Churches were designed in the Italianate, Shingle. Renaissance and Romanesque
Revival styles, while the gates and gatehouse at Woodlawn Cemetery were constructed in the Beaux­
Arts Classical style. Three- and fourwstory commercial buildings in the Romanesque, Renaissance, and
Colonial Revival styles were constructed between 1890 and 1915 at Everett Square (MHC 1981c:8-9).
Modern Period (1915-Present)
The city of Everett continued to grow into the twentieth century as its population experienced rapid
growth up to 1930. Between 1925 and 1930 the population grew on average of 1,300 persons per year,
however, after 1930 the population began to decline. The decline has continued t1u'oughout the twentieth
century, with the exception of the years of World War II. Only the 1945 population has exceeded the
population peak set in 1930 at 48,424 persons (Hengen 1983:31). In 2000, the population of Everett
was recorded at 38,037 persons (DHCD 2002). The city is primarily centered around a commercial and
industrial base, with manufacturing accounting for approximately 31 percent of the city's jobs. Everett
appears to have been largely passed over in the competition for technology-driven company locations
in the late twentieth century, as it continues to rely on the staples of its twentieth-century progress.
Because of its ability to support a dense population and the remaining manufacturing interests in the
city, Everett remains an important suburb of Boston at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
78
PAL Report No. 1396.01
CHAPTER EIGHT
HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR MEDFORD
Introduction
The city of Medford is located northwest of Boston Proper and adjoins Somerville and Everett on its
eastern boundary. The communities ofArlington, Winchester, Stoneham, and Malden surround Medford
on the south, west, and north. The city occupies approximately 8 square miles entirely within the
watershed of the Mystic River. A large diabase dike of dark Medford granite dominates the topography
and splits the town in two sections. Where the dike crosses the Mystic River it marks the division
between the lowlands of the Boston Basin to the southeast and the Middlesex Fells uplands to the
northwest where the highest elevation is 240 feet above sea level. Originally settled as Governor
Cradock's Fann between the Mystic River and the Middlesex Fells, Medford was established as an
independent town ca. 1695. Following nearly two centuries of growth and boundary adjustment, Medford
incorporated as a city in 1892.
Contact Period (1500-1620)
During the contact period the Medford area was an important settlement and transportation area for the
region west of Boston. Routes intersected around the Mystic River, with an important ford site upstream
of Medford Square. Seasonal fish runs and good agricultural land along the Mystic River and its
tributaries were valuable subsistence sources, and bedrock contained a major source for materials for
stone tools during this period.
First Settlement Period (1620-1675)
Most of the land north of the Mystic River belonged to Mathew Cradock, forn1er governor of the
Massachusetts Bay Company ca. 1630. Cradock received large land grants as incentives to invest in the
company and owned a plantation in Medford, which he managed from London. Cradock used the land
for small agriculture, fishing, and shipbuilding endeavors along the Mystic River. Cradock's heirs sold
the plantation to Edward Collins in 1652 and he began gradually subdividing the land by 1656. Major
improvements to the transportation network included the erection ofthe Cradock Bridge over the Mystic
River ford by 1637 and the operation of first stagecoach line in 1761, which traveled from Portsmouth,
New Hampshire through Medford to Boston. Another line began in 1767 offering service between
Salem and Boston (MHC 1981d; Seaburg and Seaburg 1980:3-6)
PAL Report No. 1396. 01
79
Chapter Eight
Colonial Period (1675-1775)
Intensive settlement began in Medford in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, coincident
with the Colonial Period. Governor 101m Winthrop's 600-acre farm located to the south also became
pat1 of Medford, but was later annexed to Somerville. Existing Native American trails were improved
as the primary Colonial highways and created a town center at Medford Square (located northeast of
the project area). The square is the nexus of the primary east-west Colonial highway, formed by Salem
and High streets, and the not1h·south highway, fOfllled by Main and Forest streets. Riverside Avenue
was also extant during the period (MHC 1981 d; Seaburg and Seaburg 1980:3-6)
By 1707 the population of Medford reached approximately 230 people. The population grew to
approximately 800 people representing 147 families living in 104 houses by 1775 (MHC 1981 b). This
significant increase reflects the arrival of Scotch-Irish settlers from Londonderry, New Hampshire who
moved to Medford in the early eighteenth century. The majority ofthe Colonial residential development
occurred along High Street and at Medford Square, with larger estates located on the south side of the
river along South and Main streets. These residents and increased traffic through Medford enabled by
the Cradock Bridge supported a meetinghouse and tavern in Medford Square. Commercial concerns
located on the east side of town on Riverside Avenue. By 1753 Medford received additional land to the
nOlth, fonning its present-day border with Stoneham (MHC 1981 d; Tufts 1794).
The mainstay of the Colonial economy was locally based agriculture, but the distilling and brickmaking
industries gradually gained importance. The local water sources supplied power for several mills on
Meetinghouse Brook and the Mystic River. The presence of the river and the Cradock Bridge made
Medford a key link in shipping routes because it connected water traffic to overland northern
transportation routes. The timber resources of the Middlesex Fells continued to supply materials for
local construction (MHC 1981 d).
Federal Period (1775-1830)
By the end of the Federal Period, the population of Medford reached 1,755 people (MHC 1981b).
Improvements to local and regional transportation routes facilitated industrial growth and related
population increases. The Middlesex Canal, completed in 1803 near present-day Summer Street, enabled
the efficient transp0l1 of lumber, produce, granite and other goods from northern Massachusetts and
New Hampshire to markets in Boston. This major infrastructure improvement was paired with the
construction of a turnpike from Medford to Andover in 1806. The turnpike followed portions of Mystic
Avenue and Forest Street. The turnpike and canal resulted in the conunercial and industrial growth of
Medford Square and land immediately south of the Mystic River. Development of land distant from
primary transportation routes remained largely undeveloped (MHC 1981 d).
Prosperous local industries during the period included brickmaking, milk production for Charlestown
and Boston, produce, cattle, hats, lumber, distilleries, and shipbuilding (MHC 1981 b). In 1802, Thatcher
Magoun of Pembroke established a shipyard in Medford along the banks of the Mystic River (Morrison
1923). Calvin Turner of Scituate joined Magoun in the construction of large ships and brigs in 1804.
By the early nineteenth century, Magoun's "Medford-built" ships achieved a reputation for high quality
80
PAL Repol'lNo. 1396.01
Historic Context for Medford
(Morrison 1923). The Medford shipbuilders utilized large quantities oftimber (oaks and pines) obtained
from Turkey Swamp in the Middlesex Fells as well as from n011hern sources transported down the
Middlesex Canal.
Early Industrial Period (1830-1870)
The onset of the railroad influenced mid-nineteenth-century development patterns. The Boston &
Lowell Railroad (1835), a branch route cDlmecting Medford Square with the Boston and Maine line
(1845), and a horse railroad (1860) served passenger and product transportation needs in Medford
during the period. The efficiency of railroad transport resulted in the abandonment of the Middlesex
Canal in the 1840s (MHC 1981 d). As the mode of transportation transitioned, the early-nineteenth­
centmy shipbuilding industry peaked and subsequently declined. In the mid-1850s more than 1,000
people were employed in Medford's shipbuilding industry and several hundred people worked in one
of the town's 24 brickyards. In the early 1870s, the last remaining Medford shipyard closed. The local
economy remained stable because of the continued prosperity of granite quarrying at Pine Hill, and the
continued production of linseed oil, hats, rum, and limited brickmaking. Textile concerns, including a
cloth prinnvorks in 1863 and carpet factDly in 1866, emerged as the dominant new industry and replaced
some of the local revenue lost in the shipbuilding industry (MHC 1981d).
The conunercial and industrial core of Medford remained centered at Medford Square and east along
Riverside Avenue and the Medford branch of the Boston and Maine Railroad. Fringe industrial
development located south of the Mystic River near Main Street, but the majority of Medford south of
the river and town center contained large, undeveloped tracts. This relatively available expanse of land
provided a swath of clear space for the Boston & Lowell Railroad, which extended northwest from
Somerville through the west corner of Medford. Worker's housing located near Salem Street to the east,
while affluent residences owned larger lots along High Street and scattered locations to the south. The
railroad also encouraged population growth in Medford before and after the Civil War. Between 1830
and 1870, the population tripled and by 1865, 15 percent of Medford's residents were foreign-born
(MHC 1981d).
Development in the southwest corner of town followed shortly after the construction of the Boston &
Lowell Railroad, when Tufts College received a founding charter on April 22, 1852. Tufts was organized
by a regional organization of Universalists, a tolerant religious and theological group. Charles Tufts
donated 20 acres ofland on Walnut Hill in Medford to the cause with the stipulation that the college be
built on that site. Tufts was the fifth generation descendant of Malden colonist Peter Tufts and owned
several hundred acres of land in Medford and Somerville. Tufts' gift and his significant holdings of
land adjacent to it persuaded college trustees to build in Medford despite the feeling that the site was
too remote. Construction of the first building, Ballou Hall, began on July 23,1853 and Tufts College
became the "first venture into higher education by one of the diverse offshoots of Protestantism (Miller
1986)." The rest of the original 20-acre campus was gradually developed through the late-nineteenth­
century with classroom and dorm buildings organized around a linear quadrangle on the southwest side
of Boston Avenue. Charles Tufts donated another 47 acres to the college in 1856 and 36 acres in 1864.
The college additionally acquired 16 acres in the early 1860s and owned a total of 120 acres on both
sides of the Boston & Lowell Railroad/Boston Avenue corridor by 1866 (Miller 1986; Tufts 2004).
PAL Report No. 1396.01
81
Chapter Eight
Latc Industrial Period (1870-1915)
Despite a decline and virtual disappearance of Medford's shipbuilding and rum industries during the
late nineteenth century, Medford's population continued to grow rapidly as the town became a streetcar
suburb of Boston. The population spiked to 18,244 people in 1900,23,150 in 1910, and 30,509 by 1915
(MHC 1981d; Seaburg and Seaburg 1980). Streetcar routes on Main, Salem, High, and Winthrop
streets and a trolley route on Boston Avenue connected Medford to Winchester, Stoneham, Wakefield,
Woburn, Arlington, and Boston. The Cradock Bridge was replaced with a stone span bridge in 1882 to
improve its stability and traffic capacity. The increased population, with access to street rail and regional
railroad lines, resulted in a building boom typical of suburbs during the period. A dense street grid
existed along transportation routes by the early twentieth-century and gradually filled in with a variety
ofhousing. High Street remained the prefelTed location for affluent estates, while multi-family dwellings
became typical to the south and east along Boston Avenue, Main Street, and Salem Street. Many of the
dwellings on Bost011 Avenue or ancillary roads such as Orchard Street were constructed as Queen A1me
or Colonial Revival style Two- or Three-Decker houses. The rapid influx of new residents to Medford
necessitated its incorporation as a city in 1892 (MHC 1981 d).
In the mid-1890s acquisition of the Middlesex Fells, a large rocky upland area pa11ially in Medford,
was an early priority of the Metropolitan Park Commission, which had been established in 1893 to
create a parks and parkways system in the areas in and around Boston. The interconnected network of
reservations and parkways was envisioned to serve in perpetuity as an amenity for the growing urban
population, and several ofthe earliest designations include sections in Medford. Mystic Valley Parkway
construction began in 1896 from High Street in Medford north to Main Street in Winchester and p0l1ions
of the Fells COImector Parkways (Fellsway East, Fellsway West, and The Fellsway) built between 1895
and 1898 lie within Medford. In 1896-1904, the Revere Beach Parkway was built to link the marshes
of the Mystic River at The Fellsway in Medford with the new Revere Beach Reservation (Adams et al.
2002, 2003, 2005, 2007).
Tufts College continued to develop on either side of Boston Avenue during this period. One of the
earliest prominent buildings on the northeast side of Boston Avenue was Curtis Hall, located along the
railroad right-of-way at the intersection of College Avenue. Other period changes to the campus included
the enrollment of women at the school in 1892 and the founding of the Tufts medical and dental schools
in Boston in 1893.
The economic base of Medford diversified during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but
industrial concerns remained dependent on the railroad for the shipment ofraw materials and products.
Medford brickmakers continued operations and produced more than 15 million bricks in 1890. Successful
industries that emerged during the period included additional textile-related concerns, chemical works,
and the production of shoes, buttons, brass, carriages, and gold leaf. More than $45,000 of gold leaf
was produced in Medford in 1875 (MHC 1981 d).
Modern Period (1915-prcscnt)
Medford continued to grow as a streetcar and later automobile suburb of Boston during the twentieth
century. The population steadily increased to 38,687 people by 1920 and approximately 67,000 people
82
PAL Report No. /396.01
Historic Context for Medford
by 1945, but remained stagnant in the latter half of the century (MHC 1981d; Seaburg and Seaburg
1980). By 1940, local thoroughfares were incorporated into four state highways-Route 38 (along
Main, South, and Winthrop streets), Route 60 (along Salem and High streets), Route 16 (Mystic Valley
Parkway), and Route 28 (Fellsway West). The railroads remained intact through the twentieth century,
but are now used primarily for commuter passenger traffic. Interstate 93 was constructed through the
east edge of Medford in the 1970s and required alterations to the course of the Mystic River (MHC
1981d).
The style of residential development in Medford followed regional and national trends. A substantial
amount of Colonial Revival style, Bungalow, and Cape Code houses were constructed during the early­
and mid-twentieth century. Dwellings within Medford's traditionally industrial areas were either modest
single-family or multi-family homes, while high style homes were located near the town center and in
the northeast section of town. Several commercial blocks were also constructed in the early-twentieth­
century in Medford Square, and various locations along primary roads such as Main Street and Boston
Avenue.
Medford's economy remained varied through the twentieth century. In 1925,40 industrial businesses
were recorded. These industries included the production of textiles, gold leaf, and paper that had begun
in the previous decades. A significant number of steel and reinforced concrete factories were constructed
along the Boston and Maine Railroad (MHC 1981 d).
PAL Report No. 1396.01
83
CHAPTER NINE
HISTORIC CONTEXT FOR SOMERVILLE
This chapter provides a historic context for Somerville and originally appeared in Architectural
Reconnaissance Survey Circumferential Transportation Improvements Urban Ring Corridor: Phase 2,
Voilimes I, 2, and 3 (Mair et al. 2004).
Introduction
The City ofSomerville consists ofapproximately 4.1 square miles of densely developed land located to
the northwest of Boston. The city is bordered on the north by Medford and the Mystic River, on the east
by the Mystic River and Charlestown, on the south by Cambridge, and on the west by Arlington. The
topography ofSomerville is generally flat, with the high points amid a cluster of drumlins located in the
eastern half of the town, Winter and Spring hills rise to heights of 42 and 39 meters, respectively, with
Prospect Hill, to the southeast, reaching 30 meters. N0l1heast of the two higher hills, the land drains
into the Mystic River, while the southwest areas once drained into the now-extinct Miller's Creek.
Alewife Brook, flowing north, makes up the boundary between Somerville and Arlington (MHC
1980e: 1).
First Settlement Period (1620-1675)
The land of present-day Somerville was a part of the original Charlestown Grant of 1630, and was first
settled by Europeans soon after that date. For much of the First Settlement Period it is likely that the
population of the area was less than a dozen families. Native American trails were used by these
families as transportation corridors. Prior to the arrival of Europeans, the Somerville area had been a
focal point of the trail network that allowed Native Americans to travel throughout the Charles River
watershed in search offish and shellfish beds, waterfowl, and rendezvous points for trade with Europeans.
The settlers of the area also relied on the rivers for food, both for subsistence and for profit, and farmed
and grazed cattle as well. By the 1630s, a few local farms had been established in the area. (MHC
1980e:2-3).
Colonial Period (1675-1775)
The importance of the Somerville area during the Colonial Period was centered upon its land and the
use of it. Grazing lands for Charlestown remained in the Somerville p0l1ion of the town throughout the
period, and farming further developed with the expansion of dairying and vegetable production. Both
Charlestown Center and Boston were markets for the products of Somerville's farms. Typical rural
industries also developed in the Somerville section of Charlestown during the period, including
brickmaking and slate quarries. To move the products from the farms to markets, the seventeenth-
84
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Sommerville
century roads that ran throughout the area were improved and new routes to Charlestown were added.
The population of the farming area also increased during the period, reaching approximately 500 by the
start of the American Revolution. Houses for these families were simple, timber frame buildings, with
a gable or gambrel roof and a center chimney. The only documented industrial structure is a windmill
that was constructed about 1710 (MHC 1980e:3-4).
Federal Period (1775-1830)
The Federal Period in Somerville was largely an extension ofColonial Period patterns. Fanning remained
as the chief economic pursuit of the populous, with milk production and stock raising as the chief foci.
Brickmaking continued to be one of the most important manufacturing activities of the day, with the
focus of the industry along the Medford Turnpike. With the opening of the Middlesex Canal in 1803,
the Somerville part of Charlestown was able to ship material west as far as Lowell much more efficiently
than it could by road, thus opening new markets for its products. With the construction of several
bridges from Charlestown across the Charles River to Boston and across the Mystic River, markets for
Somerville goods also expanded. In addition, transportation became easier because the bridges prompted
the construction of more turnpikes throughout the town (MHC 1980e:4).
Very little residential construction transpired during the period. The few buildings that were constructed
were primarily vernacular or in the Greek Revival style. Significant commercial activity began to
develop during the period, with the center at Union Square and strip development along the canal
(MHC 1980e:4).
Early Industrial Period (1830--1870)
The Early Industrial Period was the first period of significant growth in Somerville. In 1842 Somerville
became an independent town, prompting the stmt of a development phase that would last for almost a
century. Between 1842 and 1850 the population of Somerville tripled, reaching 3,540 persons. In each
of the next two decades the population ofthe town nearly doubled. Immigrants made up a large pOltion
of this increase, with Irish immigrants alone constituting 18 percent of the population in 1865 (MHC
1980e:5).
These new residents of Somerville moved into subdivisions that were constructed during the period.
By the mid-nineteenth century, omnibus and street railway routes were lined with single-family houses
in the Greek Revival style. In the later decades, halianate and Second Empire style houses were
constructed, with some in the rowhouse fonn. Commercial and institutional buildings of the period
were executed in primarily the same styles as their residential counterparts. The new construction of
residences and other buildings caused the start of the decline of agriculture as the primary economic
force in Somerville. With land being covered by houses, farms were fewer, smaller, and less profitable.
The key to maintaining Somerville as a successful town throughout the period was the arrival of the
railroads. In 1835, the Boston and Lowell Railroad made its way across Somerville to the Charlestown
station. In 1841 the Fitchburg Railroad crossed the town, followed by the Boston and Maine Railroad
in 1845. The railroads became the new development centers as small factories and meat packing plants
were constructed alongside them. The Miller's River succumbed to the development, being gradually
PAL Report No. 1396.01
85
Chapter Nine
filled in and covered with railroad yards. With the economical and efficient movement ofraw materials
and finished goods provided by the railroads, manufacturing grew rapidly throughout the period (Zellie
1982:18-19).
In 1851, the American Tube Works was established in Somerville, leading to the manufacture of the
first seamless brass tubes in the United States. Rolling and slitting mills, ironworks, and the manufacture
of steam engines and boilers marked the entrance of heavy industry to Somerville. The constant flow
oflivestock and dairy products through Somerville led to the establislunent ofa number of meatpacking
plants in the town. The Nm1h Meat Packing Plant was, by the 1890s, reputed to be the largest packing
plant outside of Chicago. Other types of food processing plants also took advantage of the rapid
movements of raw goods, including distilleries, vinegar works, and bakeries.
Late Industrial Period (1870-1915)
The Late Industrial Period in Somerville was marked by the establislunent of Somerville as an
independent city in 1872, and by a tremendous population and building boom. Between 1870 and
1915, the population increased sixfold. Irish immigrants topped the list of newcomers, making up 27
percent of the population by 1905. Nova Scotia and English-speaking Canada also contributed large
segments of the immigrant population.
The economic expansion that occurred nationwide in the wake of the Civil War was evident in
metropolitan Boston, including Somerville. Though the panic of 1873 put a temporary end to the
growth, it recovered in the mid-1880s to carry the rapidly developing town into the twentieth century.
Both immigration and building construction in Somerville recovered from the panic, with almost half
of Somel'ville's residential construction said to have occurred between 1890 and 1900 (MHC 1980e:7).
The building trades flourished during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as evidenced by
the significant number of building tradesmen, lumberyards, and woodworking shops listed in town
directories of the era. Among the woodworking enterprises were coffin makers, picture frame
manufacturers, and makers of tables, museum cases, and furniture. Other associated industries were
brass foundries and makers of architectural hardware, window shades, and tinware.
Somerville's residential density was increased greatly during the Late Industrial Period, with centers of
single- and multiple-family housing, rowhouses, and apartments. The continued expansion of Boston's
influence was partially responsible for tltis, as businesses and their employees left Boston, and as services
reached out faliher from the city. Of particular note was the expansion of electric trolley lines into the
suburban towns, including Somerville. Efficient trolleys allowed people to live fal1her from their jobs
and commercial areas, and resulted in the subdivision and residential building up of previously vacant
areas. On Spring Hill, as well as in other areas, three deckers were constructed, primarily in the Colonial
Revival style. Early apartment blocks in the Colonial Revival style were constructed at Union Square
as early as 1892. In affluent areas, including Prospect Hill, large, single-family houses in the Queen
Anne, Shingle, and Colonial Revival styles were constructed. Some ornate rowhouses were also
constructed in neighborhoods with these single-family residences (MHC 1980e:7-8).
The building trades were not the only flourishing economic area. The meatpacking industry continued
to lead all others in Somerville, with nearly twice the value of all other manufactured goods combined
86
PAL Repol'l No. 1396.01
Historic Context for Sommerville
in 1875. Brick production peaked in 1870, then began to decline over the remainder of the period. This
was a nationwide trend, however, as the boom of the years immediately after the Civil War began to
slow. With the panic of 1873, the industry was devastated. The last brickyard in Somerville closed in
1902. Vast railyards were also constructed during the period, centered along the Miller's and Mystic
rivers. Most ofthe industrial buildings constructed during the period were utilitarian in design, however,
several Romanesque brick industrial buildings were also built (Fitch 1990; MHC 1980e:6-8).
COllunercial centers located at Union and Davis squares continued to grow in the Late Industrial Period.
Commercial structures constructed during the period were primarily three- and four-story brick buildings.
The High Victorian Gothic style was used in the early part of the period on a few buildings, while the
Neo-Classical style followed. The Colonial Revival style, and less frequently other revival styles, were
employed throughout the period. In the neighborhood centers, one-story, small commercial blocks
were common at important street intersections (MHC 1980e:7-8).
Architectural exuberance was expressed in the institutional buildings of Somerville during the period.
The Richardson Romanesque style was used in designs for two churches in the town, with the Shingle
style also appearing on at least one church building. The High Victorian Gothic style Somerville Police
Station was constructed in 1874, followed in 1884 by the Beaux Arts style library. In the early twentieth
century, several Romanesque style fire stations were constructed in the town (MHC 1980e:8).
Modern Period (1915-Present)
Following the vast transformations of the Late Industrial Period, Somerville began a decline to average
levels in the twentieth century. The remaining open land in Somerville was quickly developed in the
1920s, after which, building construction in Somerville slowed dramatically. Simple, single- and two­
family houses made up the bulk of those constructed, with some Georgian Revival style apartment
blocks around Davis Square erected in the 1920s. Commercial buildings in the neighborhood transfomled
from the larger stores of the preceding period to small, brick stores during the early part of the Modem
Period. Small retail strips were constructed at the middle of the twentieth century. Institutional
construction during the period included the extant Georgian Revival style Police Station and several
schools. A few churches, including at least one in the Romanesque style, were also constructed. Among
industrial buildings constructed during the period, the Ford Motors Plant and First National Warehouses,
both constructed in 1927, were the most important to the conununity. Other two- and three-story, brick
and concrete, utilitarian, industrial buildings were also constructed (MHC 1980e:9).
The slowing of construction in the city is reflected in the population statistics of Somerville for the
Modern Period. Until 1930 the population continued to expand, reaching 103,908 in that year. It
declined over the next decade, but peaked for the final time during World War n, when 105,883 persons,
many employees of the Ford Motors plant, were living in Somerville. The post-war decline brought the
population down to 80,569 in 1975, the equivalent of the 1912 population. In 2000, the population had
fallen to 77,478 persons (DHCD 2003:4; MHC 1980e:8).
The population increase to 1930 can be traced to the continued increase in industrialization to that date.
Of the 145 manufacturing establishments in the city in 1930,75 percent of them had located there since
1900 (MHC 1980e:9). Meat processing continued to be the leading industry in the city. The Ford plant
PALReportNo./396.0J
87
Chapter Nine
would later become the largest employer in the city, before closing in 1957, at the end of the production
run of the 1958 Edsel. At the end of the twentieth century, Somerville had added telecommunications
and hi-tech industries to its manufacturing, trade, and service industries, and more than 20,000 people
worked in the city (City of Somerville 2003).
The automobile revolutionized transportation during the mid- and late twentieth century. Rail and
trolley routes remained into the middle of the century as automobiles gained in popularity. In the
1930s, the Metropolitan District Commission constructed the McGrath and O'Brien highways, and the
Alewife Brook! Mystic Valley Parkway, all of which remain into the twenty-first century. The MBTA
subway connects Somerville to Boston and other suburbs.
88
PALReporINo.J396.0J
CHAPTER TEN
SURVEY RESULTS
This chapter presents the results of the documentary reconnaissance survey of historic resources
completed in 2007 for the Urban Ring Phase 2 project. The survey identified previously recorded
individual properties, areas, and districts that may be eligible for listing in the State Register and National
Register. The results address historic resources in the APE for the four build alternatives, with the five
additional sub·options. and the 44 station locations (see Figures 1-1 through I-II). The infonnation is
organized and presented with reference to the geographical SegmentsA. B, and Cand by the Altematives
1, 2, 3, and 4 defined for the project as described in Chapter 1 and shown in Figure 1-12. The results
incorporate and update infonnation contained in the 2004 background research and field survey of a
single alternative (Mair et al. 2004).
A total of 1,069 individual properties and 88 historic districts and areas within the Urban Ring Phase 2
APE were identified for all the alternatives, options, and stations in the municipalities of Boston,
Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Medford, and Somerville. The Urban Ring APE (extending
50 to 100 feet from the centerline, depending on present use, and 150 feet around stations) is highly
urban. The majority of the Urban Ring project will be located on existing city streets and on abandoned
and/or active rail corridors. Table 10-1 provides a quantitative summary of results for all individual
and district/area historic resources by segment and alternative. Table 10-2 summarizes the quantitative
results for historic resources near stations in each segment and alternative. The detailed results for
individual historic resources and for historic districts and area resources that are included in the MI-IC's
Inventory, MACRlS, and the National and State Registers are presented for each segment and alternative
in Tables 10-3 through 10-26, and listed for all individual historic resources and historic districts/areas
by community in Tables 10-27 and lO-28. Tables 10-3 through 10-28 are found in Appendix A. National
Register-listed and detennined eligible properties are also listed in the narrative ofthis chapter. Individual
properties in the APE that are contributing to historic districts are indicated in the individual properties
tables.
The location of individual and district/area historic resources is shown on 32 annotated project maps
contained in Appendix 8. Individual resources are identified by an assigned map number; districts and
areas are referenced by MI-IC number. Multiple Property Submissions (MPS) and Multiple Resource
Areas (MRA) are not shown on the maps, but are included in the tables.
A comparison of all the alternatives in each community shows that the greatcst numbers of historic
resources within the APE are located in Boston, followed by Cambridge, Brookline, Somcrville, Chelsea,
Everett, and Medford in desccnding order.
PAL Report No. /396.01
89
:g
()
Table 10-1. Summary of Hisloric Resources By Segment and Altern alive, Urban Ring Phase 2.
;
~
TOlll
~
r­
~'"
"­
~
:0
'"
'"
-
SEGMENT
",
ALTERNATIVe­
Nalion.1
NRilocal
HI.torie
Landman.
U.t~DOE
DI,trk:ts
NRlLocal
Lisilld/OOE
Individual
Properties
Inventoried
Individual
Property
Contributing
in District
Potential
NR
Eligible
Districts
In~ntoried
Potential
NR
EUlIlble
lndlvldul
In....ntoried
Area Nol
Evaluated
Properti..
Individual
Property
No<
Evaluated
In....ntoried
A~.
No<
ellglbl.
Not
l'-ted or
Eligible
Individual
Propertln
AteallOlstriets
EligIble
DI.ttk:ts
MPSJMRA
Invenlori,d
Individual
Property
Total All
Individual
PropertilS
MPSIMRA
SEGMENT A
Altematl"'e 1
Allornatlve 2
Alternative 3
Altornativ...
0
0
0
0
,
,
,
2
,
,
3
2
3
,
0
0
,
2
3
,
"
"
"
"
,
2
"
25
,
1
56lndivid.
'"
33
Altem.t1v.1
Alttrnativ.2
2
Altematlv.3
0
Altlmatlv...
,
7
9
9
"
"
3
'"
2
",
'"
,
22
0
63
,
23
0
22
,
,
"
0
99
1
26
258 Individual
23.reasldislric;ts
86lndlvld.
6dislrl~ts
220 Individual
10 areasldistricts
1951!1divld.
7 dislricts
220 Individual
10 areasldislricts
,,,
3
1
28
68
,
1
"
0
0
7
"
,
'68
3
9
2M"
110 indMd.
19 disbiets
3
2
2781ndMdual
11 lIeaskblric;l$
25
68
0
66lndi'lidual
11 areas.l<listriets
IMPS
2M. .
8
Altlrn;ltive 2
2 MPSIMRA
198 indl'lidual
17 areas/districts
"
3
119 individual
13 aren/dlstricts
2M"
52
"
10.ren
85 individual
10.renl(!is\Tie15
2 MPS/MRA
92 individ.
14 districts
2
"
,
individ.
2 MPS/MRA
1-48 indMd.
H.ren
63
SEGMENT C
21 Indlvid.
6 districts
1 MPS
260 Individual
13 IlustdislriCls
32
2
,
34lodlvld.
8 dlslnt::lS
2
2M"
2S
2
2
,,,
9
0
26 indlvid.
7 districts
MPSIMRA
"
Altern;ltiv.1
MPSIMRA
MPSI1VlRA
SEGMENTS
,
,
8 (li,lriCts
-4'1 individu.l
13 .re.sldislricts
;;
"
,;;l
Table 10-1. Summary of Historic Resources By Segment and Alternative, Urban Ring Phase 2.
SEGMENT
'"d
ALTERNATIVE'
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
'"
SEGMENTS
NRiLocal
LlstedlDDE
Individual
Properties
,
Inventoried
Individual
Property
Contributing
in District
Potential
NR
Potenllal
NR
Ellgiblo
Districts
Eligible
Individual
Properties
55
5
68
'"
0
"
0
;
8
"
;
"
"
30
'40
"
26
'"
,
Alternative 2
2
Alternative 3
0
22
83
,
"
25
18
83
TOTALS"
*'"
NRiLocal
Llsted/OOE
Districts
Alternative 1
Alternative 4
..
National
Historic
Landmarks
,
"
"
Inventoried
Area Not
Evaluated
Inventoried
Individual
Property
Inventoried
Area
No'
Eligible
Evaluated
No'
Inventoried
Individual
Property
No'
Eligible
Total
Listed or
Eligible
Individual
Properties
Districts
MPS/MRA
Total AU
Individual
Properties
Areas/DIstricts
MPSIMRA
77 individ.
15 districts
143 individual
18 areas/districts
157 individ.
14 districts
220 individual
17 areas/districts
,
6
0
,
5
0
"
266
8
79
2
252
286 individ.
24 distriCts
758 individual
34 areas/districts
,4<
6
'33
2
65
369 individ.
25 districts
716 individual
33 areasldislncts
"
"
80
0
460 indMdual
48 areas/districts
82
,
203 individ.
37 districts
288 individ.
39 districts
544 individual
51 areas/districts
'82
269
5
"
91
1OS9 indiVIdual
88 areastdistricis
Sub-alternative 2A is the only alternative with an identified historic resource - one inventoried property not evaluated in Segment B. No resources were
identified in sub-altcrmltives 3A. 3B, 3C, ;lI1d 4A in any of tile Segments.
Totals do not rn3teh alternatives counts due to the presence ofduplicatc historic resources in the alternatives.
~
"
'"
.g
-
~
~
~
~
'0
'"
'"
~
'<>
II'"
"•
IS.
•
::l
~
National
Historic
Landmarks
....
i'"
"­
~
­...
-
()
Table 10-2. Summary of Historic Resources Ncar StationslStops, Urban Ring Phase 2.
National
Register/Local
Listed/DOE
Districts
iif
"0
National
Register/Local
Listed/DOE
Individual
Properties
Potential NR
eligible
Districts
Potential NR
Eligible
Individual
Properties ..
Inventoried
Area Not
Evaluated
Inventoried
Individual
Property Not
Evaluated
Total of
Individual
Properties
and Districts
••
SEGMENT A
~
Q
3 areas
Alternative 1
0
1
0
1
15
1
3
18 individual
Alternative 2
0
1
0
1
4
2
7
4 areas
11 individual
Alternative 3
0
2
0
2
4
2
8
12 Individual
Alternative 4
0
1
0
2
1
2
8
10 indiyidual
Alternative 1
0
4
•
2
7.
1
5
Alternative 2
0
5
8
2
70
1
2.
104 indiy.
Alternative 3
0
7
3
1
58
2
67 individual
Alternative 4
0
10
5
2
.,
•
1
5
Alternative 1
0
3
5
3
80
0
2
6 ateas
67 individual
Alternative 2
0
3
7
4
.2
0
4
7 ateas
15 individual
Alternative 3
0
3
9
5
39
0
3
8 ateas
52 individual
Alternative 4
0
3
8
5
81
0
2
8 areas
71 individual
6 areas
5 areas
SEGMENTS
7 areas
90 individual
6 areas
" areas
13 areas
71 individual
SEGMENTC
.
This category Includes individual properties recommended as contributing to a potential district.
This table does not include individual properties or areas previously determined to be ineligible for National Register listing. nor individual properties that are contributing to an
e~isting historic district Therefore totals in table win vary from totals in report narrative.
;;
~
;;'
=
Survey Results
Survey Results by Segment and Alternative
Segment A
Segment A (Sectors 1-4) encompasses the northwest, north, and northeast extension of the Urban Ring
Phase 2 APE, traversing (counterclockwise east to west) portions of Boston (East Boston), Chelsea,
Everett, Medford, and Somerville.
Alternative 1
A total of 260 individual properties and )3 historic districts and areas as well as two MPS/MRA
designations (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston MPS and Somerville MRA) were identified
in Alternative 1 of Segment A (see Tables 10-3 and 10-4).
National
Register~listed
properties consist of two parkways districts:
• Revere Beach Parkway, in Everett and Medford; and
• Fells Connector Parkways, Medford.
Determined eligible prope11ies include one district and four individual properties:
• Everett Square, Everett;
• MDC Sewage Pumping Station (now MWRA East Boston Steam Pumping Station), 20 Addison
Street, Boston;
• Chelsea Street Bridge, Chelsea Street, Chelsea;
• Frederick E. Parlin Memorial Library, 410 Broadway, Everett; and
• McGrath Highway Bridge over B & M Railroad, McGrath Highway, Somerville.
Four districts and approximately 35 individual properties have previously been recommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains one local historic district, the Somerville Single Building
Historic District, and one individual local landmark property at 13 Highland Avenue in Somerville.
Historic resources in the APE for the stations in Alternative I of Segment A consist of 50 individual
propel1ies, four districts/areas, and one MPS (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston). They
include one National Register-listed district: Revere Beach Parkway in Everett and Medford. One
h.istoric district and approximately 15 individual properties near stations have been recommended eligible.
Alternatke 2
A total of 85 individual properties and 10 historic districts and areas as well as two MPS/MRA
designations (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston MPS and Somerville MRA) were identified
in Alternative 2 of Segment A (see Tables 10-5 and 10-6).
National
Register~listed properties
include five districts:
PAL Report No. 1396.01
93
Chapter Ten
•
•
•
•
•
Winter Street Historic District, Cambridge;
Bellingham Square District, Chelsea;
Revere Beach Parkway, in Everett and Medford;
Fells Connector Parkways, Medford; and
Mount Vernon Street Historic District, Somerville.
Deternlined eligible properties consist of two individual properties:
• MDC Sewage Pwnping Station (now MWRA East Boston Steam Pumping Station), 20Addison
Street, Boston; and
• Chelsea Street Bridge, Chelsea Street. Chelsea.
Six districts and approximately 15 individual properties have previously been recommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 2 of Segment A consist of 33 individual properties, five
districts/areas, and one MPS (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston). They include one National
Register-listed district: Revere Beach Parkway in Everett and Medford. One historic district and
approximately four individual properties near stations have been recommended eligible.
Alternative 3
A total of 119 individual properties and five historic districts and areas as well as two MPS/MRA
designations (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston MPS and Somerville MRA) were identified
in Alternative 3 of Segment A (see Tables 10-7 and 10-8).
National
•
•
•
•
•
Register~listed propel1ies
consist of five districts:
Winter Street Historic District, Cambridge;
Bellingham Square District, Chelsea;
Revere Beach Parkway, in Everett and Medford;
Fells Connector Parkways, Medford; and
Mount Vernon Street Historic District, Somerville.
Detennined eligible properties consist of three individual propel1ies:
• MOC Sewage Pumping Station (now MWRA East Boston Steam Pumping Station), 20 Addison
Street. Boston;
• Chelsea Street Bridge, Chelsea Street, Chelsea; and
• McGrath Highway Bridge over B & M Railroad, McGrath Highway, Somerville.
Three districts and approximately 20 individual properties have previously been reconunended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
94
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Survey Results
Historic resoUl'ces near stations in Alternative 3 ofSegmentAconsist of29 individual properties, seven
districts/areas, and one MPS (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston). They include two National
Register-listed districts: Mount Vernon Street Historic District in Somerville and Revere Beach Parkway
in Medford. Two historic districts and approximately four individual properties near stations have been
recommended eligible.
Alternative 4
A total of 66 individual properties and II historic districts and areas as well as two MPS/MRA
designations (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston MPS and Somerville MRA) were identified
in Alternative 4 of Segment A (see Tables 10-9 and 10-10).
National Register-listed propelties consist of one parkway district and one historic district:
• Bellingham Square District, Chelsea; and
• Revere Beach Parkway, in Everett and Medford.
Detennined eligible propel1ies consist of two individual properties:
• MDC Sewage Pumping Station (now MWRA East Boston Steam Pumping Station), 20 Addison
Street, Boston; and
• Chelsea Street Bridge, Chelsea Street, Chelsea.
Four districts and approximately 10 individual properties have previously been recommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 4 of Segment A consist of 19 individual properties, five
districts/areas, and one MPS (Metropolitan Park System of Greater Boston). They include one National
Register-listed district: Revere Beach Parkway in Medford. Two historic districts and approximately
one individual property near stations have been recommended eligible.
Sub Alternatives
No additional historic resources were identified in the APE for sub-altemative options 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C,
and 4A in Segment A.
SegmentB
Segment B (Sectors 5-8) occupies the southwest corner of the Urban Ring Phase 2 APE passing through
Cambridge, Brookline, and Boston (Roxbury neighborhood).
A total of278 individual properties and 11 historic districts and areas as well as two MRA designations
(in Cambridge and Brookline) were identified in Altemative 1 ofSegmellt B (see Tables 10-11 and 10-12).
PAL Repol'l No. 1396.01
95
Chapler Tell
One NHL is located in this area:
• Harvard Stadium, North Harvard Street, Cambridge.
National Register-listed properties consist of six historic districts and seven individual properties:
• Back Bay Fens, Sections of, Boston;
• Charles River Basin Historic District, Boston and Cambridge;
• Emerald Necklace Parks, Boston;
• Olmsted Park System, Boston;
• Harvard Avenue Historic District, Cambridge;
• Harvard Square Historic District, Cambridge;
• Fuller, Peter Building, 808 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston;
• The Fenway, Fenway, Boston;
• Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, 280 Fenway, Boston;
• 1767 Milestone 60, North Harvard Street, Boston;
• Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store (now Landmark Center), 309 Park Drive, Boston;
• Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral of New England, 520 Parker Street, Boston; and
• Fort Washington (Fort Washington Park), 95 Waverly Street, Cambridge.
Detennined eligible historic properties consist of two individual properties:
• Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym and Drill Hall (now MIT Police Department), 120 Massachusetts
Avenue, Cambridge; and
• Metropolitan Storage Warehouse Cambridge Armory, 134 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge.
Three districts and approximately 135 individual properties have previously been recommended as
eligible for listing in the National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative I of Segment B consist of 106 individual properties,
seven districts/areas and two MRAs (Brookline and Cambridge). They inelude roUl" National Register­
listed properties (Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, and
The Fenway in Boston; and Fort Washington in Cambridge) and four National Register-listed districts
(Harvard Square Historic District in Cambridge; and Sections of Rack Bay Fens, Olmsted Park System,
and Charles River Basin Historic District in Boston). Two individual properties have been determined
eligible: Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym and Drill I-Iall, and Metropolitan Storage Warehouse in
Cambridge. Two historic districts and approximately 80 individual properties near stations have been
recommended eligible.
Alternative 2
A total of 411 individual properties and 13 historic districts and areas, as well as two MRA designations
(in Cambridge and Brookline), were identified in Alternative 2 of Segment B (see Tables 10-13 and 10­
14).
96
PAL Report No. /396.01
Survey Results
Two NHLs are located in this area:
• Frederick Ayer Mansion, 395 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston; and
• Harvard Stadium, North Harvard Street, Cambridge.
National Register-listed properties consist of seven districts and seven individual propel1ies:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Back Bay Historic District, Boston;
Back Bay Fens, Sections of, Boston;
Charles River Basin Historic District, Boston and Cambridge;
Commonwealth Avenue Mall, Boston;
Emerald Necklace Parks, Boston;
Olmsted Park System, Boston;
Harvard Square Historic District, Cambridge;
Fuller, Peter Building, 808 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston;
The Fenway, Fenway, Boston;
Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, 280 Fenway, Boston;
Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store (now Landmark Center), 309 Park Drive, Boston;
Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral of New England, 520 Parker Street, Boston;
Harvard Square Subway Kiosk, Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge; and
Fort Washington (Fort Washington Park), 95 Waverly Street, Cambridge.
Detem1ined eligible historic properties consist of four individual properties:
• Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym and Drill Hall (now MIT Police Depaltment), 120 Massachusetts
Avenue, Cambridge;
• Metropolitan Storage Warehouse Cambridge Armory, 134 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge;
• MIT Main Courtyard, 182 Memorial Drive, Cambridge; and
• Riverbank. Court Hotel, 305 Memorial Drive, Cambridge.
Three districts and approximately 130 individual properties have previously been recommended as
eligible for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains two local historic districts: Bay State Road-Back Bay West
Architectural Conservation District, and Back Bay Architectural District, both in Boston.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 2 of Segment B consist of 149 individual properties,
eight districts/areas and 1\\'0 MRAs (Brookline and Cambridge). They include five National Register­
listed properties (Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, and
The Fenway in Boston; F0I1 Washington and Harvard Square Subway Kiosk in Cambridge) and five
National Register-listed districts (Harvard Square Historic District in Cambridge; and Sections of Back
Bay Fens, Back Bay Historic District, Charles River Basin Historic District, and Olmsted Park System
in Boston). Two individual properties have been determined eligible: Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym
and Drill Hall, and Metropolitan Storage Warehouse in Cambridge. Two historic districts and
approximately 70 individual properties near stations have been recommended eligible.
PAL Report No. 1396.01
97
Chapter Ten
Alternative 3
A total of 198 individual properties and 17 historic districts and areas as well as two MRA designations
(in Cambridge and Brookline) were identified in Alternative 3 of Segment B (see Tables 10-15 and 10­
16).
National Register-listed propel1ies consist of nine districts and three individual properties:
• Back Bay Fens, Sections of, Boston;
• Charles River Basin Historic District, Boston and Cambridge;
• Commonwealth Avenue Mall, Boston;
• Emerald Necklace Parks, Boston;
• Olmsted Park System, Boston and Brookline;
• Cottage Faml Historic District, Brookline;
• Longwood Historic District, Brookline;
• Blake and Knowles Steam Pump Company, Cambridge;
• East Cambridge Historic District, Cambridge;
• Fuller, Peter Building, 808 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston;
• Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store (now Landmark Centcr), 309 Park Drive, Boston;
and
• Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral of New England, 520 Parker Street, Boston.
Determined eligible historic properties consist of foUl' individual propcl1ies:
•
Cambridge AnnOlY, MIT Gym and Drill Hall (now MIT Police Department), 120 Massachusetts
Avenue, Cambridge;
• William L. Lockhart Coffin Factory, Main Building, Cambridge Antique Market, 201 Monsignor
O'Brien Highway;
• Meigs' Experimental Railway Bldg (now Genoa Packing Co.), 221 MonsignorO'Brien Highway;
and
• Superior Nut Company, 225 Monsignor O'Brien Highway.
Two districts and approximately 80 individual propel1ies have previously been recommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains three local historic districts: Bay State Road-Back Bay West
Architectural Conservation District in Boston, Cottage Farm Local Historic District in Brookline, and
Fort Washington Historic District in Cambridge. It also includes two local landmarks: Back Bay Yard,
Riverway Administrative Building, 440 Park Drive, and Scars, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store
(now Landmark Center), 309 Park Drive, both in Boston.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 3 of Segment B consist of 81 individual properties, 12
districts/areas and lWO MRAs (Brookline and Cambridge). They include one National Register-listed
property (Sears, Roebuck, and Co. Mail Order Store in Boston) and six National Register-listed districts
(Cottage Farm Historic District and Longwood Historic District in Brookline; Blake and Knowles
98
PAL Reporl No. 1396.01
Survey Results
Steam Pump Company in Cambridge; Sections of Back Bay Fens Historic District, Charles River
Basin Historic District, and Olmsted Park System in Boston). Two individual properties have been
determined eligible: Cambridge Annory, MIT Gym and Drill Hall, and Metropolitan Storage Warehouse
in Cambridge. One historic district and approximately 55 individual properties near stations have been
recommended eligible.
Alternative 4
A total of257 individual properties and 23 historic districts and areas as well as two MRA designations
(in Cambridge and Brookline) were identified in Alternative 4 of Segment B (see Tables 10-17 and 10~
18).
National Register-listed properties consist of 12 districts and four individual propel1ies:
• Back Bay Fens, Sections of, Boston;
• Charles River Basin Historic District, Boston and Cambridge;
• Conunonwealth Avenue Mall, Boston;
• Emerald Necklace Parks, Boston;
• Olmsted Park System, Boston and Brookline;
• Beacon Street Historic District, Brookline;
• Cottage Farm Historic District. Brookline;
• Longwood Historic District. Brookline;
• Blake and Knowles Steam Pump Company, Cambridge;
• East Cambridge Historic District. Cambridge;
• Harvard Houses Historic District, Cambridge;
• Harvard Yard Historic District, Cambridge;
• Fuller, Peter Building, 808 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston;
• The Fenway, Fenway, Boston;
• Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral of New England, 520 Parker Street, Boston; and
• Fort Washington (Fort Washington Park), 95 Waverly Street, Cambridge.
Determined eligible historic properties consist of two properties:
• Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym and Drill Hall (now MIT Police Department), 120 Massachusetts
Avenue, Cambridge; and
• Metropolitan Storage Warehouse Cambridge Armory, 134 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge.
Three districts and approximately 105 individual properties have previously been recommended as
eligible for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains three local historic districts: Fort Washington Historic District
and Old Cambridge Historic District in Cambridge, and Cottage Farm Historic District in Brookline. It
also includes two local landmarks: Back Bay Yard, Riverway Administrative Building, 440 Park Drive,
and Longwood Avenue Bridge, Longwood Avenue, both in Boston.
PAL Report No. /396.0/
99
Chapter Ten
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 4 of Segment B consist of 93 individual properties, 15
districts/areas and two MRAs (Brookline and Cambridge). They include two National Register-listed
properties (The Fenway in Boston and Fort Washington in Cambridge) and nine National Register­
listed districts (Beacon Street Historic District, Cottage Farm Historic District and Longwood Historic
District in Brookline; Blake and Knowles Steam Pump Company, Harvard Square Historic District,
and Harvard Yard Historic District in Cambridge; Sections of Back Bay Fens Historic District, Charles
River Basin Historic District, and Olmsted Park System in Boston). Two individual properties have
been determined eligible: Cambridge Armory, MIT Gym and Drill Hall, and Metropolitan Storage
Warehouse in Cambridge. Two historic districts and approximately 60 individual properties near stations
have been recommended eligible.
Sub Alternatives
One historic resource was identified in the APE in sub-alternative options 2A ofSegment B. No additional
historic resources were identified in the APE for sub-alternative options 3A, 3B, 3e, and 4A in Segment
B.
Segment C
Segment C (Sectors 9-11) lies in the southeast corner of the Urban Ring Phase 2 APE stretching across
the Roxbury, Dorchester, and South Boston neighborhoods of Boston.
Alternative 1
A total of220 individual propel1ies and 9 historic districts and areas were identified in Alternative 1 of
Segment C (Tables 10-19 and 10-20).
National Register-listed properties consist of two districts and four individual properties:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dudley Station Historic District, Boston;
Fort Point Channel Historic District, Boston;
Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, Eustis Street (at Washington Street), Boston;
Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613 Columbia Road, Boston;
James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, Boston; and
Upham's Corner Market, 600 Columbia Road, Boston.
Propel1ies determined eligible consist of three individual propel1ies;
•
•
•
Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital, 685 Albany Street, Boston;
The Frances Apartment Building, 430 Dudley Street, Boston; and
The Isabella Apartment Building, 434 Dudley Street, Boston.
Four districts and approximately 75 individual propel1ies have previously been reconunended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
100
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Survey Results
This portion of the project also contains two local landmarks: Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613
Columbia Road, and James Blake House, 735 Colwnbia Road, both in Boston and also listed in the
National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 1 of Segment C consist of 88 individual properties and
six districts/areas. They include four National Register-listed properties (Dorchester North Burying
Ground, Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, James Blake House, and Upham's Corner Market in
Boston) and two National Register-listed districts: (Dudley Station Historic District and Fort Point
Channel Historic District in Boston). One individual property has been determined eligible:
Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital in Boston. Three historic districts and approximately 60 individual
properties near stations have been recommended eligible.
Alternative 2
A total of220 individual propelties and 10 historic districts and areas were identified in Alternative 2 of
Segment C (see Tables 10-21 and 10-22).
National Register-listed properties consist of two districts and five individual properties:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dudley Station Historic District, Boston;
Fort Point Channel Historic District, Boston;
Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, Eustis Street (at Washington Street), Boston;
Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613 Columbia Road, Boston;
James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, Boston;
Upham's Corner Market, 600 Columbia Road, Boston; and
Commonwealth Pier No. 5,165 NorthemAvenue, Boston.
Properties determined eligible consist of four properties:
•. Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital, 685 Albany Street, Boston;
• The Frances Apartment Building, 430 Dudley Street, Boston;
• The Isabella Apartment Building, 434 Dudley Street, Boston; and
• South Boston Fish Pier, Northern Avenue, Boston.
Five districts and approximately 75 individual properties have previously been recommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains two local landmarks: Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613
Columbia Road, and James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, both in Boston and also listed in the
National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 2 of Segment C consist of 88 individual properties and
seven districts/areas. They include four National Register-listed properties (Dorchester North Burying
Ground, Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, James Blake House, and Upham's Corner Market in
Boston) and two National Register-listed districts (Dudley Station Historic District and Fort Point
PAL Report No. 1396.01
101
Chapter Ten
Channel Historic District in Boston). Two individual properties have been determined eligible:
Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital and South Boston Fish Pier in Boston. Four historic districts and
approximately 60 individual properties near stations have been recommended eligible.
Alternative 3
A total of 143 individual properties and 18 historic districts and areas were identified in Alternative 3 of
Segment C (see Tables 10-23 and 10-24).
National Register-listed properties consist of four districts and four individual properties:
•
•.
•.
•.
•.
•.
•
•.
Dudley Station Historic District, Boston;
Fort Point Channel Historic District, Boston;
Lawrence Model Lodging Houses, Boston;
Lower Roxbury Historic District, Boston;
United States Post Office Garage, 135 A Street, Boston;
James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, Boston;
Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, Eustis Street (at Washington Street), Boston; and
Commonwealth Pier No.5, 165 Northern Avenue, Boston.
Properties determined eligible consist of three districts and four individual properties:
•
•
•.
•.
•.
•.
•.
East Brookline Streetscapes, Boston;
East Brookline Street Historic District, Boston;
South End Industrial Area, Boston;
Dahlquist Coppersmiths Manufacturing Company, 89 A Street, Boston;
Saints Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Church, 45 West Broadway, Boston;
Broadway Bridge over Fort Point Chalmel, Broadway Avenue, Boston; and
South Boston Fish Pier, N011hern Avenue, Boston.
Five districts and approximately 30 individual properties have previously been reconunended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
This portion of the project also contains two local historic districts: Eustis Street Architectural
Conservation District and the South End Landmark District in Boston. It also contains one local
landmark: James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, in Boston and also listed in the National Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 3 of Segment C consist of 69 individual properties and
eight districts/areas. They include four National Register~listed properlies (Commonwealth Pier 5, Eliot
Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, James Blake House, and United States Post Office Garage in Boston)
and two National Register-listed districts (Dudley Station Historic District and Fort Point Chalmel
Historic District in Boston). Five individual propel1ies have been detennined eligible: Broadway Bridge
over Fort Point Channel, Dahlquist Coppersmiths Manufacturing Company, Massachusetts Homeopathic
Hospital, Saints Peter and Paul Roman Catholic Church, and South Boston Fish Pier in Boston. Four
102
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Survey Results
historic districts and approximately 40 individual properties near stations have been recommended
eligible.
.Alternative 4
A total of220 individual properties and 17 historic districts and areas were identified in Alternative 4 of
Segment C (see Tables 10-25 and 10-26).
National Register-listed properties consist of four districts and five individual properties:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Dudley Station Historic District, Boston;
Fort Point Channel Historic District, Boston;
Lower Roxbury Historic District, Boston;
Mount Pleasantl-listoric District, Boston;
Upham's Corner Market, 600 Columbia Road, Boston;
Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613 Columbia Road, Boston;
James Blake House, 735 Columbia Road, Boston;
Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, Eustis Street (at Washington Street), Boston; and
Commonwealth Pier No_ 5, 165 Northern Avenue, Boston.
Properties detennined eligible consist of one district and five individual properties:
•
•
•
•
•
•
South End Industrial Area, Boston;
Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital, 685 Albany Street, Boston;
The Frances Apartment Building, 430 Dudley Street, Boston;
The Isabella Apartment Building, 434 Dudley Street, Boston;
Fort Point Channel Bridge, Fort Point Channel, Boston; and
South Boston Fish Pier, N0I1hern Avenue, Boston.
Seven districts and approximately 75 individual properties have previously beenl'ecommended as eligible
for listing in the National Register.
This portion ofthe project also contains one local historic district: Eustis Street Architectural Conservation
District in Boston. Il also contains two local landmarks: Dorchester North Burying Ground, 613 Colwnbia
Road, and James Blakc House, 735 Columbia Road, both in Boston and also listed in the National
Register.
Historic resources near stations in Alternative 4 of Segment C consist of92 individual properties and
eight districts/areas. They include five National Register-listed properties (Commonwealth Pier 5,
Dorchester North Burying Ground, Eliot Burying Ground/Old Roxbury, James Blake House, and
Upham's Comer Market in Boston) and two National Register-listed district's (Dudley Station Historic
District and Fort Point Channel Historic District in Boston). Two individual properties and one district
have been detemlined eligible: Massachusetts Homeopathic Hospital and South Boston Fish Pier in
Boston; and Soulh End Industrial District in Boslon. Four historic districts and approximately 60
individual properties ncar stations have bccn recommcnded eligible.
PAL Report No. 1396.01
103
Chapter Tell
Sub~A1tcrnatives
No additional historic resources were identified in the APE for subMaltemative options 2A, 3A, 3B, 3C,
and 4A in Segment C.
Survey Results Summary of Alternatives
The potential impacts of the Urban Ring Phase 2 project on historic resources in each of the four
primary altematives can be analyzed in tenns of the overall potential impacts ofeach of the altematives
along the route through each segment (see the summary in Table 10 MI).
Alternative 1
Overall, throughout the APE in Segments A, B, and C Altemative I would impact 758 individual and
34 areas/districts previously documented historic resources. Ofthese resources, 266 individual properties
and 24 areas/districts are known to be listed or eligible for listing in the State and National Registers.
Alternative 2
Alternative 2 has the potential to impact 716 individual and 33 areas/districts previously documented
historic resources distributed in Segments A, S, and C. Alternative 2 has 369 individual properties and
25 areas/districts that are currently listed or eligible for listing in the State and National Registers.
Alternative 3
Across Segments A, B, and C, Alternative 3 has 369 individual properties and 25 areas/districts historic
resources. These totals include 203 individual properties and 37 areas/districts previously classified as
listed or eligible for listing in the State and National Registers.
Alternative 4
In Alternative 4, there are 544 individual properties and 51 areas/districts historic resources in the APE
in Segments A, B, and C. A total of288 individual properties and 39 areas/districts are currently listed
or eligible for listing in the State and National Registers.
Sub Alternatives
With the exception of one property in sub-alternative option 2A, Segment B, no additional historic
resources were identified in the APE for sub-aJternative options 2A, 3A, 3B, 3e, or 4A in Segments A,
B,orC.
Conclusions and Recommendations
While the APE for each of the four primary alternatives in each of the three segments of the Urban Ring
Phase 2 project includes numerous historic architectural resources, it is likely in most instances that
104
PAL Report No. 1396.01
Survey Results
few of the 1,069 individual historic resources and 88 historic areas and districts will be physically
affected by the project. Those that may potentially be affected are primarily roads and bridges, in
addition to those located along proposed tunnels (depending on construction methods) and at portals.
Noise, vibration, traffic, and dust during construction, as well as permanent and visual or setting impacts
are the most likely effects to the other architectural resources along the route.
A reconnaissance field survey of the locally preferred alternative, once it is identified, is recommended
in order to verify these documentary reconnaissance survey results and identify any other historic
resources within the APE for that alternative. This should be followed by an intensive survey to collect
sufficient information about potentially eligible resources to make a determination of eligibility for
inclusion in the State and National Registers. Continued consultation with the MHC and other consulting
parties is recommended to: determine the need for additional survey and evaluation efforts; to assess
project impacts on significant historic properties; and to consider measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate
any adverse effects of the Urban Ring Phase 2 project on such resources.
PAL Report No. 1396.01
lOS