National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

OLMSTED CENTER FOR LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION

National Park Service

The Easton Building

15 State Street, Boston, MA 02109

web: www.nps.gov/oclp/

 

 

 

 

 

 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE REPORT 

FOR FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED 

NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE 

BROOKLINE, MASSACHUSETTS 

VOLUME III, RECORD OF TREATMENT 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, GREEN HILL PARCEL 

EXISTING CONDITIONS 

Prepared by 

Devon King, Designing the Parks Associate, Olmsted Center 

James Mealey, Landscape Architect, Olmsted Center 

Mona McKindley, former Gardener, Olmsted, Longfellow, and Kennedy NHS 

Aaron Erzinger, Gardener, Olmsted, Longfellow, and Kennedy NHS 

Lauren Meier, former Project Manager, Olmsted Center 

Eliot Foulds, Project Manager, Olmsted Center 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation 

National Park Service, Boston, Massachusetts, 2022 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

The Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation promotes the stewardship of signifcant 

landscapes through research, planning, and sustainable preservation maintenance. The Center 

accomplishes its mission in collaboration with a network of partners including national parks, 

universities, government agencies, and private nonproft organizations. Techniques and principles 

of preservation practice are made available through training and publications. 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation 

15 State Street, 6th Floor 

Boston, MA 02109 

www.nps.gov/oclp/ 

Publication Credits: Graphics from sources other than federal repositories may not be 

reproduced without the permission of the owners noted in the captions. Other information in 

this publication may be copied and used with the condition that full credit be given to the authors 

and publisher. Appropriate citations and bibliographic credits should be made for each use. 

National Park Service, Denver Technical Information Center (TIC) Report Number: FRLA 486 

186395 

Integrated Resource Management Applications (IRMA) Report Number: 2294809 

ISBN: 978-1-7333069-9-7 

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 

Zaitzevsky, Cynthia 

Fairsted: a cultural landscape report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site / by Cynthia Zaitzevsky; with an afterword by Mac Griswold. 

p. cm. — (Cultural landscape publication: #12) 

Includes bibliographial references 

Contents: v. 1. Site History. 

1. Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site (Brookline, Mass.) 2. Olmsted, 

Frederick Law, 1822–1903—Home and haunts—Massachusetts–Brookline. 3. 

Landscape architecture—Massachuetts—Brookline. 4. Brookline (Mass.)—Buildings, 

structures, etc. I. Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation (U.S.) II. Title. III. Series: 

Cultural landscape publication: no. 12 

F74.B9Z35 1997 97-34762 

712’.092—dc21 CIP 

Cover Photo: Young participants of the National Park Service Branching Out program and 

students from the William H. Lincoln Elementary School assist park staf with planting the 

replacement Olmsted elm on Fairsted’s South Lawn, 2013. (Matt Teuten) 

Title Page: Park and Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf pose while installing new 

plantings at Fairsted, ca. 1996. (OCLP) 

ii 
 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS V 

FOREWORD XIX 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS XXI 

INTRODUCTION 1 

Project Background 3 

Project Scope and Methodology 5 

Historical Development and Treatment Overview 7 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 23 

Research and Treatment Planning 23 

Treatment Plan 42 

Treatment Implementation (1993–2001) 48 

Treatment Implementation (2001–2021) 89 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, GREEN HILL PARCEL 99 

Research and Treatment Planning 99 

Treatment Plan/Zones 102 

Treatment Implementation 104 

EXISTING CONDITIONS 113 

Park Operations 113 

Landscape Setting 115 

Fairsted Landscape 118 

Green Hill Parcel Landscape 137 

Landscape Conditions 144 

APPENDIX A: TREATMENT CHRONOLOGY AND PROJECT PARTICIPANTS 149 

APPENDIX B: BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION 163 

APPENDIX C: FAIRSTED PLANT INVENTORIES AND PLANT SOURCES 167 

APPENDIX D: FAIRSTED LANDSCAPE PLANS 209 

APPENDIX E: GREEN HILL PARCEL LANDSCAPE PLANS 211 

APPENDIX F: ARTICLES RELATED TO LANDSCAPE RESTORATION WORK 213 

APPENDIX G: SPECIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 215 

APPENDIX H: COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS 217 

iii 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

iv 
 

 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

FIGURES 

INTRODUCTION 

Figure 0.1. Fairsted, looking northeast from the west slope toward the 

building complex, 2021. The young Jeferson elm that replaced the historic 

Olmsted elm in 2015 is pictured to the right, standing near the center of the 

South Lawn. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

Figure 0.2. View of a portion of the Green Hill parcel, looking southwest, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

Figure 0.3. A rare photograph depicting the 1810 Clark house before its 1883 

acquisition by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and subsequent modifcations, 

looking northwest from Warren Street. (Brookline Historical Society) . . . . . . . 8 

Figure 0.4. Fairsted’s South Lawn, with the Olmsted elm at its center, looking 

northeast toward the house, pre-1903. (Photo #673-51, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site Archives) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Figure 0.5. The rustic spruce pole archway that marks Fairsted’s entrance 

from Warren Street, looking west before restoration of the Fairsted 

landscape, 1994. (Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

Figure 0.6. The Front Drive, looking southwest toward the Olmsted 

residence’s historic main entrance, 2000. The circular drive’s central 

planting bed, containing a mature hemlock, is partially visible to the left. 

This photograph depicts the landscape soon after restoration. (Jack Boucher, 

HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

Figure 0.7. The spruce pole entrance archway soon after reconstruction, 

looking southeast, 2022. The Front Drive and a historic bluestone walk pass 

through the archway from Warren Street. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

Figure 0.8. The western edge of the Hollow, bordered by the ofce complex, 

looking south before landscape restoration, 1994. (Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . . 11 

Figure 0.9. The Hollow soon after restoration, looking northwest from the 

Front Drive, 2000. (Jack Boucher, HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

Figure 0.10. The Hollow, as seen from the Front Drive, looking northwest, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

v 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 0.11. Rock outcropping overgrown with English ivy at the western 

edge of the Rock Garden, looking east before landscape restoration, 1994. 

(Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Figure 0.12. The western edge of the Rock Garden, looking east from the 

South Lawn soon after landscape restoration, 2000. The western end of the 

Rock Garden path is visible near the center of the image. (Jack Boucher. 

HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Figure 0.13. The western edge of the Rock Garden, looking east from the 

South Lawn, 2021. The western end of the Rock Garden path is visible near 

the center of the image. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 

Figure 0.14. The South Lawn, looking east before landscape restoration, 

1994. Note the Olmsted elm to the left and shrubs along the lawn’s 

undulating southern edge to the right. (Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Figure 0.15. The South Lawn, looking west soon after landscape restoration, 

2000.The Olmsted elm is visible at the center of the image and the southern 

facade of the Fairsted residence is to the right. Note the western slope in 

the distance and the undulating southern edge of the lawn to the left. (Jack 

Boucher, HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Figure 0.16. The South Lawn and the Fairsted building complex, looking 

northeast from the west slope, 2021. Note the young Jeferson elm that has 

replaced the historic Olmsted Elm. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Figure 0.17. A set of stepping stones leads to the western side of the historic 

shed in the Service Areas, looking northwest, 1994. (Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . 15 

Figure 0.18. The ofce entrance courtyard, looking east soon after landscape 

restoration, 2000. (Jack Boucher, HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Figure 0.19. The parking area, looking west toward the historic shed, 2021. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Figure 0.20. Tree removal work on the west slope at the edge of the South 

Lawn, looking west, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

Figure 0.21. Olmsted NHS staf planting shrubs at the southern edge of the 

South Lawn, looking southeast, 1996. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

Figure 0.22. View of the Gardner family’s Green Hill estate, looking south, 

1902. The fgure in the right side of the image is Isabella Stewart Gardner. 

(Isabella Stewart Gardner walking at Green Hill, Guest book 7, Isabella 

Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 

Figure 0.23. A portion of the Woodland Zone near the Green Hill parcel’s 

eastern boundary, looking northeast, 2021. Note the spruce pole fence that 

separates the parcel from Warren Street to the right. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

vi 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

Figure 0.24. A portion of the Screen Zone along the eastern boundary of 

the Green Hill parcel, looking northeast, 2021. Note the recently planted 

rhododendrons near the center of the image and the spruce pole fence along 

Warren Street to the right. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Figure 0.25. A portion of the Open Meadow Subzone at the Green Hill 

parcel, looking west, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

Figure 0.26. A portion of the Fescue Meadow Subzone near the southern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 21 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 

Figure 1.1. The University of Virginia and Historic American 

Buildings Survey (HABS) plan showing existing conditions in 1983. 

Note the pool and herb garden adjacent to the South Lawn. (University of 

Virginia/HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 

Figure 1.2. Axonometric drawing of Fairsted produced by the Historic 

American Building Survey in 1983. (HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

Figure 1.3. Fairsted, looking north from the property’s southern boundary 

with the Green Hill parcel before landscape restoration, 1994. Note the 

historic Olmsted Elm, standing near the center of the South Lawn, and the 

stone dust path leading to the conservatory, with its large bay window, near 

the center of the image. (Paul Rocheleau) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

Figure 1.4. View of center bed, ledge, and grotto in the Hollow, 

May 1935. (Photo #673-137, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historical 

Site Archives) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 

Figure 1.5. Barbara Keene preparing specimens for identifcation and 

herbarium collections at Longfellow House NHS, 1993. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 28 

Figure 1.6. Team from Boston University Office of Public Archeology 

conducting electronic survey work at Fairsted, ca. 1991. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 34 

Figure 1.7. Park staf conducting a feld survey in the South Lawn near the 

original Olmsted Elm, looking northeast, 1993. Note the curvilinear pathway 

along the southern facade of the house, later removed during Phase I of the 

landscape restoration. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

Figure 1.8. Fairsted electronic survey map prepared by the Boston University 

Ofce of Public Archeology 1992–1993. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 

Figure 1.9. 1993 Existing Conditions plan, based on the electronic survey by 

Boston University Ofce of Public Archeology, with plant identifcation by 

the Arnold Arboretum. Note the size and confguration of plant material, 

and the absence of the pool and herb garden in comparison to the 1983 

University of Virginia/HABS plan (Figure 1.1). (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 

vii 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

 

Figure 1.10. 1930 Period Plan, prepared 1994. Approximately ten 

historic plans and 50 historic photographs were studied to generate this 

plan. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 

Figure 1.11. Archeological work being conducted on the west slope by (from 

left to right) Steven Pendery, Charlie Pepper, and Margie Cofn (Brown), 

1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 

Figure 1.12. Vegetation along the southern border of the South Lawn, 

looking west, ca. 1994. (In Frederick Law Olmsted: Designing the American 

Landscape. By Charles E. Beveridge and Paul Rocheleau. New York: Rizzoli, 

1995, 140.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

Figure 1.13. 1995 Treatment Plan for the Fairsted landscape, prepared by 

the Olmsted Center and consultants. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

Figure 1.14. Fairsted Non-historic Tree Removal Plan, prepared by the 

Catherine Morris O’Connor and Catherine Evans, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 44 

Figure 1.15. Planting Plan for the Hollow, prepared by Catherine Morris 

O’Connor in 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 

Figure 1.16. Planting Plan for a portion of the South Lawn, prepared by 

Catherine Morris O’Connor in 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

Figure 1.17. Fairsted’s Front Drive before restoration, looking southwest 

through the spruce pole arch, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 

Figure 1.18. Fairsted’s Front Drive after restoration, looking southwest 

through the spruce pole arch, 2000. Note the restored herbaceous plantings 

in the central bed, the reinstalled stone curb at the drive’s edge, and the reset 

front entry walk at the lower right corner. (Jack Boucher, HABS) . . . . . . . . . 49 

Figure 1.19. Contracted arborists remove a non-historic tree at the edge of 

the Front Drive, looking east, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 

Figure 1.20. A contractor operates stump-grinding equipment at the edge 

of the South Lawn, looking northeast, 1994. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 

Figure 1.21. Park staf remove non-historic vegetation from the edge of the 

South Lawn, looking east, 1994. Pictured, from left to right, are Steve Law, 

George Ryan, and Lenny Gianetti. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

Figure 1.22. Removal of Carolina hemlocks planted in the 1960s along the 

spruce pole fence east of the Front Drive, looking northeast, 1994. (OCLP) 52 

Figure 1.23. Arborists remove a sycamore maple at the southeast corner of 

the house, looking west, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 

Figure 1.24. Woodchipper east of the Rock Garden path, looking northwest, 

1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

Figure 1.25. Elevated view of the Rock Garden after tree removal during 

Phase I, looking north, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

viii 
 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

Figure 1.26. Rock Garden after tree removal during Phase I, looking west, 

1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

Figure 1.27. Tree removal on the west slope during Phase I, looking west, 

1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

Figure 1.28. Tree removal in the service area near the historic shed (left), 

looking south, 1994. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 

Figure 1.29. Park staf removing shrubs in the Hollow, looking northwest, 

1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 

Figure 1.30. Park staf member Bob Galvin dragging brush across the Front 

Drive, looking west, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 

Figure 1.31. Southeast corner of the Rock Garden following tree and shrub 

removal, looking southeast, 1994. The blue fowers of squill (Scilla siberica) 

are visible in the lawn. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 

Figure 1.32. Park staf member string trimming in the southeast corner of 

the Rock Garden following tree and shrub removal, looking south, ca. 1995. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

Figure 1.33. Park staf member cutting vegetation on the mound in the Rock 

Garden, looking east, ca. 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

Figure 1.34. View of the northern edge of the South Lawn before restoration, 

looking east, ca. 1993. Note the Hydrangea heteromalla shrub to the right 

of the curvilinear path. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 

Figure 1.36. Park staf removing shrubs from the border at the southern 

edge of the South Lawn during restoration, looking west, 1994. (OCLP). . . . . 59 

Figure 1.35. View of the northern edge of the South Lawn following removal 

of the non-historic Hydrangea heteromalla shrub, looking east, 1995. (OCLP) . 59 

Figure 1.37. American elm planted at the edge of the parking area, looking 

north, ca. 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 

Figure 1.38. A sapling, maybe a silver linden, at the edge of the South Lawn 

after restoration, ca. 2000. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 

Figure 1.39. Overhead view of park staf planting shrubs on the north 

embankment in the Hollow, looking east, 1996. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 

Figure 1.40. Park staf planting shrubs on the north embankment in the 

Hollow, looking north, 1996. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 

Figure 1.41. Plantings staked out in the eastern portion of the Rock Garden, 

looking northwest, ca. 1995. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 

Figure 1.42. New shrub plantings at the southern border of the South Lawn, 

looking northeast, ca. 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 

ix 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

Figure 1.43. Park staf planting shrubs at the southern border of the South 

Lawn, looking northeast, 1996. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 

Figure 1.44. New shrub plantings in Fairsted’s southwest corner along the 

west slope, looking southwest, ca. 1995. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

Figure 1.45. Park staf planting shrubs on the west slope, looking northeast, 

ca. 1995. Note the restored bay of grass that climbs the west slope. (OCLP). . . 70 

Figure 1.46. Park staf planting shrubs on the west slope, looking west, 1995. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

Figure 1.47. Park staf installing herbaceous plantings in the Hollow’s center 

bed, looking northeast, 1996. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 

Figure 1.48. Restored plantings and stone dust path in the Hollow, looking 

northeast, ca. 2000. Note diverse iris species in the center bed (left) and 

northern bed (right), as well as the restored stone edging on both sides of 

the path. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 

Figure 1.49. Restored plantings in the ofce courtyard, looking east, ca. 2001. 

(OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 

Figure 1.50. South Lawn, with non-historic path along the southern facade 

of the house, looking northeast, 1994. Note the non-historic Hydrangea 

heteromalla on the southern side of the path. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 

Figure 1.51. South Lawn, after removal of non-historic path and Hydrangea 

heteromalla during landscape restoration, looking northeast, 2000. (Jack 

Boucher, HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 

Figure 1.52. Park staf spreading grass seed along the undulating southern 

edge of the South Lawn during restoration, looking west, 1995. (OCLP). . . . . 79 

Figure 1.53.The undulating southern edge of the South Lawn after 

restoration, looking west, 2000. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 

Figure 1.54. South Lawn after restoration, looking west, 2000. Note the 

restored grass bay that climbs the west slope beneath the former Clark house 

in the distance. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 

Figure 1.55. Accessible concrete walk to the building’s visitor 

entrance, installed during landscape restoration, looking northwest, ca. 

2001. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 

Figure 1.57. Reset stone edging bordering the southern planting bed in the 

Hollow, looking southeast, 1996. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 

Figure 1.56. Reset stone steps in the Hollow, looking southwest, 2000. (Jack 

Boucher/HABS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 

x 
 

 

Figure 1.58. Restored features of the Front Drive, looking southwest through 

the spruce pole arch, 2001. Note the stone dust surface of the circular drive, 

the chip-seal transition apron in the foreground, the reset bluestone and 

puddingstone curb, and the restored rustic fagstone walk. (OCLP) . . . . . . 82 

Figure 1.59. Path through the Rock Garden, looking east, 1994. (OCLP) . . . . . 83 

Figure 1.60. Restored stone dust path through the Rock Garden, looking 

east, 2000. Note the shrub and herbaceous plantings and the stones lining 

the path. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 

Figure 1.61. Installation of new base material in the service court during site 

infrastructure improvements. Looking northwest, 2008. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 90 

Figure 1.62. Condenser units for HVAC system installed between 2010 and 

2012 on the north facade of the ofce wing. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 

Figure 1.63. Wayfnding signage at Fairsted’s northern boundary along 

Dudley Street, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 

Figure 1.64. Interpretive wayside panel at the northeast corner of the park 

area, looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 

Figure 1.65. Service drive with recently-restored crushed stone and stone 

dust surface. Looking south, 2014.(OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 

Figure 1.66. Granite steps and landing providing accessible entry 

to the breezeway between the barn and the house, looking southwest, 2021. 

(OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 

Figure 1.67. Front elevation from construction documents for the granite 

steps and landing at the breezeway between the barn and the house, 2014. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 

Figure 1.68. Reconstruction of the spruce pole archway, 2022. (OCLP) . . . . . 94 

Figure 1.69. Removal of a limb from the original Olmsted elm as an attempt 

to stabilize the tree. Looking northeast, 2010. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 

Figure 1.70. Crew removing the fnal section of the trunk of the original 

Olmsted elm, looking northeast, 2011. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 

Figure 1.71. Archeological work in the vicinity of the former Olmsted elm, 

prior to removal of the stump. Looking northeast, 2011. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . 96 

Figure 1.72. Young participants of the NPS Branching Out program and 

students from the William H. Lincoln Elementary School assist park staf 

in planting the replacement Olmsted elm in 2013. (Matt Teuten). . . . . . . . . . 97 

xi 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, GREEN HILL PARCEL 

Figure 2.1. Section of the spruce pole fence along Warren Street at the edge of 

the Green Hill parcel, looking southeast, 2020. Shortly after this photograph 

was taken, the fence was restored. Note the historic stone wall beneath the 

fence. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 

Figure 2.2. Vista to the Green Hill parcel from Fairsted’s South Lawn, looking 

south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .100 

Figure 2.3. Arborist climbing a large tree at the Green Hill parcel in 2003, 

soon after park acquisition of the site. Note the dense woody vegetation 

that characterized much of the landscape. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .102 

Figure 2.4. Treatment Plan for the Green Hill parcel, Option 1. (OCLP) . . . . .103 

Figure 2.5. Treatment Plan for the Green Hill parcel, Option 2. (OCLP) . . . . .103 

Figure 2.6. Tree removal work at the northern boundary of the Green Hill 

parcel, looking north, 2005. Note the former Clark sisters’ house in the 

background. (NPS). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105 

Figure 2.7. Historic stone wall along Warren Street at the eastern boundary 

of the Green Hill parcel before restoration, looking east, 2019. (OCLP) . . . . .106 

Figure 2.8. Mason restoring a portion of the historic stone wall along Warren 

Street, looking north, 2019. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106 

Figure 2.9. Section of the spruce pole fence along Warren Street at the eastern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, looking north, 2015. At the time, only 

three short sections of the fence remained. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .107 

Figure 2.10. Section of the deteriorated spruce pole fence along Warren 

Street at the eastern boundary of the Green Hill parcel, looking south, 2020. 

Note the metal support brace on the inside of the fence to the left. (OCLP) . . .107 

Figure 2.11. Scafolding constructed atop the historic stone wall at the 

eastern boundary of the Green Hill parcel as part of the spruce pole fence 

reconstruction project, looking southwest, 2020. (Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . .108 

Figure 2.12. Contractors reconstructing the spruce pole fence at the edge 

of the Green Hill parcel along Warren Street, looking west, 2020. (Olmsted 

NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .108 

Figure 2.13. Reconstructed section of the spruce pole fence along Warren 

Street at the edge of the Green Hill parcel, looking south, 2020. (Olmsted NHS)109 

Figure 2.14. Galvanized steel pipes incorporated into bracing system installed 

on western side of reconstructed spruce pole fence, looking east, 2021. 

(Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109 

Figure 2.15. Rhododendrons in the screen zone along the eastern edge of 

the Green Hill parcel soon after planting, looking northeast, 2019. (Olmsted 

NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 

xii 
 

 

 

Figure 2.16. A variety of understory shrubs in the screen zone along the 

eastern edge of the Green Hill parcel soon after planting, looking north, 

2019. (Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 

Figure 2.17. An area of the screen zone along the eastern edge of the Green 

Hill parcel, recently planted with understory shrubs, looking south, 2019. 

(Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 

Figure 2.18. Archeologists digging test pits in the screen zone along Warren 

Street before planting, looking southeast, 2019. (Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . . .111 

Figure 2.19. Archeological work underway before the installation of 

plantings in the screen zone along Warren Street, looking southeast, 2019. 

(Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111 

Figure 2.20. Archeologist investigating contents of test pit before planting 

began in screen zone along Warren Street, 2019. (Olmsted NHS) . . . . . . . . .111 

EXISTING CONDITIONS 

Figure 3.1. Fairsted, looking northeast across the South Lawn from the west 

slope, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113 

Figure 3.2. View of the Green Hill parcel, looking east toward the woodland 

zone from the meadow zone, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114 

Figure 3.3. Longfellow House-Washington’s Headquarters National Historic 

Site, 2007. (NPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115 

Figure 3.4. John Fitzgerald Kennedy National Historic Site, date unknown. 

(NPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115 

Figure 3.5. The Coolidge Corner neighborhood of Brookline, date unknown. 

The MBTA Green Line trolley is pictured to the left. (Town of Brookline). . . .116 

Figure 3.6. Warren Street, which runs along the eastern boundary of Olmsted 

NHS, looking northwest, 2021. The spruce pole fence along the eastern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel is visible on the opposite side of Warren 

Street. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .117 

Figure 3.7. Brookline Reservoir Park, date unknown. (Town of Brookline) . . .117 

Figure 3.8. Northeast corner of Fairsted, looking south across Dudley Street 

soon after reconstruction of the spruce pole fence, 2022. (OCLP). . . . . . . . .118 

Figure 3.9. View toward Fairsted’s southeast corner from the South Lawn, 

2021. Note the dense plantings of trees and shrubs along the parcel’s edge. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .118 

Figure 3.10. The Hollow’s large puddingstone outcropping overgrown with 

vines (back) and the dry-laid stone wall at the northern edge of the Front 

Drive, looking northeast, 2016. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119 

xiii 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

 

Figure 3.11. Spruce pole fence and archway at Fairsted’s eastern boundary 

with Warren Street, looking northwest, 2022. Fairsted’s Front Drive passes 

through the archway. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119 

Figure 3.12. The historic stone wall at Fairsted’s southern boundary with 

the Green Hill parcel, looking east, 2016. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120 

Figure 3.13. NPS site identifcation sign at the northeast corner of Fairsted, 

looking south, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120 

Figure 3.14. The southern facade of the historic Fairsted house from the 

South Lawn, looking north, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121 

Figure 3.15. The historic front entrance on the eastern facade of the Fairsted 

house, looking northwest from the Front Drive, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . .121 

Figure 3.16. Fairsted’s historic ofce wing, looking south from Dudley Street, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .121 

Figure 3.17. Historic barn (center) connected to the house’s service wing 

by a breezeway (left), looking west from the service area courtyard, 2021. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 

Figure 3.18. The historic shed built into the slope at the western edge of the 

parking area, looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 

Figure 3.19. Fairsted’s front entrance archway, looking southeast from the 

Front Drive, 2022. Note the fagstone walkway running beneath the archway 

to the left. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .123 

Figure 3.20. The Front Drive, looking southwest from beneath the spruce 

pole arch, 2021. Note the drive’s circular arrangement and the central bed 

planted with a mature hemlock and shade-tolerant shrubs and herbaceous 

species. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124 

Figure 3.21. Accessible parking area at the southeastern edge of the circular 

Front Drive, looking southeast, 2021. Note the border planting of trees 

and shrubs between the parking area and the spruce pole fence, which is 

obscured in the distance. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124 

Figure 3.22. Accessible concrete walk leading to the house’s visitor entrance 

from the front drive, looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125 

Figure 3.23. View down into the Hollow from the Front Drive, looking 

northwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 

Figure 3.24. The Hollow, looking southeast, 2021. The large Roxbury 

puddingstone outcropping (center back) is complemented by designed 

landscape elements to create the space’s picturesque character. A section of 

the spruce pole fence along Warren Street is visible east of the outcropping. 

(OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 

Figure 3.25. Segment of the stone dust path in the Hollow, looking northwest 

toward the ofce wing, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127 

xiv 
 

Figure 3.26. Rustic stone steps that connect the Hollow to the 

concrete visitor entrance path above. Looking southwest from the 

Hollow path, 2022. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127 

Figure 3.27. The central planting bed in the Hollow, looking southeast, 2021. 

A fre thorn shrub is pictured at center in the western end of the planting 

bed. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .127 

Figure 3.28. Yew (left) and drooping leucothoe (right) fank a small grotto in 

the stone retaining wall along the southeastern edge of the Hollow, looking 

south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .128 

Figure 3.29. Northern edge of Rock Garden, looking south from the lawn 

area south of the Front Drive, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 

Figure 3.30. Stone dust path winding through the Rock Garden, looking 

south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .129 

Figure 3.31. Border planting of trees and shrubs between the Rock Garden’s 

central mound and the spruce pole fence along Warren Street to the east. 

Looking southeast, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .130 

Figure 3.32. Granite outcropping and crabapple (left) standing at western 

edge of the Rock Garden, looking south, 2021. The historic borrowed vista 

into the Green Hill parcel is visible in the distance. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . .131 

Figure 3.33. South Lawn, looking northeast toward the historic house, 2021. 

A young elm, the successor of the historic Olmsted elm, is visible near the 

center of the lawn to the right. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131 

Figure 3.34. Sinuous border plantings at the southwestern corner of the 

South Lawn, including a bay of grass that climbs the western slope (right). 

Looking southwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 

Figure 3.35. Northwest corner of South Lawn, bordered by dense planting 

on the west slope (left), looking northwest, 2021. The park’s reserve garden 

is located beyond the trees near the center of the image. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . .133 

Figure 3.36. Planting bed near northwest corner of South Lawn, looking 

northeast, 2021. The lattice fence surrounding the laundry yard is visible 

beyond the shrubs in the planting bed. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .133 

Figure 3.37. Entrance to the service drive from Dudley Street, looking south, 

2021. The parking area is located through the gap in the spruce pole fence 

to the right. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .134 

Figure 3.38. Parking area, looking southeast toward the house’s ofce wing, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135 

Figure 3.39. Ofce courtyard, looking southeast, 2021. The space is defned 

by the facades of the planting department (right), drafting wing (center), 

and plan vault (left). (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .135 

xv 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.40. Northeast corner of the service yard, looking northeast, 2022. 

Note the planting bed with mature Hinoki false cypress (Chamaecyparis 

obtusa) (right) and threadleaf false cypress (Chamaecyparis pisifera ‘Filifera’) 

(left), which were both removed later the same year. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . .136 

Figure 3.41. Laundry yard, looking southwest, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . .136 

Figure 3.43. Wooded area within the screen zone near the Green Hill parcel’s 

southeastern corner, looking south, 2021. Note the wooden fence along the 

parcel boundary with a private abutter to the south. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . .137 

Figure 3.42. The barnyard, looking south, 2021 (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .137 

Figure 3.44. View of an area within the Green Hill parcel’s meadow zone, 

looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 

Figure 3.45. Fescue meadow at the northern edge of the Green Hill parcel, 

looking north toward Fairsted, 2021. Note the glimpse of the Fairsted house 

through the vegetation along the parcel boundary. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 

Figure 3.46. Private drive running through a .15-acre lot at the Green Hill 

parcel on which that park holds an access easement, looking southwest, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139 

Figure 3.47. Warren Street and the spruce pole fence at the eastern boundary 

of the Green Hill parcel, looking southwest, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . .139 

Figure 3.48. An area within the woodland zone at the Green Hill parcel, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .141 

Figure 3.49. Screen zone along the Green Hill parcel’s eastern boundary, 

looking south, 2021. Note the recently planted rhodoendrons near the 

center of the image and the spruce pole fence to the left. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . .141 

Figure 3.50. A young eastern redbud in the screen zone, looking northeast, 

2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142 

Figure 3.51. Rhododendron planting wrapping around the southeast corner 

of the Green Hill parcel in winter, looking southeast, 2022. (OCLP) . . . . . . .143 

Figure 3.52. An area of the open meadow subzone, 2021. Note the goldenrod 

in the foreground. (OCLP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .143 

Figure 3.53. Fescue meadow subzone, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) . . . . . . .144 

xvi 
DRAWINGS 

EXISTING CONDITIONS 

Drawing 1. Existing Conditions, Fairsted 145 

Drawing 2. Existing Conditions, Green Hill Parcel 147 

TABLES 

RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 

Table 2.1. Numbering System for Fairsted Historic Plant Inventory 28 

Table 2.2. List of Plants in Herbarium Collection 29 

Table 2.3. Plants Propagated at the Arnold Arboretum, 1991–1996 31 

Table 2.4. Summary Results of Tree Coring 39 

Table 2.5. Summary of Trees Removed, Fall 1994 54 

Table 2.6. Summary of Shrubs Removed, Fall 1994 60 

Table 2.7. Summary of Trees Planted, 1991–2000 65 

Table 2.8. Summary of Shrubs Planted, 1994–2000 71 

Table 2.9. Summary of Herbaceous Materials Planted, 1997–2000 77 

xvii 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

xviii 
Foreword

 

FOREWORD 

Since 1979, the National Park Service has cared for the historic buildings, 

landscape, and archival and museum collections at Fairsted, the former home 

and ofce of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. in Brookline, Massachusetts. As the site 

of the frst full-scale landscape architecture ofce in the United States and the 

residence of the profession’s American founder, Fairsted is signifcant for its role 

in the design of notable public and private landscapes throughout the country. 

Beyond these associations, the Fairsted landscape is signifcant as a work executed 

by Olmsted, Sr. and his sons, John Charles and Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. 

In the 43 years since the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site was 

established at Fairsted, the National Park Service has worked to preserve and 

enhance the 1.76-acre landscape’s historic character. This report documents these 

eforts to beneft current and future landscape stewards and the wider public who 

might be interested in the evolution of this distinctive landscape. 

The period between 1993 and 2001 is particularly crucial to Fairsted’s recent 

history. During these years, a team composed of National Park Service staf, 

institutional partners, and consultants collaborated on a major project to restore 

the landscape to its ca. 1930 character by applying expertise in landscape 

architecture, archival research, archeology, horticulture, and landscape 

maintenance. This ambitious efort is documented here in detail. However, 

preservation work at Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site is ongoing, 

and this report documents projects completed through 2021 at Fairsted and at the 

adjacent 5.31-acre Green Hill parcel, which the park acquired in 2001 to preserve 

Fairsted’s historic setting. 

As we celebrate the 200th anniversary of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr.’s birth in 

2022, we refect on his legacy and the continued power of his works to capture 

public imagination. We also look toward the future, when new generations will be 

called upon to manage and protect Fairsted and other historic landscapes. With 

the publication of this volume, they will have one more valuable tool to aid them 

in that work. 

Jay Newman 

Superintendent, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

xix 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

xx 
Acknowledgments

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The authors of this report are grateful that their work could intersect with those 

who have lovingly tended the Fairsted landscape since November 1979, when 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site was established. All past and 

present staf members and volunteers at this vibrant public institution have been 

stewards of a most remarkable legacy. This long caretaking has required the 

dedication of so many individuals, from superintendents to gardeners, archivists 

to landscape architects, park rangers to park planners, horticulturists, historians, 

budget analysts, and community activists. 

With the completion of this report, more stewards can be added to the list, 

including Devon King, an architectural historian who joined the efort through a 

partnership with the National Council for Preservation Education. Devon worked 

with draft materials prepared in 2001 by former Olmsted Center preservation 

planning supervisor Lauren Meier to document the 1994–1999 landscape 

restoration project, which Lauren led. Beyond formatting and editing Lauren’s 

detailed draft documents, Devon also recorded other landscape treatment 

actions undertaken between 2001 and the present, many of which involved the 

neighboring Green Hill parcel, 5.31 acres of land added to the national historic 

site in 2001. Devon handed of his work to landscape architect James Mealey who 

accomplished additional formatting and edits to the document under the guidance 

of Olmsted Center Director Bob Page and Preservation Planning Manager Eliot 

Foulds. 

Present staf of the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site have greatly 

contributed to this work, and have provided valuable input, beginning with Jill 

Trebbe, Site Manager for Frederick Law Olmsted NHS and John Fitzgerald 

Kennedy NHS, who served as the project point of contact, and provided 

comments, direction and guidance. Facility Manager Scott Fletcher shared his 

ofce space with the project team and shared his knowledge of recent park 

projects and provided comments on draft submittals. Former gardener Mona 

McKindley provided her personal retrospective on the implementation of the 

1990s restoration project and site caretaking up until her retirement. Current 

gardener Aaron Erzinger carefully read draft submittals and provided detailed 

comments, relating current caretaking issues to the project team. Archivist 

Michele Clark provided review comments, encouragement, and most tangibly, 

a welcoming space for Devon to work and access to scanning equipment within 

the park’s curatorial wing. We further ofer our gratitude to Superintendent Jason 

Newman and Administrative Ofcer Lauren Downing for their leadership and 

xxi 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

for providing the supportive administrative and organizational environment that 

made our work both possible and enjoyable. 

Although the completion of this document has been a long time coming, we are 

pleased to have completed it during 2022; this year being noteworthy as the 200th 

anniversary year of Frederick Law Olmsted Sr.’s birth. As a capstone to over thirty 

years of active landscape stewardship which has occupied so many hearts and 

minds, it is our great hope that this report will be accessible for discovery and 

consultation by future generations of Fairsted’s landscape stewards. 

xxii 
Introduction

INTRODUCTION 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site was established in 1979 to preserve 

and interpret Fairsted, the home and professional ofce setting of renowned 

American landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. (1822–1903). Resources 

at Fairsted include signifcant archival collections related to the Olmsted frm’s 

work and a historic designed landscape that surrounds former residential and 

ofce building wings (Figure 0.1). The 1.75-acre property is located at 99 Warren 

Street in the Brookline Hills area of Brookline, Massachusetts, a wealthy “streetcar 

suburb” located fve miles west of downtown Boston. In 2001, the park acquired 

the neighboring Green Hill parcel, 5.31 acres of undeveloped land immediately 

south of Fairsted that was historically part of a larger estate owned by the Gardner 

family (Figure 0.2). 

Today, the park landscape encompasses 7.06 acres across Fairsted and the 

Green Hill parcel. Four historic buildings and ten historic structures are found 

at Fairsted, a historic “site” designated as the “Fairsted Grounds” in National 

Register of Historic Places documentation. The Green Hill parcel is separately 

recorded in the National Register as part of the Green Hill Historic District, which 

encompasses 34 historic properties in the residential neighborhood south of 

Fairsted. In fall of 2021, an updated National Register nomination was submitted 

to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Ofcer. This nomination, which 

would expand the park’s historic site boundary to include the Green Hill parcel, 

remains under review. 

Figure 0.1. Fairsted, looking northeast 

from the west slope toward the 

building complex, 2021. The young 

Jefferson elm that replaced the 

historic Olmsted elm in 2015 is 

pictured to the right, standing near 

the center of the South Lawn. (OCLP) 

1 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.2. View of a portion of the 

Green Hill parcel, looking southwest, 

2021. (OCLP) 

The designed landscape at Fairsted exhibits in microcosm many of the design 

principles employed in the Olmsted frm’s public and private commissions. 

After Olmsted’s purchase of the property in 1883, pre-existing buildings and 

structures were modifed and embellished to form an interconnected complex 

serving as both the Olmsted family residence and the ofces where the design 

frm, under a succession of business names, produced a vast portfolio of work. 

After the National Park Service acquired the 1.75-acre Fairsted property in 

1979, site managers and caretakers initially restored the grounds to refect the 

landscape’s ca. 1960 appearance. Following a 1987 amendment to the park’s 

General Management Plan, the park leadership initiated an ambitious program of 

research, planning and treatment aimed at restoring the buildings and grounds to 

their appearance in ca. 1930, when the number of design commissions pursued by 

the Olmsted frm was at a high point. 

In 1992, the park assembled a complex project team to support the landscape 

restoration project, including outside consultants, university partners, as well 

as National Park Service historical landscape architects and preservation 

horticulturists. The latter established a cohort of National Park Service specialists 

within the emerging feld of cultural landscape preservation. This cohort worked 

alongside park leadership, administration, and facility managers at Fairsted. 

Working in the same building as those who would ultimately care for the restored 

landscape made it quite impossible for the project team to deal in idealized 

solutions, or to otherwise downplay the practical constraints or frustrations 

imposed on the project by the perennial limits on maintenance staf and resources. 

Soon enough, word spread to staf working at other national park units in 

the greater Boston area that there was a team of in-house cultural landscape 

specialists at work in Brookline. With only a phone call, the Fairsted restoration 

2 
Introduction

project team could be reached to provide consultation and hands-on assistance to 

other local national parks confronting troublesome landscape preservation issues. 

In this way, the Fairsted restoration efort hatched the concept for a new National 

Park Service program. Having its origins at the Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site, the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation has been assisting 

national parks of the northeastern United States, and beyond, with landscape 

research, planning, and preservation maintenance for the past thirty years. 

PROJECT BACKGROUND 

The completion of this report places a capstone on a remarkable sequence of 

research, planning and treatment that have returned the Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site landscape to the general layout and specifc conditions 

existing during the early 1930s. Organized with present and future landscape 

stewards in mind, this report covers episodes of landscape treatment undertaken 

on the original 1.75 acre Fairsted property acquired in 1979, as well as treatment 

work undertaken on the adjacent and much larger 5.31 acre Green Hill Parcel 

acquired in 2001. 

Historic buildings and structures at Fairsted include the primary dwelling, the 

attached ofce wing, and a free-standing barn and storage shed. Landscape 

features include a picturesque sunken garden referred to as “The Hollow”; a 

“Rock Garden” featuring a meandering path lined with boulders and mountain 

laurel (Kalmia latifolia); a sweeping “South Lawn” centered upon a specimen 

American elm (Ulmus americana) tree and edged with an undulating border 

planting, interrupted by a gap that provides for a “borrowed” rural view into the 

adjacent Green Hill property. The nearly circular “Front Drive” and rear “Service 

Areas” provide access to buildings and their immediate landscape environs. 

The Green Hill National Register Historic District borders the Fairsted site to the 

south and the Town Green National Register Historic District borders the site 

to the north and east. Fairsted is one of 96 historic properties in Brookline listed 

on the National Register of Historic Places.1

 In 1980, the Nature Conservancy 

acquired the 5.31-acre Green Hill parcel, comprised of six contiguous building 

lots formerly belonging to the adjacent Gardner estate. The parcel was 

subsequently transferred to the Brookline Conservation Land Trust in 1981. In 

1998, the 105th Congress authorized federal acquisition of the property, which 

took place in December 2001. 

The National Park Service uses cultural landscape reports as the primary 

treatment document for cultural landscapes and as a tool to inform long-term 

landscape management. This report is the fourth of four volumes to address the 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site landscape. Fairsted, A Cultural 

3 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Volume 

I: Site History was completed by Zaitzevsky and Associates, with an afterword 

penned by Mac Griswold, and published in 1997 by the Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation, in partnership with the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard 

University. This frst volume documents the Fairsted landscape history from a time 

prior to its purchase by Olmsted until 1994, including an account of preliminary 

plans for upcoming restoration work. 

Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 

Volume II: Existing Conditions, Analysis and Treatment, was completed in draft 

between 1993 and 1995 by Lauren Meier of the Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation. This report remained in draft as the park focused on implementing 

landscape restoration work. In 2017, Chris Beagan of the Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation served as project manager to consolidate the draft under 

a single cover and to fnalize the report. As published in 2017, this second volume 

documents the 1994 conditions of the 1.75-acre Fairsted landscape, provides an 

analysis of its historic appearance, and outlines detailed recommendations for 

the removal of non-historic vegetation and restoration of plantings and surface 

treatments. The exhaustively researched narrative and graphic description of ca. 

1930 landscape conditions is foundational in identifying required tree removals, 

new tree, shrub and herbaceous plantings, and minor changes to pathways and 

small-scale features necessary to evoke the past. 

Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel – Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site: Site History, Analysis and Evaluation, Treatment, was 

prepared by Christopher Beagan and Angelina Jones of the Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation and published in 2017, sixteen years after the acquisition 

of the adjacent property by the federal government. The research for this project 

was begun in 2013, when Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf 

were tasked with documenting the construction or installation of key surviving 

landscape features, including the stone wall and spruce pole fence along Warren 

Street, as well as the historic character of ornamental plantings found within the 

National Park Service owned parcels. The 2017 report also outlines alternatives 

for the repair of the stone wall and pole fence along Warren Street, replanting of 

ornamental vegetation, management of invasive plants, and the perpetuation of 

the historic viewshed between Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel. 

An initial draft of the Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site, Volume III: Record of Treatment was completed in 2001, 

summarizing alterations occurring between 1979–1994 and documenting with 

more detail those interventions and treatment tasks completed between 1995– 

2001 to restore the landscape to ca. 1930 conditions. Given the 2001 acquisition 

of the neighboring 5.31-acre Green Hill parcel, planning and project priorities 

became refocused on establishing baseline documentation to guide management 

4 
Introduction

of this new parcel of land. The 2001 record of treatment report for Fairsted has 

remained since that time a useful draft document. Much of the content of the 

2001 draft report has been adapted and updated for inclusion in the present 

volume. 

In the feld of historic preservation, the term “treatment” is understood as those 

interventions or undertakings, beyond basic maintenance, aiming to perpetuate 

historic character, or alternatively to remove or add features to accurately refect 

an earlier time. Treatment very often includes thoughtful changes to historic fabric 

and historic relationships to accommodate a new, appropriate use. The following 

report, as the fourth of four volumes, provides a record of the restoration 

treatments at Fairsted, and preservation and rehabilitation treatments at Green 

Hill. This volume, along with those that precede it, will serve as a repository of 

institutional memory regarding those many tasks planned and undertaken over 

approximately thirty years; a vital resource for both park leadership and park 

caretakers responsible for delivering this place, unimpaired, for the use and 

enjoyment of future generations. 

PROJECT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 

This document provides a record of landscape preservation planning and 

treatment from 1993 to the present, a written and graphic description of 

existing landscape conditions, and seasonal guidance for annual landscape care. 

The project was initiated and completed between 2020–2022, collaboratively 

between Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf, park staf, and 

associate team members contributing to the work through a partnership with 

the National Council for Preservation Education. The project team was further 

supplemented through a limited professional services contract with the site’s 

former staf gardener. National Council for Preservation Education partners, 

with guidance from senior staf, took on an unusually high level of leadership of 

the project, including planning and leading web-based meetings and workshops 

and conducting telephone interviews with retired staf involved with planning the 

2003–2007 landscape treatment project. 

Site visits and feld work took place between June and August 2021. Research and 

writing took place between August and December. Editing and formatting of the 

document took place during the early months of 2022. The completed document 

preserves a useful record of the original 1993–2001 program of landscape 

restoration treatment, and also post-2001 treatment measures directed toward 

both the original 1.75 acre Fairsted property as well as the 5.31 acre Green Hill 

parcel. 

5 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

The organization and content of the originally proposed record of treatment 

project was developed through follow-up consultations with the Northeast 

Cultural Resources Center in Lowell, Massachusetts, the Northeast Museum 

Services Center in Boston, Massachusetts and the Denver Service Center in 

Denver, Colorado. Architects and museum specialists in these centers provided 

assistance, both in locating samples of fnal construction reports as well as 

discussing archival documentation and record-keeping methods. As a result, it was 

decided that the general outline for the record of treatment project would include 

a summary of the treatment work in narrative form, complemented by charts and 

lists, as well as copies of critical documents created as part of project work. The 

structure for this fnalized 2022 record of treatment document is largely based 

upon the original outline. 

Information gathered for this Record of Treatment is derived from various 

sources, including: 

•	 Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation project fles 

•	 Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site maintenance division fles 

and feld records, administrative records, and management records 

•	 Published and unpublished reports such as the park’s Administrative 

History, Historic Grounds Report, General Management Plan, prior 

Cultural Landscape Report volumes for Fairsted, Cultural Landscape 

Report for the Green Hill Parcel, Cultural Landscapes Inventory, and 

others 

•	 Photographs and slides collected by National Park Service staf from 

1980 to present 

•	 Plans and drawings produced by the National Park Service and 

consultants between 1980 and the present related to the Fairsted and 

Green Hill parcel landscapes 

•	 Historical records from the Olmsted Archives 

•	 Oral interviews with National Park Service staf, Arnold Arboretum staf, 

and others knowledgeable about the project 

•	 Site survey completed in September 1999 by Bryant Associates, Inc. and 

revised in summer 2001 by Justin Berthiaume, Landscape Architect, 

National Park Service, Boston Support Ofce 

•	 Photo documentation completed by Paul Rocheleau in 1994, for the book 

Frederick Law Olmsted: Designing the American Landscape, and by Jack 

Boucher, in July 2000, for the Historic American Buildings Survey 

6 
Introduction

This volume is organized into three chapters. The frst chapter details treatment 

projects implemented at Fairsted between 1993–2021, with a primary focus on 

the landscape restoration that took place between 1993–2001 and restored the 

landscape’s ca. 1930 character. Most content related to the 1993–2001 restoration 

is adapted from the record of treatment report draft completed in 2001. The 

second chapter documents landscape treatment at the Green Hill parcel since the 

park’s 2001 acquisition of the historic Gardner family property. Finally, the third 

chapter provides an illustrated narrative description of the existing landscape 

conditions at Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel in 2021. The report’s three 

chapters are supplemented by several appendices which include a treatment 

chronology, landscape treatment plans, compliance documentation, and 

landscape maintenance guidelines. 

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND TREATMENT OVERVIEW 

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT, FAIRSTED 

When Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. acquired the Clark sisters’ home in 1883, the 

property featured a ca. 1810 farmhouse with a detached barn, fruit trees, and a 

small pasture on a rocky slope. Following construction of a new Shingle-style 

residence for the Clark sisters at the western edge of Fairsted, a condition of the 

sale, Olmsted immediately began to alter the existing landscape and buildings to 

match both his aesthetic vision and practical needs, including the addition of a 

substantial ofce wing to the original house. The overall structure of the Fairsted 

landscape was in place by 1900 and remains extant today. Between 1900 and 1930, 

the ofce wing footprint remained the same, however the building was expanded 

with the signifcant addition of a second story. 

The evolution of the Fairsted landscape is directly related to both the occupants 

of the house and, later, the partners who led the design frms. What little is known 

about the pre-existing character of the Clark sisters’ farmstead is described in the 

frst volume of the Cultural Landscape Report for Fairsted. A photograph in the 

archives of the Brookline Historical Society shows a view of the Clark farmstead 

from Warren Street before Olmsted’s 1883 acquisition of the property (Figure 

0.3). Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and his son John Charles Olmsted are largely 

responsible for creating the picturesque appearance and site organization that has 

characterized the Fairsted landscape for the last century (Figure 0.4). 

After Olmsted, Sr.’s 1895 retirement and subsequent death in 1903, Frederick Law 

Olmsted, Jr. and his stepbrother John Charles continued to manage the ofce and 

the Fairsted landscape. Most of the alterations made by the two Olmsted brothers 

consisted of minor planting improvements. However, as the ofce wing expanded 

7 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.3. A rare photograph 

depicting the 1810 Clark house before 

its 1883 acquisition by Frederick 

Law Olmsted, Sr. and subsequent 

modifcations, looking northwest 

from Warren Street. (Brookline 

Historical Society) 

and employee automobiles became 

more prevalent, the service areas 

and Hollow were re-worked 

several times between 1900–1930 

to accommodate new building 

additions and parking. During the 

last era of the Olmsted Brothers’ 

leadership between 1940–1963, 

the frm continued to maintain the 

landscape, replacing vegetation and 

repairing other features as needed. 

During the Olmsted Associates 

tenure, 1963–1979, the partners 

in the design frm made several 

changes to the landscape including 

constructing an above-ground 

swimming pool on the South Lawn, 

constructing a brick terrace and 

herb garden, and enhancing the 

Hollow with fowering shrubs. 

The remainder of this section comprises a summary of the historical development 

of the Fairsted landscape, the original 1.75-acre parcel that once served as the 

home and ofce of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. his sons, and successors in the 

practice of landscape architecture. This parcel composed the entirety of the 

land holdings belonging to the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

between 1979 and 2001, before acquisition of the Green Hill parcel. The historical 

summary is organized by fve distinct landscape zones that can be traced to the 

Figure 0.4. Fairsted’s South Lawn, with the 

Olmsted elm at its center, looking northeast 

toward the house, pre-1903. (Photo #673-51, 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

Archives) 

8 
Introduction

designed landscape’s origins at the end of the nineteenth century and have been 

delineated in prior National Park Service reports. The practice of zoning the 

landscape in this way helps to organize the historic narrative and to assist the 

reader in locating features described in this report. 

Front Drive 

Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. created the Front Drive, or carriage turn-around, 

in 1884 to provide a new primary entrance to the property, which was both 

aesthetically improved and suitable for his home and ofce setting. Olmsted 

designated separate service and front entrances when designing Fairsted, thus 

moving the house’s original main entrance from the southern to the eastern 

facade. To accomplish this, Olmsted, Sr. and John Charles constructed a Roxbury 

puddingstone retaining wall at the area’s low point, creating a fat plane on which 

the carriage turn is located as well as a distinct grade separation between the 

Front Drive and adjacent Hollow. The drive enters Fairsted from Warren Street 

through a rustic spruce pole archway and encircles a central planting bed featuring 

a mature Canadian hemlock (Figures 0.5, 0.6). At the base of the retaining wall on 

the northern edge of the drive, a narrow rustic bluestone walk also enters from 

Warren Street, under the spruce pole arch to the ofce entrance (Figure 0.7). 

Hollow 

The Hollow is a natural topographic depression featuring the lowest elevation on 

the Fairsted parcel. Originally a simple rocky basin with a few fruit trees, Olmsted, 

Sr. created the distinct grade separation in 1884 with the puddingstone retaining 

wall between the Hollow and the Front Drive. During Olmsted’s frst years at 

Fairsted, the Hollow provided for a rustic walk through the rocky outcroppings 

and remnant orchards to the Service Area to the northwest. The construction of 

the clerical department (built in 1890 as a drafting room for Olmsted, Sr.) and the 

lower and upper draft rooms (1891 and 1911, respectively) changed the character 

of the Hollow dramatically. The new buildings enclosed the Hollow along the 

space’s western edge, creating a distinct landscape room visible from the entry 

drive, main ofce entrance and from the interiors of the drafting rooms (Figure 

0.8). As a result, the Hollow became the most observable part of the Fairsted 

landscape to the men working in the ofce. By 1895, the path through the Hollow 

had been extended to form a complete loop so that one could walk around a 

central planting bed (Figures 0.9, 0.10). 

Rock Garden 

The Rock Garden, like the Hollow, was enhanced from a pre-existing natural 

feature, a large rock outcropping that is evident in the earliest site survey dating 

from ca. 1883. Although grading plans for the Rock Garden have not been located, 

9 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.5. The rustic spruce pole 

archway that marks Fairsted’s 

entrance from Warren Street, 

looking west before restoration of 

the Fairsted landscape, 1994. (Paul 

Rocheleau) 

Figure 0.6. The Front Drive, looking 

southwest toward the Olmsted 

residence’s historic main entrance, 

2000. The circular drive’s central 

planting bed, containing a mature 

hemlock, is partially visible to the 

left. This photograph depicts the 

landscape soon after restoration. 

(Jack Boucher, HABS) 

Figure 0.7. The spruce pole entrance 

archway soon after reconstruction, 

looking southeast, 2022. The Front 

Drive and a historic bluestone walk 

pass through the archway from 

Warren Street. (OCLP) 

10 
Introduction

Figure 0.8. The western edge of 

the Hollow, bordered by the offce 

complex, looking south before 

landscape restoration, 1994. (Paul 

Rocheleau) 

Figure 0.9. The Hollow soon after 

restoration, looking northwest from 

the Front Drive, 2000. (Jack Boucher, 

HABS) 

Figure 0.10. The Hollow, as seen from 

the Front Drive, looking northwest, 

2021. (OCLP) 

11 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.11. Rock outcropping 

overgrown with English ivy at the 

western edge of the Rock Garden, 

looking east before landscape 

restoration, 1994. (Paul Rocheleau) 

Figure 0.12. The western edge of the 

Rock Garden, looking east from the 

South Lawn soon after landscape 

restoration, 2000. The western end 

of the Rock Garden path is visible 

near the center of the image. (Jack 

Boucher. HABS) 

Figure 0.13. The western edge of the 

Rock Garden, looking east from the 

South Lawn, 2021. The western end 

of the Rock Garden path is visible 

near the center of the image. (OCLP) 

12 
Introduction

it appears that Olmsted, Sr. and John Charles enhanced the natural topography 

around the existing outcroppings to form a rustic mound, heavily planted with 

woodland shrubs and a few trees (Figure 0.11). The topography and general 

vegetative cover of the Rock Garden is evident in a 1904 survey made after 

Olmsted, Sr.’s death and is also seen in several historic photographs. It was heavily 

planted with mountain laurel, viburnum (Viburnum spp.), buckthorn (Rhamnus 

spp.), andromeda (Pieris spp.), rhododendron (Rhododendron spp.), yew (Taxus 

spp.), mock orange (Philadelphus spp.), ferns, and a variety of trees. A small path 

lined with native puddingstone winds through the Rock Garden (Figures 0.12, 

0.13). 

The southeastern corner of the property, contained within the Rock Garden zone, 

was originally created as an embayment of lawn surrounded by shrubs and trees 

as well as a planned footpath running diagonally from the circular front drive 

to Warren Street. Two signifcant trees, an American elm and large cucumber 

magnolia (Magnolia acuminata) mark the boundary between the Front Drive and 

Rock Garden zones. 

South Lawn 

Upon Olmsted’s arrival in 1883, the South Lawn consisted of a small rustic pasture 

with fruit trees and a drive leading up to a detached barn. By moving the barn 

to the rear of the house and relocating the entrance drive to the eastern façade, 

Olmsted created a residential-scale greensward. While several elms existed on 

the site when Olmsted acquired the Fairsted property, he chose one particular 

specimen growing opposite the southern façade of the house as the focal point 

of a new lawn (Figure 0.14). Two other elms were removed from the South Lawn 

area, along with numerous fruit trees. By 1900, the general character of the South 

Lawn, with its undulating tree line faced with shrubs and small trees, was frmly 

established. 

The South Lawn is bordered to the south by a stone wall and dense plantings of 

hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), white pine (Pinus strobus), yew, leucothoe (Leucothoe 

spp.), and andromeda (Figure 0.15). The west slope, part of the larger South Lawn 

zone, gains approximately ffteen feet in elevation as it climbs toward the former 

Clark sisters’ residence (Figure 0.16). The west slope was historically planted with 

pine, linden (Tilia spp.), larch (Larix spp.), hemlock, and yew. A small “reserve 

garden” used as an informal plant nursery to “heel-in” excess plant material 

temporarily is located on the west slope out of view from the main lawn area 

behind the Service Areas shed and barnyard. Around 1960, Artemis Richardson 

made two major additions to the South Lawn area when he constructed an aboveground swimming pool and a brick terrace between the elm and the laundry 

yard and an herb garden along the southern side of the house. The National Park 

13 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.14. The South Lawn, looking 

east before landscape restoration, 

1994. Note the Olmsted elm to the 

left and shrubs along the lawn’s 

undulating southern edge to the 

right. (Paul Rocheleau) 

Figure 0.15. The South Lawn, 

looking west soon after landscape 

restoration, 2000. The Olmsted elm is 

visible at the center of the image and 

the southern facade of the Fairsted 

residence is to the right. Note the 

western slope in the distance and 

the undulating southern edge of the 

lawn to the left. (Jack Boucher, HABS) 

Figure 0.16. The South Lawn and the 

Fairsted building complex, looking 

northeast from the west slope, 2021. 

Note the young Jefferson elm that 

has replaced the historic Olmsted Elm. 

(OCLP) 

14 
Introduction

Service removed these features in 1984, a relatively short time after acquiring the 

property. 

Service Areas 

The Service Areas, defned by the 

courtyard entrance to the ofce 

wing, the rear service entrance to the 

house, and a small parking area, form 

the ffth landscape zone. The spruce 

pole fence and a painted board fence 

delineate these areas. Historically, 

the construction of the ofce wing 

greatly afected the confguration and 

character of the service area. One of 

Olmsted, Sr.’s frst changes to Fairsted 

involved relocating the pre-existing 

barn to a site close to the house, to 

consolidate the location of buildings, 

making possible both the construction 

of a new dwelling for the Clark sisters 

and the sweeping South Lawn. He 

then laid out a new service drive of 

Dudley Street to the northern side of 

the complex of buildings. As early as 

1883 and 1887, site plans show two 

fenced enclosures adjacent to the barn, 

providing for an enclosed laundry yard 

connecting the barn with the service 

wing of the main house. Olmsted constructed a small shed or storehouse at the 

northern end of the west slope (Figure 0.17). 

By 1895, the footprint of the expanded ofce wing completely separated the 

service drive from the Hollow. In 1911, further additions to the freproof brick 

vault and ofce wing formed a small rear courtyard surrounded by buildings 

on three sides (Figure 0.18). In the little entrance courtyard, the frm created 

an idiosyncratic garden that was redesigned at least twice. Later, the Olmsted 

Associates also altered the ofce courtyard, removing the fowering plants and 

adding climbing hydrangea (Hydrangea petiolaris) to the southern wall of the 

vault. In the recent restoration, the roses and other fowering plants present in 

the mid-1920s were replanted in the ofce courtyard, the climbing hydrangea 

was removed and euonymus (Euonymus fortunei) was re-trained to grow on the 

exterior brick walls of the freproof vault. Originally a vegetable or cutting garden, 

the service area parking lot was established in 1926 to accommodate the growing 

Figure 0.17. A set of stepping stones leads to 

the western side of the historic shed in the 

Service Areas, looking northwest, 1994. (Paul 

Rocheleau) 

15 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.18. The offce entrance 

courtyard, looking east soon after 

landscape restoration, 2000. (Jack 

Boucher, HABS) 

number of employee automobiles 

being parked along Dudley Street 

(Figure 0.19). 

TREATMENT OVERVIEW, FAIRSTED 

Beginning in 1980, following federal 

acquisition, the National Park 

Service focused on protection and 

stabilization projects at Fairsted, 

such as emergency drainage repairs, 

building rehabilitation, and the 

removal of features well understood 

to have been introduced after 1960. 

By 1985, the National Park Service 

revised its landscape interpretive objectives, and began working to amend its 

general management plan to enable a restoration of the landscape to its ca. 1930 

appearance. This point in time was an appropriate target for restoration as a 

moment just prior to the Great Depression, during a period of great activity for 

the Olmsted frm. 

Extensive research and planning culminated in a major program of landscape 

restoration at Fairsted, implemented primarily between 1993 and 2001. 

Restoration of the landscape to its ca. 1930 appearance occurred across two 

phases, the frst of which focused on removing non-historic features, including 

more than 1,000 trees (Figure 0.20). The project’s second phase reintroduced 

historic planting schemes and other landscape features that had been lost since 

ca. 1930. By 2001, more than 60 trees and approximately 600 shrubs and vines 

Figure 0.19. The parking area, looking west 

toward the historic shed, 2021. (OCLP) 

16 
Introduction

Figure 0.20. Tree removal work on the 

west slope at the edge of the South 

Lawn, looking west, 1994. (OCLP) 

Figure 0.21. Olmsted NHS staff 

planting shrubs at the southern edge 

of the South Lawn, looking southeast, 

1996. (OCLP) 

had been planted at Fairsted (Figure 0.21). The park has implemented additional 

landscape treatment work at Fairsted since the restoration project concluded in 

2001, including the replacement-in-kind of historic fences and resurfacing of 

historic drives. In 2013, a new elm was planted in the South Lawn to replace the 

historic Olmsted elm, which had succumbed to age and disease in 2011. 

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT, GREEN HILL PARCEL 

It was Isabella Stewart Gardner who apparently named the neighboring former 

Ingersoll property “Green Hill” after her husband John Lowell Gardner II 

inherited the property in 1884. Shortly thereafter, as Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. 

was busy directing his own changes to the Fairsted landscape next door, Mrs. 

Gardner instructed her gardening staf to remove mature trees at Green Hill to 

17 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

create open space in the landscape, improve air fow, and increase the availability 

of sunlight (Figure 0.22). 

The home and grounds, established by the Ingersoll family in 1806, and now 

under the direction of “Mrs. Jack,” soon acquired a separate Italianate garden, a 

Japanese garden and extensive greenhouse facilities. The grounds were featured 

in garden publications during the early twentieth century, including Guy Lowell’s 

“American Gardens.” The Fairsted archives contain grading plans for Green Hill 

prepared between 1886–1887, however the Olmsted frm’s involvement with the 

adjacent Gardner landscape appears to have been limited.2 After Mrs. Gardner’s 

death in 1924, the property was left to her nephew George Peabody Gardner, Jr., 

who after ffty years of ownership, and after divesting peripheral portions of the 

property to others, devised the property to his son and daughter-in-law following 

his 1976 death. In 1980, around the time that Olmsted’s Fairsted was acquired by 

the federal government, the Gardner family deeded 5.31 acres of the estate (as 

six individual building lots) along Warren Street to the Nature Conservancy. In 

turn, the following year, the Nature Conservancy transferred the property to the 

Brookline Land Trust. During the twenty-year ownership of the Green Hill parcel 

by the local land trust, the formerly well-tended estate property became subject to 

greatly reduced maintenance. As specimen trees died, they were left standing in 

place, or remained on the ground after they fell. Expanses of formerly well-tended 

meadow began reverting to a young woodland flled with invasive Norway maple 

saplings. 

TREATMENT OVERVIEW, GREEN HILL PARCEL 

In December 2001, the 5.31-acre Green Hill parcel was transferred from the 

Brookline Conservation Land Trust (BCLT) to the National Park Service. The sixFigure 0.22. View of the Gardner 

family’s Green Hill estate, looking 

south, 1902. The fgure in the right 

side of the image is Isabella Stewart 

Gardner. (Isabella Stewart Gardner 

walking at Green Hill, Guest book 7, 

Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, 

Boston) 

18 
Introduction

lot parcel runs parallel to Warren Street and abuts the stone-wall lined southern 

boundary of the Fairsted property at 99 Warren Street. The parcel is bisected by 

a driveway from Warren Street that serves the historic Gardner mansion at 135 

Warren Street and an adjacent modern residence at 111 Warren Street. Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site holds an access easement on the eastern end 

of the private drive. 

While the Green Hill parcel features no buildings and follows a treatment 

philosophy with management goals far diferent from those of Fairsted, the 

undeveloped landscape supports preservation of Fairsted’s historic setting. 

Landscape treatment projects at the Green Hill parcel have included the removal 

of more than 100 trees, mostly invasive Norway maples that had colonized the site 

during the period of reduced landscape maintenance prior to 2001. The park has 

also restored a historic stone wall and replaced a historic spruce pole fence along 

Warren Street and planted more than 100 subcanopy trees and shrubs near the 

parcel’s eastern edge. 

However, landscape treatment at the Green Hill parcel has primarily been 

implemented through cyclical vegetation management intended to achieve and 

maintain desired landscape character within three distinct landscape zones. The 

remainder of this section provides a description of these zones. In contrast to 

the landscape zones at Fairsted, the zones at the Green Hill parcel derive from 

the park’s present-day management priorities and do not descend from the 

landscape’s historic organization. 

Woodland 

The Woodland Zone encompasses a total area of 1.4 acres and is formed from fve 

small portions of the Green Hill parcel: A strip running along the eastern, Warren 

Street perimeter of the parcel from the Fairsted-Green Hill property boundary 

to the northern side of the 111–135 Warren Street entrance drive; a second strip 

running from the southern side of the entrance drive towards the southern 

property boundary; a small area running between the southern boundary line 

and the 135 Warren Street driveway; and, an area straddling the Fairsted property 

boundary surrounding the former Clark sisters’ house. 

The Woodland Zone’s canopy is composed of mostly deciduous trees of mixed 

native and exotic species and a lower understory (Figure 0.23). The informal stone 

wall which defnes the boundary between Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel is 

found in the Clark sisters’ and Warren Street areas. The stone retaining wall and 

spruce pole fence also defne the eastern boundary of a portion of the Screen 

Zone. 

19 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 0.23. A portion of the 

Woodland Zone near the Green Hill 

parcel’s eastern boundary, looking 

northeast, 2021. Note the spruce pole 

fence that separates the parcel from 

Warren Street to the right. (OCLP) 

Screen 

The Screen Zone, the smallest zone at half an acre, is a sinuous portion of the 

Green Hill parcel running between the southern Woodland zones, Warren Street, 

and the parcel’s southern property boundary. It is composed of a sub-canopy of 

mid-height trees and woody shrubs along with a bufer of herbaceous vegetation, 

primarily rhododendrons (Figure 0.24). The zone’s primary role is to obscure 

views to and from Warren Street and the adjoining residences. 

Open and Fescue Meadow 

The largest zone in the Green Hill parcel, the Open and Fescue Meadow Zone 

extends across approximately 3.4 acres at the core of the property and is divided 

into two subzones. The open meadow subzone contains open areas of grasses and 

Figure 0.24. A portion of the Screen 

Zone along the eastern boundary 

of the Green Hill parcel, looking 

northeast, 2021. Note the recently 

planted rhododendrons near the 

center of the image and the spruce 

pole fence along Warren Street to the 

right. (OCLP) 

20 
Introduction

wildfowers that are sparsely populated with deciduous trees (Figure 0.25). The 

fescue meadow subzone, located along the Fairsted-Green Hill parcel boundary, 

is largely defned by wildfower plantings and meadow grasses (Figure 0.26). The 

fescue meadow subzone is defned by both the Fairsted-Green Hill parcel stone 

wall to the north and complements the historic “borrowed view” of the Green Hill 

parcel from Fairsted’s South Lawn. The western side of this subzone also features 

the entry point to an informal trail that runs along the northern and eastern 

property boundaries to the northern side of the private entrance driveway. 

Figure 0.25. A portion of the Open 

Meadow Subzone at the Green Hill 

parcel, looking west, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 0.26. A portion of the Fescue 

Meadow Subzone near the southern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, 

looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

21 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

ENDNOTES, INTRODUCTION 

1 Based on a NRIS database search, 8/5/01. 

2 Job# 1044, John L. Gardner, Brookline, MA, 1886–1887, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site Archives, Brookline, Massachusetts. 

22 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 

This chapter comprises a detailed account of landscape treatment projects 

that have been completed at Fairsted since 1993. Under National Park Service 

management, the most active period of Fairsted’s landscape treatment occurred 

during two phases between 1993–2001. The frst phase primarily entailed the 

removal of non-historic trees and shrubs, which prepared the landscape for the 

second phase, when new features were introduced to replace historic features that 

had been lost since ca. 1930. Since 2001, staf at Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historical Site have carried out additional landscape treatment projects that have 

contributed to Fairsted’s historic character and contemporary use. 

The frst section of this chapter provides an overview of the extensive research 

and planning that have supported restoration of the Fairsted landscape to 

enhance its ca. 1930 character. This is followed by a description of the creation 

of the treatment plan that has guided the restoration. The chapter’s fnal section 

comprises an account of landscape treatment implementation, including a record 

of specifc tasks that were completed between 1993–2021. The narrative presented 

here has been minimally altered from a draft completed by Lauren Meier in 2001. 

The account of landscape treatment projects after 2001 has been added and minor 

changes to the original text have been made to amend appendix references, revise 

citations, include references to fgures, and update descriptions of the landscape. 

RESEARCH AND TREATMENT PLANNING 

EARLY LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION PROJECTS 

When the National Park Service acquired Fairsted, much of the agency’s attention 

focused on interior work needed to stabilize the building and to make it available 

to visiting researchers. A few landscape stabilization projects were completed to 

improve the condition of woody vegetation, guided by the 1982 Historic Grounds 

Report and Management Plan by Lucinda Whitehill. This report documented 

the existing landscape and prescribed immediate work needed to improve site 

conditions. In 1983, Fairsted’s existing conditions were documented in a detailed 

set of measured drawings produced by a landscape architecture team from the 

University of Virginia and the Historic American Buildings Survey. The 1983 

drawings document the confguration of all structures, trees, and shrubs, and 

would function as the primary site plan for the park over the following decade 

(Figures 1.1, 1.2). 

23 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.1. The University of Virginia and Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) plan showing existing conditions in 1983. Note the 

pool and herb garden adjacent to the South Lawn. (University of Virginia/HABS) 

The 1983 General Management Plan for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site called for a preservation period of 1960 and the removal of non-contributing 

landscape features: a swimming pool and small formal herb garden located 

along the south side of the house. In 1984, the National Park Service removed 

the existing pool, brick terrace and herb garden. This project made a substantial 

impact on the character of the South Lawn, which was dominated for 25 years 

by the swimming pool and terrace. It also helped to slow the deterioration of the 

American elm, known as the “Olmsted Elm,” in the center of the lawn, which 

sufered from root fungus caused in part by the construction of the pool. After the 

pool, terrace, and herb garden were removed, the National Park Service installed 

a stone dust path to connect the parking area with the conservatory, which visitors 

used as the house’s primary entrance (Figure 1.3). This path was modeled in 

part after a pathway seen in ca. 1900 historic photos but did not follow an exact 

historic alignment. Park visitors continued to use the conservatory door as the 

main entrance until changes in the frst-foor rooms made it appropriate to come 

into the house through the historic ofce entrance. 

24 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.2. Axonometric drawing of 

Fairsted produced by the Historic 

American Building Survey in 1983. 

(HABS) 

Figure 1.3. Fairsted, looking north 

from the property’s southern 

boundary with the Green Hill parcel 

before landscape restoration, 1994. 

Note the historic Olmsted Elm, 

standing near the center of the 

South Lawn, and the stone dust path 

leading to the conservatory, with its 

large bay window, near the center of 

the image. (Paul Rocheleau) 

LANDSCAPE TREATMENT PLANNING 

General Management Plan Amendment 

By 1986 it was clear to the National Park Service that the “1960 landscape” did 

not communicate the rustic character of the original design and that sufcient 

documentation existed to restore the landscape to an earlier period. In 1986–7 

Fairsted staf members Shary Page Berg and Charlie Pepper developed a narrative 

report proposing a change in the preservation period for the landscape from 1960 

25 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

to ca. 1930. This resulted in a 1987 amendment to the park’s General Management 

Plan that recommended a change in the preservation period to 1930 to better 

interpret conditions during the height of the design frm’s operations and to 

illustrate fundamental landscape design principles. In 1987, the State Historic 

Preservation Ofcer at the Massachusetts Historical Commission concurred with 

this recommendation. 

Treatment Decision: Restoration 

The decision to restore the Fairsted landscape to its appearance in ca. 1930 

accomplishes several objectives: 

•	 The primary goal of the restoration is to promote an understanding of the 

principles of landscape design practiced by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and 

the successor frms. 

•	 The ca. 1930 restoration period makes possible the interpretation of the 

landscape from 1883–1930, a period during which the Olmsted Brothers frm 

was particularly active. This approach is consistent with the interpretation and 

treatment of the rest of the site. 

•	 The overall landscape design created by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. was 

maintained by his sons through 1930 despite continued construction of 

the ofce wing. The Olmsted Brothers completed most of the signifcant 

alterations to the buildings by 1926. Thus, the restoration period allows for a 

unifed historic appearance in both architecture and landscape. 

•	 The restoration period also represents a period for which substantial 

documentation is available, making an accurate historic appearance possible 

(Figure 1.4). 

•	 The Fairsted landscape provides a primary interpretation and education tool. 

It is one of the few places in the nation where visitors can see where a historic 

design was created on paper and experience it in three dimensions. 

The 1987 General Management Plan amendment ofcially changed the treatment 

of the landscape from “preservation” with a 1960 interpretive framework, to 

“restoration,” with a 1925–1930 restoration period. The implementation of actual 

treatment work was dependent on historical research and the preparation of a 

Cultural Landscape Report and Treatment Plan, consistent with the standards and 

guidelines prepared by the National Park Service. This project is described below. 

26 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.4. View of center bed, ledge, 

and grotto in the Hollow, May 1935. 

(Photo #673-137, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historical Site 

Archives) 

RESEARCH PROJECTS 

Historic Plant Inventory 

In the formative years of the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, the 

Fairsted landscape provided the materials to test several new methodologies 

that would later be applied at parks throughout the Northeast. One example 

is a comprehensive inventory of historic woody plants. This project consisted 

of several components necessary to document the existing plant material prior 

to treatment. Margie Cofn Brown, historical landscape architect, and Charlie 

Pepper, horticulturist, developed an inventory numbering system for the Fairsted 

plants related to their physical location on the site. 

Each individual woody plant, including trees, shrubs, and vines, were assigned a 

unique identifcation number for record-keeping purposes and to direct specifc 

treatment or maintenance actions. This number consists of a two-digit location 

and a one-to-three-digit plant specimen number. The frst two digits of the 

inventory number correspond with the location of the plant, by identifying its 

landscape zone and subzone. This is followed by a number corresponding to the 

individual plant specimen, numbered sequentially for each landscape subzone 

(Table 2.1). For example, the “Olmsted Elm” is plant #41-01 - which corresponds 

to the South Lawn (Zone 4), house and lawn area (Subzone 1), and plant 

specimen #01 in that location. Groups of plants, particularly shrub massings, 

were given several specimen numbers that roughly correspond to the quantity of 

individual plants even though the mass may constitute one feature. 

27 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.1. NUMBERING SYSTEM FOR FAIRSTED HISTORIC PLANT INVENTORY 

ZONE AREA PLANT 

NUMBER ZONE AREA NAME 

1 1 001-009 Hollow Center bed and walk 

2 001-031 Hollow North embankment and grotto 

3 001-035 Hollow West embankment 

2 1 NA Front Drive Edge of property 

2 001-012 Front Drive Circular drive and center bed 

3 001-041 Front Drive Circular drive parking area beds 

4 001-004 Front Drive House and offce entrance 

3 1 001-080 Rock Garden Boundary/east side of path 

2 001-046 Rock Garden Lawn/west side of path 

4 1 001-023 South Lawn House and lawn area 

2 001-062 South Lawn South border 

3 001-149 South Lawn West border 

4 001-010 South Lawn Storehouse area 

5 1 001-027 Service Areas Parking lot area 

2 001-004 Service Areas Courtyards and barnyards 

3 001-004 Service Areas Rear offce entry and vault area 

Herbarium Collection and Taxonomic 

Verifcation 

Amendment two to the Cooperative 

Agreement with the Arnold 

Arboretum provided for a 

collaborative process to identify 

and verify the taxonomy of existing 

woody plants at Fairsted. Between 

1991–93, Barbara Keene collected 

specimens of the existing plant 

material and prepared them for 

further processing as part of the 

Fairsted plant inventory (Figure 1.5). 

Keene pressed the plant specimens, 

noted the preliminary identifcation, 

and delivered them to the Arnold 

Figure 1.5. Barbara Keene preparing specimens 

for identifcation and herbarium collections at 

Longfellow House NHS, 1993. (OCLP) 

28 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arboretum. Susan Hardy-Brown prepared the herbarium sheets at the Arnold 

Arboretum. 

Botanists from the Arnold Arboretum completed the taxonomic verifcation. 

Steven Spongberg did the majority of the plant identifcation at the arboretum 

herbarium directly from the herbarium sheets. In some cases, further 

identifcation to cultivar level required a plant specialist. For example, the 

arboretum consulted with C.J. Patterson, rhododendron specialist, regarding the 

identifcation of several of the azaleas and rhododendrons planted in the late 

1950s and 1960s by the Olmsted Associates. In some cases, such as with Norway 

maple (Acer platanoides) volunteers, representative herbarium sheets were made 

since it was not necessary to process specimens for each individual plant. 

The result is a full herbarium collection with 184 specimens for the landscape 

as it existed in 1994, prior to restoration (Table 2.2). The collection is curated by 

the archives at the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site and is currently 

located at the Springfeld Armory as part of the site’s natural history collection. 

TABLE 2.2. LIST OF PLANTS IN HERBARIUM COLLECTION 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 

Acer palmatum Japanese Maple 

Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple, Moosewood 

Acer platanoides Norway Maple 

Acer platanoides ‘Schwedleri’ Schwedler Maple 

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 

Acer rubrum Red Maple 

Acer saccharum Sugar Maple 

Actinidia arguta Tara Vine, Hardy Kiwi, Bower Actinidia 

Aesculus parvifora Bottlebrush Buckeye 

Aralia spinosa Devil’s Walking Stick 

Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry 

Berberis vulgaris Native Barberry 

Betula lenta Sweet Birch 

Betula nigra River Birch 

Betula papyrifera Paper Birch 

Buxus sempervirens Common Box 

Calycanthus foridus Carolina Allspice 

Carya ovata Shagbark Hickory 

Cercidiphyllum japonicum Katsura 

Chaenomeles speciosa Common Flowering Quince 

Chamaecyparis obtusa Hinoki False Cypress 

Chamaecyparis pisifera ‘Filifera’ Threadleaf False Cypress 

Cladrastis kentukea American Yellowwood 

Clethra alnifolia Summersweet 

Cornus alternifolia Pagoda Dogwood 

Cornus forida Flowering Dogwood 

Cornus kousa Kousa Dogwood 

29 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 2.2. LIST OF PLANTS IN HERBARIUM COLLECTION 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 

Cotoneaster apiculatus Cranberry Cotoneaster 

Crataegus mollis Downy Hawthorne 

Cydonia oblonga Common Quince 

Deutzia carnea f. densifora Deutzia 

Deutzia scabra var. candidissima Fuzzy Deutzia 

Euonymus alatus Winged Euonymus 

Euonymus fortunei Wintercreeper Euonymus 

Euonymus fortunei ‘radicans’ Wintercreeper Euonymus 

Fraxinus americana White Ash 

Hydrangea heteromalla Hydrangea 

Hydrangea petiolaris Climbing Hydrangea 

Kalmia latifolia Mountain Laurel 

Leucothoe fontanesiana Drooping Leucothoe 

Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree 

Lonicera tatarica Tatarian Honeysuckle 

Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Magnolia 

Malus sp. Flowering Crabapple 

Phellodendron amurense Amur Corktree 

Philadelphus coronarius Sweet Mock Orange 

Pieris foribunda Mountain Andromeda 

Pieris japonica Japanese Pieris 

Prunus sp. Cherry 

Pyracantha coccinea Scarlet Firethorn 

Quercus rubra Red Oak 

Rhamnus cathartica Common Buckthorn 

Rhododendron sp. Rhododendron 

Rhododendron calendulaceum Flame Azalea 

Rhododendron catawbiense Catawba Rhododendron 

Rhododendron kaempferi Torch Azalea 

Rhododendron x laetevirens Wilson Rhododendron 

Rhododendron maximum Rosebay Rhododendron 

Rhododendron mucronulatum Korean Rhododendron 

Rhododendron vaseyi Pinkshell Rhododendron 

Rhododendron yedoense poukhanense Korean Rhododendron 

Rhototypos scandens Jetbead 

Rosa sp. Rose 

Sorbus aucuparia European Mountain Ash 

Spirea thunbergii Thunberg Spirea 

Spirea x vanhouttei Vanhoutte Spirea 

Syringa x persica Persian Lilac 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 

Taxus baccata English Yew 

Taxus baccata ‘Repandens’ Weeping English Yew 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 

Taxus cuspidata ‘Nana’ Dwarf Japanese Yew 

30 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

 

TABLE 2.2. LIST OF PLANTS IN HERBARIUM COLLECTION 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 

Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 

Ulmus americana American Elm 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood Viburnum 

Viburnum plicatum Doublefle Viburnum 

Viburnum setigerum Tea viburnum 

Weigela forida Old Fashioned Weigela 

Wisteria sinensis Chinese Wisteria 

Plant Propagation 

In 1991, propagation of historically signifcant and uncommon plants was initiated 

through the cooperative agreement with the Arnold Arboretum. Propagation was 

necessary to provide for the future replacement of these signifcant plants with an 

exact genetic match. This work continued through 1994, ultimately resulting in the 

propagation of eleven taxa from Fairsted. 

Once Jack Alexander, chief plant propagator, and his staf successfully propagated 

the historic plant material, it was grown on in the arboretum’s greenhouse until 

it was mature enough to be transferred to an outdoor nursery area. From 1992– 

1997, the Arnold Arboretum housed the historic plant nursery in Jamaica Plain. In 

1997, this plant material was relocated to the Lyman Estate in Waltham, managed 

by Historic New England. 

Since the propagation began before plans for the landscape restoration were 

complete, historic research later found that some of the existing plant material was 

non-historic. For this reason, the devil’s walking stick (Aralia spinosa) in the Rock 

Garden was de-accessioned and removed from the historic plant nursery. 

Many of the plants listed in Table 2.3 were used in the restoration, as new plants to 

replace missing historic vegetation. Two propagules from the Olmsted Elm, which 

had been initially propagated in 1992, reached a sufcient size to be transferred 

back to Fairsted in 1996. One was used in the restoration and replaced a missing 

historic elm in the southeast corner of the site. The second propagule was 

repropagated to ensure a replacement for the historic Olmsted Elm, however both 

propagules died before they could be used. 

TABLE 2.3. PLANTS PROPAGATED AT THE ARNOLD ARBORETUM, 1991–1996 

NURSERY 

ID NO. 

DATE 

PROPAGATED 

FRLA 

ID 

NO. 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON NAME QUANTITY OF 

PROPAGULES 

125-95 1995 

43-59 Acer 

platanoides 

“Schwedleri” 

Schwedler Norway 

Maple 

3 

446-91 1991 41-02 Actinidea 

arguta 

Hardy Kiwi 4 

31 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.3. PLANTS PROPAGATED AT THE ARNOLD ARBORETUM, 1991–1996 

NURSERY 

ID NO. 

DATE 

PROPAGATED 

FRLA 

ID 

NO. 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON NAME QUANTITY OF 

PROPAGULES 

399-92 1992 Aralia spinosa Devil’s Walking 

Stick 

4 

445-91 1991 51-07 Cydonia 

oblonga 

Common Quince 4 

333-93 1993 23-04 Magnolia 

acuminata 

Cucumber 

Magnolia 

1 

447-91 1991 42-37 Pyracantha 

coccinea 

Firethorn 19 

397-92 1992 32-33 Rhododendron 

calendulaceum 

Flame Azalea 

398-92 

398-93 

1992 

1993 

11-05 Rhododendron 

kaempferi 

Kaempferi Azalea 4 

451-91 1991 44-08 Rosa multifora Multifora Rose 3 

396-92 

130-96 

1992 

1996 

41-01 Ulmus 

americana 

American Elm 2 

450-91 1991 41-22 Wisteria 

sinensis 

Chinese Wisteria 4 

Cooperative Agreement with the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University 

In 1991, the National Park Service, in collaboration with the Arnold Arboretum 

of Harvard University, began work on a comprehensive cultural landscape 

report intended to direct the restoration of the grounds. The initial cooperative 

agreement with the Arnold Arboretum (CA 1600-1-9009) was developed by Nora 

Mitchell, then cultural landscape program manager in the New England Regional 

Ofce, and Charlie Pepper, then horticulturist at Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site. The Arboretum’s association with the Fairsted restoration was 

accomplished through two amendments to the original cooperative agreement. 

•	 Amendment 2: Develop a cultural landscape treatment plan for the Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site, October 1992–July 1994 

•	 Amendment 7: Develop a cultural landscape treatment plan for the Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Phase II, October 1994–November 1997 

Beginning in 1992, Phyllis Andersen, Landscape Historian and Director of the 

Arnold Arboretum’s Institute for Cultural Landscape Studies, coordinated the 

National Park Service projects at the arboretum. 

Cultural Landscape Report, Volume I 

The National Park Service initiated the historical research phase of the cultural 

landscape report through the cooperative agreement with the Arnold Arboretum. 

Cynthia Zaitzevsky, Ph.D. served as principal researcher for the frst volume of the 

cultural landscape report, dedicated to the site’s history. 

32 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Zaitzevsky examined every known historic record for Fairsted. This included 

plans, photographs, planting order lists, and other records in the Olmsted 

Archives at the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site and correspondence 

housed in the Manuscript Division at the Library of Congress. Unfortunately, 

very few letters or written descriptions were found in the Library of Congress, 

presumably because Olmsted could direct the improvements to the grounds on 

site, and thus had little reason to write to himself. 

Other important repositories included the Frances Loeb Library at the Harvard 

Graduate School of Design, the Society for the Preservation of New England 

Antiquities (today Historic New England), and the Brookline Public Library. 

These records were assembled as a chronology of plans, drawings, photographs, 

and other key documents.1

 Zaitzevsky ultimately produced Fairsted, A Cultural 

Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Volume 

I: Site History, which documents the evolution of the Fairsted landscape from 

1883–1994. It is organized frst by chronological period, related to epochs of 

stewardship by Olmsted, Sr., his sons, and successors, and also geographically by 

landscape zone, so that each chronological period has a consistent organization 

related to the site. Zaitzevsky completed the frst draft of chapters one through 

six in summer of 1993, with chapter seven on the period of National Park Service 

management completed in draft in June 1994. 

The Arnold Arboretum also provided assistance with identifying plants in 

historic photographs in order to help decipher which plans and notations were 

actually implemented and aid Zaitzevsky with the preparation of the report. Dr. 

Peter Del Tredici, Director of Living Collections at the Arnold Arboretum and 

National Park Service Horticulturist Charlie Pepper accomplished this work with 

Zaitzevsky. 

By 1995, the frst volume of the cultural landscape report was essentially complete. 

It was initially prepared as an informal technical report with over two hundred 

illustrations and several appendices. Between 1995–7, the Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation and the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University 

completed editing and formatting changes and reduced the quantity of appendices 

to prepare the publication for printing. 

The Arnold Arboretum also contributed additional work by garden historian 

Mac Griswold, who prepared a narrative “Afterword” that describes the Fairsted 

landscape in the context of the Olmsted family, the frm, and the Brookline 

neighborhood. Andy Winter, graphic artist, designed the fnal publication, 

which was printed by the Government Printing Ofce in 1997. This document 

is invaluable both as a chronology of landscape change over time, but also as 

a published record of primary source material contained in the archives of 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. 

33 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Cultural Landscape Report, Volume II and Related Studies 

Simultaneous with the preparation of Volume I, work began on developing 

treatment recommendations to prescribe physical changes to the Fairsted 

landscape. While historical research was underway, the Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation focused on information gathering to document the 

landscape’s existing conditions. Following this phase, existing conditions data 

was analyzed alongside historical evidence to understand changes to the historic 

landscape’s character. This analysis would provide a foundation for landscape 

treatment recommendations. Lauren Meier, historical landscape architect, served 

as project manager for the treatment plan project. The documentation generated 

during this process remained mostly internal to the National Park Service until it 

was published in 2017 as part of Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site, Volume II: Conditions, Analysis, and Treatment. 

The content of the 2017 report is discussed in more detail in the Treatment Plan 

section below. 

Boston University Offce of Public Archeology, Electronic Survey 

In 1991, the National Park Service signed a cooperative agreement with Boston 

University Ofce of Public Archeology to provide an electronic survey of the 

Fairsted grounds (CA 1600-5-0004). This work involved two components: 

1. Geophysical remote sensing using non-invasive archeological methods (groundpenetrating radar) to locate subsurface features 

2. Electronic survey and computer mapping to produce an accurate existing 

conditions plan of the site (Figure 1.6) 

Figure 1.6. Team from Boston 

University Offce of Public Archeology 

conducting electronic survey work at 

Fairsted, ca. 1991. (OCLP) 

34 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.7. Park staff conducting a 

feld survey in the South Lawn near 

the original Olmsted Elm, looking 

northeast, 1993. Note the curvilinear 

pathway along the southern facade 

of the house, later removed during 

Phase I of the landscape restoration. 

(OCLP) 

Boston University and the National Park Service identifed data points necessary 

to produce an accurate map of the site. Information was collected in the feld 

using traditional survey methods, but the data points were recorded electronically 

and processed using SOKKIA mapping software. This produced a computerbased map of landscape features including all woody plant material as both a hard 

copy (paper) and electronic fle retrievable from a personal computer. The survey 

information collected on plant material at Fairsted relied on the numbering system 

described above which had been transferred onto metal tags and attached to every 

woody plant on the site. To verify the accuracy of the survey, several checks were 

made to locate missing data points. This information was feld checked by both 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf and park personnel (Figure 1.7). 

Once the survey was complete, it was plotted at 1”=20’ and 1”=10’ to provide the 

base for a new existing conditions plan (Figure 1.8). 

The electronic survey also supported the site’s Visual Information System, an 

earlier computerized database and mapping system using “Aperture” software 

that tracked routine and cyclic maintenance activities.2 The Boston University feld 

team led by Dave Clayton completed the Fairsted survey and a summary of their 

fndings in 1993. 

The remote-sensing component of the project used ground-penetrating 

radar, electromagnetic conductivity meters and a proton magnetometer to 

locate evidence of landscape features below the ground surface. The Boston 

University Ofce of Public Archeology documented the results of this work in an 

unpublished report.3 

35 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.8. Fairsted electronic 

survey map prepared by the Boston 

University Offce of Public Archeology 

1992–1993. 

Existing Conditions Plan 

The 1983 University of Virginia/Historic American Buildings Survey plan 

functioned as the ofcial existing conditions plan of Fairsted until 1993 when it 

was replaced with a new drawing produced by Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation staf. Information contained in the Boston University electronic 

survey and the historic plant inventory was used to generate a new existing 

conditions plan for the site (Figure 1.9). The graphic style for the new plan was 

based on the Historic American Buildings Survey Plan. With a similar graphic 

style, the plans could be used for comparison, illustrating changes to the 

vegetation and other features of the site over a decade. 

Catherine Morris O’Connor, then a student at the Harvard Graduate School 

of Design and an intern with the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 

drew the new existing conditions plan. Morris O’Connor produced the frst 

draft in 1993 and the fnal in 1994. The plan is drawn at 1”=10’ in ink on mylar 

and measures 36 x 48”. Three overlays were drawn separately using pin-bar 

registration to combine the overlays into one drawing. The overlays are: 

•	 Topography, paths and drives, buildings and structures 

36 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.9. 1993 Existing Conditions 

plan, based on the electronic survey 

by Boston University Offce of Public 

Archeology, with plant identifcation 

by the Arnold Arboretum. Note 

the size and confguration of plant 

material, and the absence of the pool 

and herb garden in comparison to the 

1983 University of Virginia/HABS plan 

(Figure 1.1). (OCLP) 

•	 Plant material with accurate canopy symbols 

•	 Labels 

Woody plants are coded using the same method as the Historic American 

Buildings Survey drawing with an abbreviation of the plant species on the plan.4 

This abbreviation is listed on the legend along with the full botanical and common 

names and the plant identifcation number described above. Once the plans were 

completed, they were reproduced by a diazo machine (full-size). The existing 

conditions plan functioned as the base map on which recommendations for 

treatment actions are indicated. 

1930 Period Plan 

The third phase of the project, integrity analysis, required a careful evaluation of 

the appearance of the landscape in ca. 1930 to assess how much it has changed 

in the last 60 years. First, approximately ten historic plans and 50 critical 

historic photographs were used to generate a “period plan” which illustrates 

the appearance of the landscape in ca. 1930 (Figure 1.10). Catherine Evans, 

historical landscape architect, and Catherine Morris O’Connor conducted this 

37 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

Figure 1.10. 1930 Period Plan, 

prepared 1994. Approximately 

ten historic plans and 50 historic 

photographs were studied to 

generate this plan. (OCLP) 

work with Lauren Meier. Each decision and assumption used to create this plan 

is documented so that the decisions can be properly reviewed, consistent with the 

requirements of Director’s Order 28 (DO-28) and Section 106.5 

The period plan was then compared in detail with the existing conditions plan. 

This analysis was used to generate an integrity plan that illustrates existing historic 

features, missing historic features, and features added or modifed signifcantly 

since ca. 1930. This plan functioned primarily as a research tool and therefore was 

not produced on mylar as part of the fnal drawings for the project. Instead, it is 

housed in the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation fat fles with the rest of 

the research drawings for the project. 

In addition to the 1930 period plan, Morris and Evans produced a series of 

informal documents that record questions and issues related to both existing and 

missing historic features. For example, both objective and subjective decisions 

were required throughout the project when documentation was inclusive or 

lacking. Morris and Evans’ records related to individual site features were carefully 

analyzed so that a clear and justifable rationale could be developed for decisionmaking, ultimately producing the treatment plan discussed below. 

38 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

For example, the Olmsted frm produced many plans for Fairsted, but it was not 

always clear which were actually implemented. In this case, historic photographs, 

plant orders, and existing site features helped to determine whether or not design 

plans were actually constructed. 

Additional Research Testing 

Despite substantial historical research and site analysis, several research questions 

remained. They included: 

•	 The age of many existing trees that could not be documented in historic plans 

or photographs 

•	 The previous existence of a reserve garden for heeling in plant material 

•	 The historic surface material of the Front Drive 

•	 The condition of archeological resources in the vicinity of the ofce path and 

north of the vault 

In the fall of 1993, tree coring and archeological testing were undertaken to 

answer these questions. 

Tree Coring 

Some areas of the landscape, such as the west slope, lacked sufcient 

documentation overall to determine what treatment actions should be taken. 

This was particularly true for trees on the west slope, for which historic research 

proved inconclusive related to which trees were in fact historic, and which 

were either volunteers, transplants, or additions. Once the initial research and 

analysis was complete, several large trees appeared to be less than 60 years old 

and therefore recommended for removal. Prior to removal, twenty trees with a 

diameter at breast height of 12” or greater were cored to determine their age more 

precisely. 

Many of the trees cored are fast growing and invasive species that clearly achieved 

a substantial size in a relatively short period of time. The results of the tree coring 

determined that most of these trees were not historic (Table 2.4). For example, the 

cores from a 14”diameter at breast height sycamore maple (Acer pseudoplatanus) 

and a 25” diameter at breast height Norway maple both indicated the trees were 

less than forty years old. This information informed the fnal treatment decision. 

TABLE 2.4. SUMMARY RESULTS OF TREE CORING 

ID # SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME DBH CANOPY RESULTS CONCLUSION ACTION 

23-3 Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 20” 54’ 36 rings not historic remove 

31-14 Fraxinus americana Green Ash 23” 60’ 78 rings historic retain 

39 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.4. SUMMARY RESULTS OF TREE CORING 

ID # SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME DBH CANOPY RESULTS CONCLUSION ACTION 

31-17 Malus sp. Crab Apple 7” 21’ -- not historic remove 

31-18 Malus sp. Crab Apple 4” 17’ 16 rings not historic remove 

32-12 Malus sp. Crab Apple 5” 18’ -- not historic Keep6 

32-13 Malus sp. Crab Apple 8” 30’ -- not historic remove 

32-15 Quercus rubra Red Oak 10” 43’ 28 rings not historic remove 

32-16 Quercus rubra Red Oak 12” 28’ 21 rings not historic remove 

42-7 Betula lenta River Birch 19” 52’ 53 rings historic remove & 

replace in 

kind7 

43-8 Acer palmatum Japanese Maple 8” 27’ 37 rings not historic remove 

43-15 Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 18” 44’ 34-35 rings not historic remove 

43-16 Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 14” 60’ 31 rings not historic remove 

43-17 Acer platanoides Norway Maple 14” 45’ 32 rings not historic remove 

43-22 Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Tree 12” 28’ 30 rings not historic remove 

43-31 Cladrastis kentukea Yellowwood 13” 26’ -- not historic remove 

43-42 Acer platanoides Norway Maple 15” 34’ 28 rings not historic remove 

43-59 Acer platanoides 

‘Schwedleri’ 

Schwedler Norway Maple 30” 45’ 62 rings historic retain 

43-60 Acer saccharum Sugar Maple 21” 53’ 58 rings historic 

43-63 Betula lenta River Birch 12” 38’ -- not historic retain 

43-68 Betula lenta River Birch 23” 68’ 60+ rings historic remove 

ARCHEOLOGY 

Following the historical research phase of the project, additional questions 

remained regarding specifc features on the site. First, no records were found 

for the historic surface material used in the circular drive. Second, historic plans 

noted a “reserve garden” on the west slope near the shed, but without further 

clarifcation or documentation. 

To address these issues, the Archeology Branch of the National Park Service 

Cultural Resources Center in Lowell conducted archeological testing in four test 

pits. 

•	 Test pit #1 on the west slope near the shed was specifcally located to research 

the noted “reserve garden” indicated on plan #673-2 for which no photo 

documentation had been found (Figure 1.11). The excavation revealed the 

presence of a planting hole and a prepared planting bed, and portions of a tile 

drainage system. This seemed to support the historic plan notation. 

•	 Test pit #2 was located in the circular drive to evaluate historic surface 

material. This pit revealed a prepared bed of Roxbury puddingstone 

extending 80 centimeters from the surface, under which were two additional 

deposits with artifacts predating the Olmsted residency. No information was 

apparent related to the historic surface material. 

40 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

•	 Test pit #3 was excavated south of 

the ofce entrance to evaluate the 

impact of the proposed accessible 

ramp. This excavation did expose 

a drainage feature and relatively 

low archeological integrity in the 

top 77 centimeters. 

•	 Test pit #4 was located north of 

the vault to research the potential 

presence of a historic path. This 

revealed substantial surface 

disturbance, probably from the 

vault construction. 

CONCLUSIONS FROM HISTORIC 

RESEARCH, EXISTING ANALYSIS, 

AND TESTING 

The Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation carefully analyzed 

the information gathered through 

Zaitzevsky’s research, the inventory of existing conditions, and the additional 

testing described above to determine how the landscape had changed since ca. 

1930 as the frst stage in determining physical work necessary to recover the 

ca. 1930 landscape. Although the Fairsted landscape was both attractive and 

appeared to be in relatively good condition, the balance of overstory/understory 

vegetation had clearly changed since ca. 1930. 

Comparisons between the 1904 survey, 1930 period plan, 1984 University of 

Virginia/Historic American Buildings Survey plan and 1994 existing conditions 

plans clearly revealed that the undulating South Lawn edge and rich understory 

planting had been lost. This was largely due to the growth of the overstory since 

1960, much of which is composed of volunteer trees (Figure 1.12). In addition, 

each steward of the Fairsted landscape had left their mark, including Olmsted, Sr., 

his sons, the Olmsted Associates, and the National Park Service. Still, the primary 

landscape zones and the picturesque intent of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. was 

still readable in the landscape. 

While some improvements had already been implemented by 1994, particularly 

the removal of the swimming pool, parking area restoration, and the spiraled steel 

strapping trellis system, additional work was needed to remove other non-historic 

features and replace missing elements that had existed during the restoration 

period. 

Figure 1.11. Archeological work being 

conducted on the west slope by (from left to 

right) Steven Pendery, Charlie Pepper, and 

Margie Coffn (Brown), 1994. (OCLP) 

41 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.12. Vegetation along the 

southern border of the South Lawn, 

looking west, ca. 1994. (In Frederick 

Law Olmsted: Designing the American 

Landscape. By Charles E. Beveridge 

and Paul Rocheleau. New York: 

Rizzoli, 1995, 140.) 

TREATMENT PLAN 

The last phase of the cultural landscape report, the treatment plan, drew upon 

the integrity analysis to produce an overall restoration plan at a scale of 1”=10’, 

schematic design drawings, and construction documents which prescribe specifc 

actions necessary to re-establish the earlier landscape (Figure 1.13). The integrity 

analysis mentioned above, the 1930 period plan, and the results of additional 

testing were used to determine specifc actions necessary to restore the landscape. 

This included the removal of non-historic features and the replacement of missing 

historic features. This work is described in greater detail in the following section 

of this chapter. 

In particular, the treatment project has addressed the removal of non-historic 

features, replacement of missing historic features, provisions for barrierfree access, and historic vegetation “threats” to the building. Additionally, it 

formulated a hierarchy of principles for the treatment of individual features 

when the documentation or existing conditions information is not defnitive. The 

greatest visual alteration to the site resulted from a change to the character of the 

vegetation. The treatment plan recommended substantial removal of volunteer 

or “self-sown” trees, primarily Norway and Japanese maples, and a very large 

amount of new shrub and vine planting, including very high quantities and 

densities of evergreen shrubs. This change in the mix of vegetation was necessary 

to recapture the picturesque qualities of the landscape prevalent in ca. 1930. 

DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS 

A critical component of the 1993–1996 treatment plan was a series of drawings at 

1”=10’ and 1”=1/4’ prepared by Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf 

42 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.13. 1995 Treatment Plan for 

the Fairsted landscape, prepared by 

the Olmsted Center and consultants. 

(OCLP) 

and consultants between 1993–1996. The frst package of drawings was prepared 

by Catherine Morris O’Connor and Catherine Evans, documenting the results of 

the research, existing conditions, overall treatment plan, and identifying nonhistoric trees and shrubs to be removed (Figure 1.14). Lauren Meier prepared 

written specifcations for site protection and the removal of non-historic trees 

indicated in the drawings for the frst phase of treatment work. Final drawings 

produced during this phase included: 

•	 Existing Conditions, 1994 (1”=10’) 

•	 1930 Period Plan (1”=10’) 

•	 Treatment Plan (1”=10’) 

•	 Tree Removal Plan (1”=10’) 

•	 Shrub Removal Plan (1”=10’) 

The second set of drawings prepared by Morris O’Connor and Eliot Foulds 

provided schematic design and a partial set of construction documents for the 

replacement of missing features and other alterations necessary to restore the 

landscape. This included a series of planting plans at 1”=4’ for the entire site 

43 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.14. Fairsted Non-historic 

Tree Removal Plan, prepared by 

the Catherine Morris O’Connor and 

Catherine Evans, 1994. (OCLP) 

prepared by Morris O’Connor; schematic design details for site features by 

Foulds, and an updated treatment plan at 1”=10’, also by Foulds (see Figure 1.13): 

•	 Treatment Plan (revised, based on planting plans, 1”= 10’) 

•	 12 Planting Plans (1”=4’) for the Hollow; Front Drive; Rock Garden, including 

the southeast corner; South Lawn, including the west slope; and Service 

Areas, including the parking area and ofce courtyard (Figures 1.15, 1.16) 

•	 Schematic design details (2 sheets, various scales) 

Grounds staf at Frederick Law Olmsted National Historical Site used the planting 

plans for shrub, vine, and herbaceous planting. The treatment plan and schematic 

design details also provided guidance for re-confguring the edge of the South 

Lawn and the installation of a new seasonal irrigation system using above-ground 

feld piping. The schematic design also provided the basis for construction 

documents prepared under contract with Carol R. Johnson Associates, landscape 

architects. 

Construction documents for the second phase of physical work, including tree 

planting and other site improvements, were sub-contracted to the ofce of Carol 

44 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.15. Planting Plan for the 

Hollow, prepared by Catherine Morris 

O’Connor in 1995. (OCLP) 

R. Johnson Associates through an indefnite quantity contract with Archetype, 

architects and planners. Beth Gavrin and Carol Johnson served as the project 

team. The construction document package included plans, site details and 

specifcations for: 

•	 Tree planting 

•	 Accessible ramp 

•	 Repairs to masonry features such as the Hollow steps 

•	 Repairs to the rustic curb and walk along the Front Drive 

•	 Drainage improvements 

•	 New sidewalk along Dudley Street 

•	 Cedar pole and chain link fence along the southwest boundary 

•	 Pipe arbor at the back of the barn 

45 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.16. Planting Plan for a 

portion of the South Lawn, prepared 

by Catherine Morris O’Connor in 

1995. (OCLP) 

The construction document package completed by Carol R. Johnson and 

Associates was used to procure construction services necessary to implement 

elements of the restoration project. This work was undertaken in 1995–6. 

TREATMENT PLAN REPORT 

In 1994, Lauren Meier produced the second volume of the cultural landscape 

report for Fairsted in-house as a spiral-bound report. It was used primarily as a 

record of the project for discussion with park staf, public review and compliance. 

The 1994 report includes an introduction, description of methodology, 

description of the existing and ca. 1930 conditions of the historic property, a 

description of treatment work with special emphasis on the frst phase, and a 

discussion of public participation and review. It also includes existing conditions 

photographs and copies of relevant plans and appendices. The treatment plan was 

supplemented with a case report for the second phase of work, which included 

more specifc information on the proposed planting and other site improvements. 

In 2017, Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site, Volume II: Conditions, Analysis, and Treatment was published by 

the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. The published report includes 

46 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

landscape treatment recommendations developed between 1993 and 1995 along 

with documentation of Fairsted’s 1994 existing conditions and analysis of its 

historic character. 

PUBLIC REVIEW 

Prior to initiating any physical work on the landscape, the Olmsted Center 

for Landscape Preservation and park staf held a series of public review and 

information meetings in 1994. This included the following meetings: 

•	 A discussion with members of the landscape preservation community 

(landscape historians, landscape architects, horticulturists and historic 

property managers) 

•	 Extensive mailings and informal meetings with Brookline neighbors 

•	 Discussions with the Town of Brookline, Historic Preservation Commission 

and Selectmen 

COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 106 

A project overview, case report, two volume cultural landscape report, and 

Section 106 compliance documentation for the frst phase of work were submitted 

to the Massachusetts Historical Commission for review and compliance 

with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in June 1994. The 

commission approved this work on July 6, 1994 and the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation did the same on August 30, 1994. In fall 1994, non-historic 

trees and shrubs were removed from Fairsted, consistent with this request. 

The second phase of work was addressed in a similar documentation package 

including a project description, Section 106 documentation, plans, and 

specifcations submitted to the Massachusetts Historical Commission in 

September 1995. Shrub planting work began in late fall 1995 following completion 

of Section 106 compliance for the second phase. 

In September 1996, the park submitted a separate documentation package to 

the Massachusetts Historical Commission regarding Section 106 compliance 

for the accessible ramp/walk into the historic ofce entrance. This submittal was 

necessitated by previous discussions with the commission related to an earlier 

ramp design. On September 12, 1996 Judith McDonough, Massachusetts state 

historic preservation ofcer, concurred with the determination of no adverse 

efect. Based on this compliance action, the contract proceeded based on the 

construction document package prepared by Carol R. Johnson and Associates. 

47 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site has completed several other 

compliance actions for landscape work at Fairsted. These include: 

•	 April 1984 documentation related to the replacement of the spruce pole fence 

along Warren, Dudley, and Fairmount Streets 

•	 August 1984 documentation related to the removal of the non-historic 

swimming pool and brick patio 

•	 December 1986 documentation related to emergency drainage repairs and 

curbing along Dudley Street 

•	 February 1992 documentation related to removal of trees damaged in a storm 

in fall 1991, including a red oak (Quercus rubra) in the Hollow, tulip tree 

in the Hollow, white ash (Fraxinus americana) in the Rock Garden, and a 

thornless honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis) near the shed on 

the west slope 

•	 May 1993 documentation related to removal of a hazardous Canadian 

hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) in the parking lot, which was subsequently 

replaced in kind 

•	 1996 compliance for removal of hazardous sugar maple (Acer saccharum) 

near the parking area 

•	 October 1997 documentation for additional drainage repair in the circular 

drive 

•	 June 1998 documentation related to granite curbing on Fairmont Street 

needed for the management of stormwater 

Copies of relevant materials from each of these compliance actions are included in 

Appendix H: Compliance Documents. 

TREATMENT IMPLEMENTATION (1993–2001) 

The second portion of this chapter documents the implementation of the 

landscape restoration at Fairsted between 1993–2001. This project re-established 

the appearance of the Fairsted landscape as it looked ca. 1930, based on historical 

research and treatment planning accomplished through a two volume cultural 

landscape report described in the previous section (Figures 1.17, 1.18). The 

Arnold Arboretum and the National Park Service published Volume 1: Site History 

by Cynthia Zaitzevsky, in 1997. Volume II: Treatment Plan was prepared by the 

National Park Service in 1994 and used internally to guide projects before it was 

published by the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation in 2017. 

48 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.17. Fairsted’s Front Drive 

before restoration, looking southwest 

through the spruce pole arch, 1994. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 1.18. Fairsted’s Front Drive 

after restoration, looking southwest 

through the spruce pole arch, 2000. 

Note the restored herbaceous 

plantings in the central bed, the 

reinstalled stone curb at the drive’s 

edge, and the reset front entry 

walk at the lower right corner. (Jack 

Boucher, HABS) 

The specifc actions described below are based on a careful analysis of ten historic 

plans, ffty historic photographs, and many of the historic planting order lists 

which were selected because they clearly contained information pertinent to 

the ca. 1930 period. The ten plans were chosen because historic photographs or 

existing site conditions indicated they had actually been implemented. In some 

cases, treatment tasks described below are based on site information gathered by 

the National Park Service since 1980. This is true for a number of missing features, 

such as the cedar post and chain link fence which was severely deteriorated and 

removed during the 1980s as well as the missing steps in the Hollow which were 

removed during emergency drainage repairs to the vault. 

The project has been implemented in two phases. The frst phase consisted of 

the removal of non-historic trees and shrubs, accomplished by the maintenance 

staf of Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site and a contract with Tree 

49 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Specialists Inc. of Holliston, Massachusetts. In the second phase, missing historic 

features were replaced, existing features repaired, and new pedestrian circulation 

established, including an accessible ramp into the house. 

PHASE I SCOPE OF WORK 

Tree Removal 

In September 1994, 1,136 trees were removed from the Fairsted landscape. 

Approximately 50% of the non-historic trees, including the largest in size, were 

removed through a contract with Tree Specialists, Inc. Tree Specialists brought 

in specialized equipment and certifed arborists trained in tree climbing to do 

the work (Figures 1.19, 1.20). The plans and specifcations for the tree removal 

provided both a detailed list of the work to be accomplished as well as methods 

for site protection, including minimizing vehicular access and large equipment 

on the site and protecting the ground surface and tree roots with fencing and 

plywood barriers. Trees were taken down in segments cut from the upper canopy 

Figure 1.19. Contracted arborists remove a non-historic tree at the 

edge of the Front Drive, looking east, 1994. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.20. A contractor operates stump-grinding equipment at 

the edge of the South Lawn, looking northeast, 1994. (OCLP) 

50 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

and lowered to the ground with ropes. The trunks were then fush cut at the base. 

A limited number of stumps were ground with a stump grinder to a depth of 

12–15” in places where new trees were to be planted. 

Following the Tree Specialists work, the maintenance staf of the Olmsted, 

Longfellow and Kennedy National Historic Sites removed the remaining nonhistoric trees and shrubs (Figure 1.21). This work was accomplished through an 

intensive efort by all the maintenance staf from all three sites, coordinated by 

Ed Baciagalupo, chief of maintenance, and Barbara Harty (now Keene), grounds 

supervisor. The National Park Service removed non-historic trees that were 

smallest in diameter and most accessible, because specialized equipment was 

required to remove the larger trees. The plant identifcation numbering system 

was used consistently throughout this project to facilitate tracking of all woody 

plant material. 

The majority of the non-historic trees removed in Phase I were seedlings or 

volunteers that grew up in the previous thirty years due to changes in maintenance 

practices. A few were deliberately planted during the Olmsted Associates tenure, 

after the ca. 1930 restoration period. Most of the trees were removed from the 

west slope area between Fairsted and the former Clark sisters’ property. The 

most common non-historic species on the site was Norway maple, followed by 

Japanese maple (Acer palmatum), birch (Betula spp.), and Carolina hemlock (Tsuga 

caroliniana), respectively. Two severely deteriorated trees were removed and 

replaced in kind by Tree Specialists. 

Hollow 

No trees were removed in the Hollow. 

Figure 1.21. Park staff remove nonhistoric vegetation from the edge 

of the South Lawn, looking east, 

1994. Pictured, from left to right, are 

Steve Law, George Ryan, and Lenny 

Gianetti. (OCLP) 

51 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.22. Removal of Carolina hemlocks planted in the 1960s Figure 1.23. Arborists remove a sycamore maple at the southeast 

along the spruce pole fence east of the Front Drive, looking corner of the house, looking west, 1994. (OCLP) 

northeast, 1994. (OCLP) 

Front Drive 

A hedge of seventeen Carolina hemlocks planted in the 1960s by Artemis 

Richardson was removed (Figure 1.22).8 Two small striped maples (Acer 

pensylvanicum), north of the existing parking area, were removed. A Sycamore 

maple was also removed near the corner of the house (Figure 1.23). 

Rock Garden 

On the eastern side of the Rock Garden path, 21 trees were removed (Figure 1.24). 

These included eleven Norway maple, three striped maple, three white ash, two 

crab apple (Malus spp.), one amur corktree (Phellodendron amurense), one cherry, 

and one European mountain ash (Sorbus aucuparia). One deteriorated historic 

white ash was removed and replaced in kind by Tree Specialists. West of the path, 

nine trees were removed (Figures 1.25, 1.26). These included four river birch 

(Betula nigra) sprouting from an existing stump, and a mixture of small deciduous 

volunteers. Two red oak were also removed. 

52 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.24. Woodchipper east of the 

Rock Garden path, looking northwest, 

1994. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.25. Elevated view of the Rock 

Garden after tree removal during 

Phase I, looking north, 1994. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.26. Rock Garden after tree 

removal during Phase I, looking west, 

1994. (OCLP) 

53 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.27. Tree removal on the west 

slope during Phase I, looking west, 

1994. (OCLP) 

South Lawn 

In the area known as the south border, trees removed included one Japanese 

maple and fve Norway maple volunteers, and three Carolina hemlock. They were 

determined to be non-historic due to size, species, and location, and they do not 

appear on any of the historic plans for this area. 

On the west slope, 71 trees, including 39 Norway maple and fourteen Japanese 

maple were determined non-historic. Other trees removed from the west slope 

included two sycamore maple, tuliptree, yellowwood (Cladrastis kentukea), white 

ash, river birch, katsura (Cercidiphyllum sp.), kousa dogwood (Cornus kousa), 

cherry (Prunus sp.), red oak, and Canadian hemlock (Figure 1.27). 

Service Areas 

In the Service Areas, which include the parking lot and the rear ofce entry, one 

Norway maple was removed (Figure 1.28). 

TABLE 2.5. SUMMARY OF TREES REMOVED, FALL 1994 

FRONT DRIVE: 21 TREES 

CENTER BED (1 TREE) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Malus sp. Crab Apple 1 

CIRCULAR PARKING AREA BEDS (20 TREES) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 

Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple 2 

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 1 

Tsuga caroliniana Carolina Hemlock 17 

ROCK GARDEN: 30 TREES 

EAST SIDE OF WALK (20 TREES) 

54 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.28. Tree removal in the 

service area near the historic shed 

(left), looking south, 1994. (OCLP) 

TABLE 2.5. SUMMARY OF TREES REMOVED, FALL 1994 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Acer pensylvanicum Striped Maple 2 

Acer platanoides Norway Maple 11 

Fraxinus americana White Ash 3 

Malus sp. Crab Apple 2 

Phellodendron amurense Amur Corktree 1 

Prunus sp. Cherry 1 

Sorbus aucuparia European Mountain Ash 1 

LAWN/WEST SIDE OF PATH (9 TREES) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Aralia spinosa Devils-Walkingstick 1 

Betula nigra River Birch 4 

Malus sp. Crab Apple 1 

Prunus sp. Cherry 1 

Quercus rubra Red Oak 2 

SOUTH LAWN: 80 TREES 

SOUTH BORDER (9 TREES) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Acer palmatum Japanese Maple 1 

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 2 

Acer platanoides Norway Maple 39 

Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree 1 

Cladrastis kentukea American Yellowwood 3 

Fraxinus americana White Ash 2 

Betula lenta River (Sweet) Birch 7 

Cercidiphyllum japonicum Katsura 1 

Cornus kousa Kousa Dogwood 1 

Prunus sp. Cherry 1 

Quercus rubra Red Oak 1 

55 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.5. SUMMARY OF TREES REMOVED, FALL 1994 

Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 1 

SERVICE AREAS: 1 TREE 

PARKING LOT (1 TREE) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Acer platanoides Norway Maple 1 

Shrub Removal 

A total of 96 shrubs were removed from the Fairsted landscape, primarily from the 

Hollow, Rock Garden and edges of the South Lawn. As with the trees on the site, 

the south border and west slope sufered from extensive volunteer growth. Many 

of the shrubs were very small seedlings, volunteers that self-seeded from other 

shrubs on site or from properties nearby. A few were consciously planted during 

the Olmsted Associates period, particularly bright-fowering shrubs to add color 

to the landscape. Those later additions were not signifcant and conficted with 

intended design character created by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and his sons. 

The Hollow 

Fifteen shrubs were removed from the Hollow (Figure 1.29). Shrubs removed 

included eight plants from the center bed, the most noteworthy of which were 

fve azaleas and rhododendrons (Rhododendron spp.) planted in the 1960s which 

were not consistent with the earlier plant palette and were not indicated in 

historic plans or photographs. Seven more shrubs were removed from the north 

embankment and west embankment of the Hollow. They included two buckthorn 

(Rhamnus sp.), one barberry (Berberis sp.), one torch azalea (Rhododendron 

kaempferi), and one Korean rhododendron (Rhododendron mucronulatum). 

Figure 1.29. Park staff removing 

shrubs in the Hollow, looking 

northwest, 1994. (OCLP) 

56 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.30. Park staff member Bob 

Galvin dragging brush across the 

Front Drive, looking west, 1994. 

(OCLP) 

Front Drive 

A total of eleven shrubs were removed from the Front Drive zone (Figure 1.30). In 

the center bed, two English yew (Taxus baccata) and one arrowwood (Viburnum 

dentatum) were removed and replaced with shrubs documented in historic 

photos. The area adjacent to the parking area included several large Japanese and 

English yews. These shrubs could not be documented in historic plans or photos 

and the parking area was substantially altered in the early 1960s. The Carolina 

allspice (Calycanthus foridus) located near the northeast corner of the house was 

also removed. 

Rock Garden 

Thirty-fve shrubs, or approximately 

one third of the total number of 

non-historic shrubs, were removed 

from the Rock Garden. Twenty-four 

of these shrubs were removed from 

the area east of the Rock Garden 

path (Figures 1.31, 1.32). Historically, 

the lawn extended into this corner, 

necessitating the removal of many 

shrubs. Ten of the shrubs removed 

from this area were mock orange 

(Philadelphus sp.); the rest of the 

removal included seven winged 

euonymus (Euonymus alatus), four 

jetbead (Rhodotypos scandens), one 

buckthorn, and one Japanese yew. 

Figure 1.31. Southeast corner of the Rock 

Garden following tree and shrub removal, 

looking southeast, 1994. The blue fowers of 

squill (Scilla siberica) are visible in the lawn. 

(OCLP) 

57 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.32. Park staff member string 

trimming in the southeast corner of 

the Rock Garden following tree and 

shrub removal, looking south, ca. 

1995. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.33. Park staff member cutting 

vegetation on the mound in the Rock 

Garden, looking east, ca. 1995. (OCLP) 

Existing shrubs along the outside of the historic lawn boundary were left intact 

since clear documentation did not exist for the composition of the shrub border 

in this area. West of the path, in the rocky area bordering the South Lawn, eleven 

shrubs known to be recent introductions, or which conficted with historic 

plantings, were removed (Figure 1.33). They included two fame azaleas, two 

Japanese yew, three arrowwood, and one each of tea viburnum (Viburnum 

setigerum), rhododendron, Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergii), honeysuckle 

(Lonicera sp.), and English yew. 

South Lawn 

Thirty-four shrubs were removed in the vicinity of the South Lawn. The most 

noticeable of these was the Hydrangea heteromalla adjacent to the path near 

58 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

the conservatory entrance, which was planted by the National Park Service in 

the 1980s (Figure 1.34, 1.35). Fourteen shrubs were removed along the south 

border (Figure 1.36). They included one catawba rhododendron (Rhododendron 

catawbiense) and nine yews, including a dwarf Japanese yew, English yew, and 

a Japanese yew, as well as two arrowwood and two viburnum in the southwest 

Figure 1.34. View of the northern edge of the South Lawn 

before restoration, looking east, ca. 1993. Note the Hydrangea 

heteromalla shrub to the right of the curvilinear path. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.35. View of the northern edge of the South Lawn 

following removal of the non-historic Hydrangea heteromalla 

shrub, looking east, 1995. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.36. Park staff removing 

shrubs from the border at the 

southern edge of the South Lawn 

during restoration, looking west, 

1994. (OCLP) 

59 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

corner. Along the west slope, a large group of sixteen winged euonymous selfsowed and were removed along with two English yew and one arrowwood. 

Service Areas 

The only non-historic shrub in the Service Areas zone was the climbing hydrangea 

(Hydrangea petiolaris) along the south side of the vault in the ofce courtyard. 

TABLE 2.6. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS REMOVED, FALL 1994 

HOLLOW: 15 

CENTER BED AND WALK (8) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Cotoneaster apiculatus Cranberry Contoneaster 1 

Lonicera tatarica Tatarian Honeysuckle 1 

Rhododendron kaempferi Torch Azalea 1 

Rhododendron x laetevirens Rhododendron 2 

Rhododendron yedoense 

poukhanense 

Korean Azalea 1 

Rhododendron sp. Rhododendron 1 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 1 

NORTH EMBANKMENT AND GROTTO (6) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry 1 

Rhamnus cathartica Common Buckthorn 1 

Rhododendron kaempferi Torch Azalea 3 

Rhododendron mucronulatum Korean Rhododendron 1 

FRONT DRIVE: 11 

CIRCULAR DRIVE AND CENTER BED (3) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 2 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 1 

CIRCULAR DRIVE PARKING AREA (7) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME 

Rhododendron catawbiense Catawba Rhododendron 1 

Rhodotypos scandens Jetbead 1 

Taxus baccata English Yew 1 

Taxus cuspidate Japanese Yew 4 

HOUSE AND OFFICE (1) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Calycanthus foridus Carolina Allspice 1 

ROCK GARDEN: 35 

EAST SIDE OF WALK (24) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Berberis Vulgaris Common Barberry 1 

Euonymus alatus Winged Euonymus 7 

Rhodotypos scandens Jetbead 4 

Philadelphus coronarius Mock Orange 10 

Rhamnus cathartica Common Buckthorn 1 

60 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

TABLE 2.6. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS REMOVED, FALL 1994 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 1 

LAWN/WEST SIDE OF PATH (11) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry 1 

Lonicera sp. Honeysuckle 1 

Rhododendron sp. Rhododendron 1 

Rhododendron calendulaceum Flame Azalea 2 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 1 

Taxus baccata English Yew 1 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 3 

Viburnum setigerum Tea Viburnum 1 

SOUTH LAWN: 34 

HOUSE AND LAWN AREA (1) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Hydrangea heteromalla Hydrangea 1 

SOUTH BORDER (14) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Rhododendron catawbiense Catawba Rhododendron 1 

Taxus cuspidata Dwarf Japanese Yew 1 

Taxus baccata English Yew 3 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 5 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 2 

Viburnum plicatum Viburnum 2 

WEST SLOPE (19) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Euonymus alatus Winged Euonymus 16 

Taxus baccata English Yew 2 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 1 

SERVICE AREAS: 1 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY REMOVED 

Hydrangea petiolaris9 Climbing Hydrangea 1 

PHASE II SCOPE OF WORK 

Overview 

Following the removal of non-historic trees and shrubs, the next phase of 

restoration work involved the replacement of missing historic features, repair 

work, and installing a new accessible entrance. In the winter of 1994–1995, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf completed schematic drawings 

for the second phase (see Figures 1.15, 1.16). In the spring, summer, and fall 

of 1995, Barbara Keene continued work on the Fairsted landscape, evaluating 

the new growing conditions, enhancing the soil with compost, and installing a 

seasonal watering system in preparation for the next phase. In 1996, the National 

Park Service contracted D&D Enterprises, Inc. to implement tree planting and 

61 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

other site work. This was followed by additional work performed by the park 

maintenance team, including removal of the non-historic path through the South 

Lawn and confguring the boundary of the lawn edge. 

Seasonal Watering System 

In the fall of 1995, following tree removal, park personnel procured services from 

Bay State Irrigation to install a new seasonal irrigation system. Designed by the 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, it utilized feld pipes on the surface 

of the ground with spigots every 50 feet. 

During treatment planning, the grounds staf had expressed concern over the 

need for substantial watering capability for the new plant material. This was due to 

several issues on site. First, the existing landscape had a large amount of exposed 

bedrock and ledge close to the surface, resulting in limited amount of soil for 

planting. Second, the presence of existing historic vegetation created the potential 

for root competition. Last, a limited number of water sources/spigots exist along 

the exterior of the buildings, so watering is a labor-intensive project. Given the 

sensitivity of the site, a below-ground irrigation system was deemed unsuitable. 

The new above ground irrigation system consisted of a series of removable feld 

pipes fed from one water source located at the shed. These pipes were mulched so 

they are not visible. This project entailed bringing a waterline from the basement 

of the west ofce wing (former planting department), under the drive to the 

barnyard, continuing to the shed. 

Archeological work was done for Section 106 approval related to parking lot 

restoration and drainage repair to the vault. A spigot was installed at the shed, 

from which surface (feld) pipes are fed. Seasonal spigots are located every 50 

feet or so to allow for adequate watering of the new plant material. The watering 

system allows for multiple hoses on the site so that more surface area can be 

covered simultaneously. 

New plantings accomplished in Phase II restored one of the most signifcant 

characteristics of the Olmsted design, a profuse and diverse planting of trees, 

shrubs, vines, and groundcover. This is by far the most detailed and extensive 

aspect of the restoration. Decisions regarding new plantings were based on 

substantial documentation of historic and existing conditions as described in 

volumes I and II of the cultural landscape report for Fairsted. 

62 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Planting 

Trees 

Phase II included planting 61 trees, concentrated on the southern border of the 

property. The planting was done through the contract with D&D Enterprises, Inc. 

of Hopkinton, Massachusetts. Since these trees replaced missing historic trees, 

which were lost to age, disease, and storm damage, the tree planting did not afect 

any archeological resources. The following sections describe the tree plantings 

in each landscape zone. Most were planted in the spring of 1997. A few trees had 

difculty getting established, were difcult to locate, or were planted in phases and 

thus have a later planting date. 

The Hollow 

One tuliptree and one red oak were planted along the Dudley Street side of 

the Hollow, replacing those lost during the 1990 hurricane. Between the two, a 

deteriorated downy hawthorn (Crataegus mollis) was replaced in kind. 

Front Drive 

Four trees were planted between the 

drive and Warren Street. A cucumber 

magnolia (Magnolia acuminata) 

marked the entry just inside the 

spruce pole fence. An American elm 

was placed at the edge of the parking 

area (Figure 1.37). According to the 

specifcations, the elm was to be a pure 

species, not a cultivar. A fowering 

dogwood (Cornus forida) and 

Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolia) 

provided the understory tree layer 

between the replacement elm and 

existing magnolia. The Russian olive 

may have been misidentifed at the 

nursery. A large clump of mountain 

maple was planted along the fence. 

Figure 1.37. American elm planted at the edge 

of the parking area, looking north, ca. 1995. 

(OCLP) 

Rock Garden 

Ten trees were added in the Rock Garden. Eight were placed to the eastern side 

of the walk. A white ash, an American elm, and a red oak were planted on the 

Warren Street edge in the northeastern corner of the property. Two pitch pines 

63 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

were placed in the new grass bay created by the reconfgured lawn. Two existing 

white pines (Pinus strobus) separated this massing from a shagbark hickory (Carya 

ovata) and sweet birch (Betula lenta) was placed along the southern rock wall. A 

river birch was planted on the slope between the white pine and the path. One 

goldenraintree (Keolreuteria paniculata) was added to the west side of the path, 

completing the canopy layer. 

South Lawn, Border, and West Slope 

Three groups of Canadian hemlock, 

totaling 21 trees, were planted to 

defne the southern border of the 

site. These groups joined the existing 

Canadian hemlocks to provide a 

continuous edge above the western 

half of the rock wall. Several new 

trees, two pitch pines (Pinus rigida), 

a European larch (Larix decidua), a 

silver linden (Tilia tomentosa) and 

two white pines line the west slope 

and separate the reserve garden from 

the South Lawn (Figure 1.38). A new 

paper birch (Betula papyrifera) was 

placed alongside an existing paper 

birch between the historic path and 

the shed. Figure 1.38. A sapling, maybe a silver linden, at 

the edge of the South Lawn after restoration, 

ca. 2000. (OCLP) 

Service Areas 

A sugar maple and a tuliptree were placed at the northwestern corner of the 

parking lot. A sycamore maple placed between the vault and the fence at the east 

side of the drive completed the Service Areas tree plantings. 

Summary of Trees Planted 

D&D Enterprises, Inc. planted the majority of the trees listed in Table 2.7 

beginning in 1997. Two trees were replaced as part of the tree removal contract 

with Tree Specialists Inc. in fall 1994. The Russian olive was planted as part of the 

earlier National Park Service shrub planting work in 1995. 

64 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

TABLE 2.7. SUMMARY OF TREES PLANTED, 1991 – 2000 

HOLLOW: 15 

CENTER BED AND WALK (8) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Crataegus mollis Downy Hawthorn 1 Nov. 1999 

Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree 1 1995 

Quercus rubra Red Oak 1 1997 

Tsuga Canadensis Canadian Hemlock 1 199110 

FRONT DRIVE: 18 

CIRCULAR DRIVE PARKING AREA (18) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Acer spicatum Mountain Maple 14 1998 

Cornus forida Flowering Dogwood 1 April 1997 

Elaeagnus sp. Russian-olive 1 1995 

Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Magnolia 1 1999 

Ulmus americana American Elm 1 April 1997 

ROCK GARDEN: 10 

EAST SIDE OF WALK (8) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Betula lenta Sweet Birch 1 1994 

Betula nigra River Birch 1 April 1997 

Carya ovata Shagbark Hickory 1 May 2000 

Fraxinus americana White Ash 1 May 2000 

Pinus rigida Pitch Pine 2 April 1997 

Quercus rubra Red Oak 1 April 1997 

Ulmus americana American Elm 1 1998 

LAWN/WEST SIDE OF WALK (1) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Koelreuteria paniculata Goldenraintree 1 NR 

SOUTH LAWN: 29 

SOUTH BORDER (21) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 21 1997, 1998, 

2000 

WEST SLOPE (8) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Betula papyrifera Paper Birch 1 April 1997 

Cladrastis kentukea Yellowwood 1 NR11 

Larix decidua European Larch 1 June 1998 

Pinus rigida Pitch Pine 2 April 1997 

Pinus strobus White Pine 2 April 1997 

Tilia tomentosa Silver Linden 1 April 1997 

SERVICE AREAS: 4 

NORTH SIDE (1) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 1 NR 

65 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.7. SUMMARY OF TREES PLANTED, 1991 – 2000 

PARKING LOT (3) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY PLANTED DATE 

Acer saccharum Sugar Maple 1 1996, 2000 

Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree 1 NR 

Pinus strobus White Pine 1 199112 

Shrubs and Vines 

The restoration planting plans called for the installation of approximately 600 

shrubs and vines in Phase II of the project. Park grounds staf implemented 

this work between 1995 and 2000 after the non-historic trees and shrubs were 

removed. In some cases, the quantities of plants in a given shrub mass were 

reduced either because larger specimens were used, to allow for future growth, or 

to accommodate existing historic plants. 

The Hollow 

The Hollow was returned to its intended rustic and picturesque conditions with 

the addition of 189 new shrubs. The vast majority of the shrubs, 147 in all, were 

placed along the northern embankment, creating a dense underplanting along the 

Dudley Street edge (Figures 1.39, 1.40). Plantings consisted of 48 wintercreeper 

euonymus (Euonymus fortunei), 26 dwarf bush-honeysuckle (Diervilla lonicera), 

39 shrub willows (Salix sp.), three Japanese yew, three Japanese yew ‘Nana’, two 

rock cotoneaster (Cotoneaster horizontalis), four Chinese juniper (Juniperus 

chinensis) and one rosebay rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum). Two 

English weeping yew were planted between the stone steps and the retaining wall. 

In the area of the grotto, four Canadian yew, six rock Cotoneaster, and fve English 

Figure 1.39. Overhead view of park 

staff planting shrubs on the north 

embankment in the Hollow, looking 

east, 1996. (OCLP) 

66 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.40. Park staff planting shrubs 

on the north embankment in the 

Hollow, looking north, 1996. (OCLP) 

weeping yew were planted. One Canadian yew (Taxus canadensis) was replaced in 

kind at the base of the stone ledge. 

Four rock cotoneaster and two common juniper (Juniperus communis) were 

massed at the northeastern end of the center bed. A single scarlet frethorn 

(Pyracantha coccinea) was placed adjacent to the rock outcropping at 

the southwestern end. On the western embankment, two Schlippenbach 

rhododendron (Rhododendron schlippenbachii) were placed at the bottom of the 

stone steps. A massing of ten Canadian yew were planted below the landing with 

groups of four Japanese yew ‘Nana’, fve mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), and 

four English weeping yew located at intervals along the northeastern face of the 

house. Three wintercreeper euonymus were to be planted at the base of the ofce 

wing wall, but have not yet been added. 

Front Drive 

The understory of the Front Drive area was supplemented with 70 shrubs. 

The barberry in the center bed was replanted. Two new rock cotoneaster fank 

the front entrance. This bed was also to receive additional plantings of two 

wintercreeper euonymous, with two additional euonymous planted further to the 

north of the entry. These have not yet been planted. Nine winged euonymus and 

two sweet mock orange completed the underplanting at the base of the existing 

cucumber magnolia. A dense planting was created on the Warren Street edge 

of the Front Drive with the addition of eight winged euonymus, four common 

quince (Cydonia oblonga), two common lilac (Syringa vulgaris), 25 yellowroot 

(Xanthorhiza simplicissima) and fve bush honeysuckle. 

67 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.41. Plantings staked out 

in the eastern portion of the Rock 

Garden, looking northwest, ca. 1995. 

(OCLP) 

Rock Garden 

Shrub additions in the Rock Garden totaled 174 plants. As stated previously, 

the historic design took advantage of the natural rock outcropping, creating a 

naturalistic landscape with a shrub layer dominated by evergreens. The densest 

plantings are located surrounding the outcropping on the western side of the path. 

Nine mountain andromeda (Pieris foribunda), fve scarlet frethorn, fve weeping 

English yew, fve Canadian yew, seventeen mountain laurel, one common quince 

and one common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) completed the shrub layer in 

this area. To the north of the rock outcropping, eleven mountain laurel, eleven 

mountain andromeda, three eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana), one black 

jetbead, two Vanhoutte spirea (Spiraea x vanhouteii) and one Hinoki falsecypress 

(Chamaecyparis obtusa) were planted. East of the path nineteen Witherod 

viburnum (Viburnum nudum), twenty arrowwood viburnum, three sweet mock 

orange and one common buckthorn completed the plantings (Figure 1.41). 

Between the path as it turns west and the southern rock wall, eighteen mountain 

laurel, seven Canadian yew, fve eastern redcedar, fourteen mountain andromeda 

and nine scarlet frethorn were planted. 

South Lawn, Border, and West Slope 

Along Fairsted’s southern border, a break in the tree canopy occurs near where 

the Rock Garden path enters the South Lawn. The vista through this break 

toward the Green Hill parcel is the most signifcant view from Fairsted. In this 

area, seventeen wintercreeper euonymus and 23 drooping leucothoe (Leucothoe 

fontanesiana) were added. Beneath the canopy of Canadian hemlock, ffteen 

drooping leucothoe, 30 mountain andromeda, and six Japanese holly (Ilex 

crenata) were added where the border pushed in toward the American elm. 

68 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Where the grade begins to rise toward the southwest corner, ten Tatarian 

dogwood (Cornus alba), ten redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea), ten winged 

euonymus, and thirteen inkberry holly (Ilex glabra) front and intermingle with 

the continuing Canadian hemlock edge (Figures 1.42, 1.43). Three Japanese yew 

and one Japanese holly were placed in the lawn. In the southwestern corner, six 

Tatarian dogwood, seven redosier dogwood, six winged euonymus, and four 

Japanese yew completed the shrub layer beneath and in front of the last of the 

Canadian hemlock (Figure 1.44). One Japanese yew in the lawn was replanted. 

In the open area along the west slope, ten common lilac were planted along 

the fence with ten Virginia rose (Rosa virginiana) edging the lawn (Figures 

1.45, 1.46). Five memorial roses were planted at the lawn edge near the base 

of the southwestern corner slope and one showy border forsythia (Forsythia x 

intermedia) was placed in the lawn. Two Vanhoutte spirea were planted in the 

Figure 1.42. New shrub plantings at 

the southern border of the South 

Lawn, looking northeast, ca. 1995. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 1.43. Park staff planting shrubs 

at the southern border of the South 

Lawn, looking northeast, 1996. (OCLP) 

69 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.44. New shrub plantings in 

Fairsted’s southwest corner along the 

west slope, looking southwest, ca. 

1995. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.45. Park staff planting shrubs 

on the west slope, looking northeast, 

ca. 1995. Note the restored bay of 

grass that climbs the west slope. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 1.46. Park staff planting shrubs 

on the west slope, looking west, 

1995. (OCLP) 

70 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

lawn near the north edge and two Dutchman’s pipe (Aristolochia macrophylla) 

were placed at the base of the new pipe arbor (also called the “wicket”). 

Service Areas 

Seven common lilacs were added to those existing on the west side of the parking 

lot. Ofce court plantings were restored with the addition of two pyramidal 

Japanese yew at the entry, three wintercreeper euonymus on the north wall, one 

Japanese yew and three Dutchman’s pipe on the southern wall and one pyramidal 

yew to the southern side of the path. Roses completed the woody plantings, ffteen 

of which were in the center bed and one to the southern side of the path. Five 

English ivy (Hedera helix) were planted at the base of the northern side of the plan 

vault, facing Dudley Street. 

Outside Boundary Fence 

Several vines were planted along the spruce pole fence. They include 30 

wintercreeper euonymus and 4 Dutchmen’s pipe. 

Summary of Shrubs Planted 

The restoration plan recommended a large quantity of new shrubs. By and large, 

the plans were implemented as recommended. In a few instances, the quantity 

of individual plants in a vegetation mass was reduced to allow for future growth. 

This is summarized below in Table 2.8, including variations in designed vs. 

implemented planting. 

TABLE 2.8. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS PLANTED, 1994 – 2000 

HOLLOW: 196 SHRUBS RECOMMENDED, 189 PLANTED 

CENTER BED AND WALK (7) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Cotoneaster 

horizontalis 

Rock Cotoneaster 4 4 1995 

Juniperus communis Common Juniper 2 2 1995 

Pyracantha coccinea Scarlet Firethorn 1 1 1995 

WEST EMBANKMENT (39 PLANNED, 35 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Euonymous fortunei 

var. radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 3 0 NR 

Kalmia latifolia Mountain Laurel 5 5 1999 

Rhododendron 

schlippenbachii 

Schlippenbach 

Azalea 2 2 May 1999 

Taxus baccata 

‘Repandens’ 

English Weeping 

Yew 4 4 1995 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 11 10 2000 

71 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.8. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS PLANTED, 1994 – 2000 

Taxus cuspidata ‘Nana’ Dwarf Japanese Yew 4 4 1997-

1999 

NORTH EMBANKMENT AND GROTTO (150 PLANNED, 147 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Cotoneaster 

horizontalis Rock Cotoneaster 8 8 1995 

Diervilla lonicera Dwarf Bushhoneysuckle 26 26 1995 

Euonymous fortunei 

var. radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 48 48 1995 

Juniperus chinensis Chinese Juniper 4 4 1995 

Juniperus communis Common Juniper 3 3 1995 

Rhododendron 

maximum 

Rosebay 

Rhododendron 1 1 1996 

Salix sp. Shrub Willow 39 39 

Nov. 

1998, 

1999 

Taxus baccata English Yew 2 0 NA 

Taxus baccata 

‘Repandens’ 

English Weeping 

Yew 7 7 1995 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 6 5 2000 

Taxus cuspidata 

‘Capitata’ 

Japanese Yew 

‘Capitata’ 3 3 6/98 

Taxus cuspidata ‘Nana’ Japanese Yew 

‘Nana’ 3 3 1997-

1999 

FRONT DRIVE: 76 SHRUBS 

CIRCULAR DRIVE AND CENTER BED (1) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Berberis vulgaris Native Barberry 1 1 NR 

CIRCULAR DRIVE AND PARKING AREA (71) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Acer spicatum Mountain Maple 14 14 1998 

Cydonia oblonga Common Quince 4 4 1995 

Diervilla sessifolia Bush Honeysuckle 5 5 1999 

Euonymous alatus Winged Euonymous 17 17 April 

1995 

Euonymous fortunei v. 

radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 2 2 1995 

Philadelphus 

coronarius Sweet Mock Orange 2 2 June 1998 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 2 2 1995 

Xanthorhiza 

simplicissima Yellowroot 25 25 1995 

HOUSE AND OFFICE (8 PLANNED, 4 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Cotoneaster 

horizontalis Rock Cotoneaster 2 2 1995 

Euonymous fortunei 

var. radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 4 0 NA 

72 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

TABLE 2.8. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS PLANTED, 1994 – 2000 

Philadelphus 

coronarius Sweet Mock Orange 1 1 1995 

Spirea x vanhouttei Vanhoutte Spirea 1 1 NR 

ROCK GARDEN (179 SHRUBS RECOMMENDED, 174 PLANTED) 

EAST SIDE OF WALK (102 PLANNED, 99 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Cornus sericia 

‘Flaviramea’ Redosier Dogwood 1 1 1998 

Juniperus virginiana Eastern Redcedar 5 5 1998 

Kalmia latifolia Mountain Laurel 20 18 1997 

Philadelphus 

coronarius Sweet Mock Orange 4 4 1995 

Pieris foribunda Mountain 

Andromeda 14 14 1998 

Pyracantha coccinea Scarlet Firethorn 9 9 NR 

Rhamnus cathartica Common Buckthorn 3 2 1998 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 7 7 2000 

Viburnum cassinoides Witherod Viburnum 19 19 1995 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood 

Viburnum 20 20 1995 

LAWN/WEST SIDE OF WALK (77 PLANNED, 75 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Chamaecyparis obtusa Hinoki Falsecypress 1 1 NR 

Juniperus virginiana Eastern Redcedar 3 3 1998 

Kalmia latifolia Mountain Laurel 28 18 1997 

Philadelphus 

coronarius Sweet Mock Orange 1 1 1998 

Pieris foribunda Mountain 

Andromeda 23 21 1998 

Pyracantha coccinea Scarlet Firethorn 5 5 NR 

Rhamnus cathartica Common Buckthorn 2 1 April 

1998 

Rhodotypos scandens Black Jetbead 1 1 1998 

Spirea x vanhouttei Vanhoutte Spirea 2 2 1995 

Taxus baccata 

‘Repandens 

English Weeping 

Yew 5 5 NR 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 5 5 2000 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 1 013 NR 

SOUTH LAWN: 192 SHRUBS AND VINES 

SOUTH BORDER (182 PLANNED, 149 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Aristolochia durior Dutchman’s Pipe 1 2 July 1997 

Cornus alba ‘Sibirica Tatarian Dogwood 16 16 1995 

Cornus sericea 

‘Flaviramea Redosier Dogwood 10 10 1995 

Euonymous alatus Winged Euonymous 10 10 1995 

Euonymous fortunei 

radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 22 17 1995 

73 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

TABLE 2.8. SUMMARY OF SHRUBS PLANTED, 1994 – 2000 

Ilex crenata ‘Convexa’ Japanese Holly 7 7 1995 

Ilex glabra Inkberry Holly 13 13 1995 

Leucothoe 

fontanesiana Drooping Leucothoe 60 38 1995 

Pieris foribunda Mountain 

Andromeda 37 30 1999 

Spirea x vanhouttei Vanhoutte Spirea 2 2 May 1998 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 4 4 1995 

WEST SLOPE (43) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Cornus sericea 

‘Flaviramea’ Redosier Dogwood 7 7 1995 

Euonymous alatus Winged Euonymous 6 6 1995 

Forsythia x intermedia 

‘Spectabilis’ 

Showy Border 

Forsythia 1 1 1995 

Rosa virginiana Virginia Rose 10 10 1995 

Rosa wichuraiana Memorial Rose 5 5 1995 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 10 10 1997 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 4 4 1995 

SERVICE AREAS: 38 SHRUBS 

PARKING LOT (7) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 7 7 1997 

OFFICE COURT (26) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Aristolochia durior Dutchman’s Pipe 3 3 1998 

Euonymous fortunei 

var. radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 3 3 NR 

Rosa (multiple 

varieties) Various roses 16 16 1998-

2000 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 1 1 1998 

NORTH SIDE (5) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Hedera helix English Ivy 5 5 1998 

OUTSIDE BOUNDARY FENCE (30 SHRUBS AND VINES RECOMMENDED, 0 PLANTED) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Aristolochia durior Dutchman’s Pipe 4 0 NA 

Euonymous fortunei 

var. radicans 

Wintercreeper 

Euonymous 26 0 NA 

Herbaceous Plants 

Phase II included planting herbaceous material in the Hollow, Front Drive and 

ofce court. Historic documentation of herbaceous materials in the form of plant 

lists or plans was limited to the Hollow and the ofce court. These documents, 

74 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

which date from the restoration period, indicated that perennial plantings focused 

attention on the entry areas for both clients and employees. 

National Park Service staf installed the herbaceous plantings. Historic varieties of 

iris (Iris spp.), rose, fern and peony (Paeonia spp.) were researched and wherever 

possible, historic varieties were obtained. Where they were not available, research 

determined the visual character of the plants so that suitable replacements could 

be obtained without adversely afecting the intended design efect. 

The Hollow 

Herbaceous plantings in the Hollow are based primarily on the October 1923 

Plan #673-33. Numeric codes were defned in an accompanying plant list. Plan 

#673-39 detailed plantings for the Hollow steps. An August 1925 plan refected the 

addition of a number of iris varieties, which were included in the treatment plan 

as well. 

The middle of the center bed was 

planted with dwarf crested iris (Iris 

cristata). Edging the bed were areas of 

Japanese pachysandra (Pachysandra 

terminalis), epimedium (Epimedium 

macranthum), 110 garden phlox (Phlox 

paniculata) in three varieties, and Iris 

kochi (Figure 1.47). Spot plantings of 

fve varieties of tall bearded iris (Iris 

germanica) were concentrated in the 

northern side of the bed. Eighteen 

varieties of tall bearded iris were 

planted along the north side of the 

path, with beds of smaller iris species 

completing the northeastern edge 

(Figure 1.48). A bed of dwarf crested iris was planted at the west base of a bed of 

100 garden phlox bordering the west side of the stone steps. The remaining edge 

of the path was edged with groundcover. 

Shrubs and trees were underplanted with epimedium, pachysandra, narrowleaved hosta (Hosta lancifolia), Siebold hosta (Hosta sieboldiana), hay-scented 

fern (Dennstaedtia punctilobula) and marginal shield fern (Dryopteris marginalis). 

Hay-scented fern were placed at the end of the path to the top of the stone ledge. 

Marginal shield fern interspersed with bergenia (Bergenia sp.) edged the new 

accessible ramp. A bed of sedum (Sedum sp.) at the base of the north-facing wall 

completed the herbaceous plantings. 

Figure 1.47. Park staff installing herbaceous 

plantings in the Hollow’s center bed, looking 

northeast, 1996. (OCLP) 

75 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.48. Restored plantings 

and stone dust path in the Hollow, 

looking northeast, ca. 2000. Note 

diverse iris species in the center bed 

(left) and northern bed (right), as well 

as the restored stone edging on both 

sides of the path. (OCLP) 

Front Drive 

Historic photographs showed fern planted in the center bed. Fifty cinnamon fern 

(Osmunda cinnamomea) and 90 hay-scented fern were planted based on that 

information. 

Service Areas 

Information on ofce court 

herbaceous plants was taken from the 

October 1923 Plan #673-40 by Hans 

Koehler and supported by historic 

photographs. The central bed in 

the ofce court now contains nine 

varieties of roses and is bordered by 

sweet alyssum (Lobularia maritima). 

Four varieties of iris were planted 

on the west edge of the courtyard. 

Pachysandra interspersed with 

begonia flled the southern edge. Giant 

holly fern (Polystichum munitum) and 

tree fern surround the pavers leading 

to the door. Five varieties of peonies were placed at the north side of the start of 

the pavers and three more varieties at the north side of the entrance to the ofce 

court (Figure 1.49). Sedum flled the north bed at the base of the north wall. 

Figure 1.49. Restored plantings in the offce 

courtyard, looking east, ca. 2001. (OCLP) 

76 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

TABLE 2.9: SUMMARY OF HERBACEOUS MATERIALS PLANTED, 1997 – 2000 

HOLLOW: 3,841 HERBACEOUS PLANTS RECOMMENDED 

CENTER BED AND WALK 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Bergenia cordifolia Bergenia 30 NR NR 

Fern (multiple 

varieties) Fern 228 175 1997-1999 

Epimedium 

macranthum Epimedium 756 NR 1997, 1998 

Hosta (multiple 

varieties) Hosta 110 55 1998, 1999 

Iris (multiple varieties) Iris 630 600 1997-

2000 

Pachysandra terminalis Pachysandra 1859 NR Each year 

Phlox subulata 

(multiple varieties) Phlox 200 100 1998-2000 

Sedum stoloniferum Sedum 28 36 1998, 

1999 

Taxus canadensis Canadian Yew 11 10 2000 

FRONT DRIVE: 175 HERBACEOUS PLANTS RECOMMENDED, 90 PLANTED 

CENTER BED (175) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Fern (multiple 

varieties) Fern 175 90 1998-

1999 

SERVICE AREAS: 273 HERBACEOUS PLANTS RECOMMENDED, 161 PLANTED 

OFFICE COURTYARD (161) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QUANTITY 

ON PLANS 

QUANTITY 

PLANTED DATE 

Alyssum maritimum Sweet Alyssum / 

Madwort 48 48 Each year 

Fern (multiple 

varieties) Fern 75 59 1998 

Iris species Iris 15 15 1998 

Pachysandra terminalis Pachysandra 110 15 1998 

Paeonia (multiple 

varieties) Peonies 9 8 1998 

Sedum spectabula Stonecrop Sedum 16 16 NR 

NR = No record found 

OTHER WORK 

Phase II included the removal of non-historic hardscape features, repair of some 

deteriorated features, and the replacement of missing historic features. These 

items were implemented through a combination of feldwork by park personnel 

and by a construction contract with D&D Enterprises, Inc. 

77 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.50. South Lawn, with nonhistoric path along the southern 

facade of the house, looking 

northeast, 1994. Note the non-historic 

Hydrangea heteromalla on the 

southern side of the path. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.51. South Lawn, after 

removal of non-historic path and 

Hydrangea heteromalla during 

landscape restoration, looking 

northeast, 2000. (Jack Boucher, HABS) 

Removal of the Non-historic Walk 

In 1995, the Fairsted grounds staf removed the existing walkway from the 

southwestern corner of the barnyard to the conservatory (Figures 1.50, 1.51). 

The National Park Service installed this walk in 1985, after the removal of the 

Richardson’s swimming pool, to provide public access from the parking lot to 

the conservatory. The location of the 1985 path was loosely based on historical 

evidence, although the project was never intended to restore a missing feature. 

Research conducted by Cynthia Zaitzevsky determined that by 1926 the path 

had disappeared from the South Lawn. In addition, an accessibility study for the 

frst foor public rooms determined that the easiest and least intrusive exterior 

modifcation to accommodate wheelchair access into the building was the historic 

ofce entrance of the circular drive. Therefore, both historic evidence and plans 

for accessibility improvements eliminated the need for the South Lawn path. 

78 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.52. Park staff spreading grass 

seed along the undulating southern 

edge of the South Lawn during 

restoration, looking west, 1995. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 1.53.The undulating southern 

edge of the South Lawn after 

restoration, looking west, 2000. 

(OCLP) 

Reshaping the South Lawn Edge 

Once all the non-historic features were removed, the grounds staf of Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site began work to reconfgure the lawn edge 

(Figure 1.52). They completed the new lawn edge in the fall of 1995. At the same 

time, work began to replant missing historic shrubs described in the previous 

section. The new lawn edge dramatically changed the spatial qualities of the site as 

the relatively straight lines of vegetation were replaced with an undulating border 

(Figure 1.53). This work also created several new undulating “bays” of grass that 

had been obscured by volunteer growth. 

Once the non-historic trees were removed, park staf created a new bay of lawn 

grass in the southeastern corner of the site, behind the large cucumber magnolia. 

This bay is defned by the surrounding shrub plantings (especially winged 

79 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

euonymus), trees, the spruce pole 

fence along Warren Street, and the 

sloping topography of the southern 

border and Rock Garden. It is largely 

invisible from the South Lawn and is 

framed by the two Vanhoutte spirea 

that mark the entrance. 

The western boundary of the South 

Lawn also contains two new bays of 

grass. The largest extends into the 

southwestern corner of the site up the 

slope directly below the former Clark 

sisters’ house. It is framed by dense 

plantings of shrubs and trees (Figure 

1.54). At the foot of the western slope, 

near the northwestern boundary of 

the lawn, a smaller bay of grass was 

created in the vicinity of several rock 

outcroppings. 

Accessibility Improvements 

The National Park Service and D&D 

Enterprises completed exterior 

accessibility improvements in 1996–7. 

The Fairsted buildings crew removed 

the existing deck at the entrance 

to the ofce and replaced it with a 

similar deck and railing at the same 

elevation as the threshold. This 

eliminated the step into the ofce 

wing in order to provide barrier-free 

access. D&D Enterprises constructed 

the new, accessible ramp following 

plans prepared by Olmsted Center 

for Landscape Preservation staf and 

construction documents by landscape architects Carol R. Johnson and Associates. 

This work followed recommendations from the State Historic Preservation 

Ofce, which had advised the National Park Service to fnd a solution that 

was compatible with the historic landscape features in the vicinity of the ofce 

entrance. 

Figure 1.54. South Lawn after restoration, 

looking west, 2000. Note the restored grass bay 

that climbs the west slope beneath the former 

Clark house in the distance. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.55. Accessible concrete walk to the 

building’s visitor entrance, installed during 

landscape restoration, looking northwest, ca. 

2001. (OCLP) 

80 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

The design raised the existing walk to create a ramp to a new deck at the same 

height as the ofce entrance (Figure 1.55). The existing historic coping stones, 

which bordered the original walk at the top of a small retaining wall, were also 

raised to form a barrier to the Hollow with the same elevational relationship that 

existed historically. The existing concrete walk was also widened to accommodate 

a wheelchair. This solution was consistent with the existing and historic character 

of the Hollow and historic ofce entrance and thus achieves the objectives 

recommended by the state historic preservation ofce. 

CHANGES TO SPECIFIC LANDSCAPE 

AREAS 

Hollow 

The stone steps leading from the ofce 

walkway to the bottom of the Hollow 

were reset to improve their condition 

and stability (Figure 1.56). This work 

also included adding a new step at the 

top of the Hollow, needed to meet the 

new grade created by the accessible 

entrance. Figure 1.56. Reset stone steps in the Hollow, 

looking southwest, 2000. (Jack Boucher/HABS) 

Dry-laid stone steps leading from a 

gate facing Dudley Street to the lower level of the ofce wing were reinstalled. 

The original steps had been removed during previous work to repair drainage 

problems in the vault but were well documented in photographs. The stone edging 

around the planting beds was also reset (Figure 1.57). 

Figure 1.57. Reset stone edging 

bordering the southern planting bed 

in the Hollow, looking southeast, 

1996. (OCLP) 

81 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Front Drive and Outer Edge 

The existing non-historic parking area was retained to provide accessible parking. 

This parking area was not constructed with the same subsurface material as the 

rest of the circular drive, and as a result, it was prone to major drainage problems 

during heavy rains and spring thaw. To solve this problem, new subsurface 

materials were required. In 1997, D&D Enterprises completed work on the 

circular drive, including the parking area according to construction documents 

prepared by Carol R. Johnson and Associates. D&D excavated the parking area to 

a depth of one foot and replaced it with gravel to provide a stable subsurface layer 

and permit adequate drainage. 

D&D also removed the deteriorated bituminous area located near the spruce pole 

fence and replaced it with an eight-foot asphalt transition apron with a chip seal, 

beginning at the existing trench drain. 

The entire front (circular) drive and 

parking area were resurfaced with 

stone dust (Figure 1.58). The existing 

bluestone and puddingstone curb 

bordering the driveway was reset, 

including the addition of an edge drain 

specifed in the Carol R. Johnson and 

Associates drawings. 

A small missing portion of the rustic 

fagstone walkway and edging leading 

from Warren Street to the front door 

of the house was replaced to match 

historic photographs. The existing 

stones of the walk were leveled and 

reset. Missing puddingstone curb 

around the center bed was also Figure 1.58. Restored features of the Front 

Drive, looking southwest through the spruce replaced. A new concrete sidewalk 

pole arch, 2001. Note the stone dust surface was installed, beginning at the end of of the circular drive, the chip-seal transition 

the fagstone walkway and continuing apron in the foreground, the reset bluestone 

and puddingstone curb, and the restored rustic along the street edge to the Dudley 

fagstone walk. (OCLP) Street drive. This work was intended 

to meet the Town of Brookline’s 

specifcations. A non-historic stone walkway leading from the Front Drive toward 

the Rock Garden was removed, as were excess edging stones. A curb cut was 

made near the house allowing accessibility to the lawn. 

82 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.59. Path through the Rock 

Garden, looking east, 1994. (OCLP) 

Rock Garden 

The existing path through the Rock 

Garden was resurfaced with stone dust 

(Figures 1.59, 1.60). No excavation was 

required. The existing non-historic 

stones at the northern entrance to the 

Rock Garden path were removed in 

order to re-establish the grass “bay” 

that historically extended into the 

southeastern corner of the property. 

South Lawn, Border, and West Slope 

The chain link boundary fence 

between the site and the Clark sisters’ 

property was replaced to replicate the 

historic design, which utilized wooden posts and chain link. The existing metal 

poles and concrete footings were removed and replaced with cedar posts. D&D 

Enterprises completed this work. 

The Fairsted grounds crew re-established the reserve garden, which historically 

heeled plant material for the site, at the northern end of the west slope. The 

reserve garden now provides a holding area for replacement plants. 

D&D installed a new section of path along the southern end of the board fence 

bordering the rear barnyard. The path terminates with a new pipe arbor, the 

design based on historic photographs of a “wicket” structure located at the 

opening between the board fence and the barn. After D&D installed the pipe 

arbor, the Fairsted grounds crew planted Dutchman’s pipe along it. 

Figure 1.60. Restored stone dust path through 

the Rock Garden, looking east, 2000. Note the 

shrub and herbaceous plantings and the stones 

lining the path. (OCLP) 

83 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

The existing drain/catch basin in the stone dust path was relocated approximately 

10 feet closer to the parking area to better accommodate surface water from the 

path and reserve garden slope. 

Service Areas 

As part of their construction project, D&D Enterprises resurfaced the parking 

area. Since the historic material, cinders, is now considered hazardous and 

cannot be used, a substitute material was found which approximates the historic 

appearance to the greatest extent possible. The contractor presented two 

alternative stone dust mixes, similar in composition but with diferent colors to the 

National Park Service for review. A warm gray (beige) mix was chosen for most of 

the site including the circular drive and service drive. A cool gray mix was chosen 

for the parking area to approximate the historic color diference. 

D&D also repaired the ofce courtyard by removing and replacing the existing 

aggregate concrete pavers in kind. The small aggregate pavers in the northeastern 

corner of the courtyard were reset in their historic confguration. 

SUMMARY OF OTHER SITE WORK 

Hollow 

•	 Reset existing steps from ofce entrance 

•	 Reset existing stones bordering center bed 

•	 Replaced missing steps on path from Dudley Street 

Front Drive and Outer Edge 

•	 Reset existing rustic walk and replaced missing stones 

•	 Repaired subsurface of existing parking area 

•	 Repaired surface 

•	 Added new concrete walk outside site boundary, along Dudley Street 

Rock Garden 

•	 Resurfaced path 

•	 Removed non-historic edge stones 

84 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

South Lawn and West Slope 

•	 Removed non-historic path and regraded 

•	 Regraded area where non-historic herb garden existed 

•	 Removed existing non-historic chain link fence and replaced with cedar post 

and chain link 

•	 Added missing section of path to barn yard 

•	 Added missing pipe rail arbor 

•	 Reconfgured fence into entrance of shed 

•	 Repaired brick drive into shed 

•	 Moved drain on path 

Service Areas 

•	 Resurfaced parking area and service drive 

•	 Added water line from basement of planting department through barnyard to 

shed 

•	 Added spigot, seasonal irrigation system 

•	 Removed existing deteriorated historic pavers in ofce courtyard and 

replaced in kind 

ARCHEOLOGY 

As mentioned above, a few items included in Phase II were located in areas that 

had been previously disturbed by the National Park Service or had received 

archeological testing as part of the Phase I work or earlier projects. They 

included: 

•	 Subsurface repair work to the Front Drive, located approximately 50 feet from 

the 1994 test pit researched by the National Park Service Cultural Resource 

Center 

•	 New concrete sidewalk located outside the boundary of Fairsted in an area 

that was signifcantly disturbed in the 1980’s when emergency drainage 

repairs were made to correct fooding in the vault 

•	 Water line in the Service Areas located where earlier archeological 

investigations were conducted for the restoration of the parking area. 

85 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

In addition, the National Park Service regional archeologist, Dick Hsu, examined 

the existing (deteriorated) brick drive into the shed. 

CHANGES IN SCOPE OR IMPLEMENTATION 

While the implementation of the landscape restoration followed the 

recommendations in the cultural landscape report closely, several issues arose 

during implementation that afected how the work was accomplished. 

Quantity of Plant Material 

Historic records indicate a very high density of shrub plantings at Fairsted, 

consistent with Olmsted’s planting strategy in the Boston park system and other 

landscapes. In some cases, the Fairsted grounds crew decreased the quantity of 

shrubs in a given area to allow for future growth and to accommodate the existing 

plant material, which has matured substantially since ca. 1930. The historic 

documentation indicated that, in some areas, shrubs were planted in very dense 

masses to provide an instant efect. In the restoration project, the lower density 

and wider spacing of the replacement shrubs was part of a long-term landscape 

maintenance strategy to ensure that the new plantings would survive and grow to 

achieve the desired efect. Because their role in the original design was to create an 

overall efect, the evergreen massings were considered as a single group of plants, 

not as individuals. 

Plant Substitutions 

A limited number of substitute iris varieties were required because varieties listed 

in historic plans were no longer available for purchase. This change did not afect 

the overall project since the characteristics of these herbaceous plants could be 

both documented and replicated with a reasonable alternative. A list of plant 

substitutions is included below. More detailed notes on the substitutions are 

described in Appendix C, Plant Charts. 

Hollow 

•	 Crataegus mollis (Downey Hawthorne) planted - should have been C. mollis 

‘Toba’ (or C. x mordenensis ‘Toba’) 

•	 Epimedium macranthum replaced by Epimedium grandifora 

•	 3 Iris ‘Caterina’ planted in 1998, temporarily enhanced with addition of 2 Iris 

‘Mother of Pearl’ 

•	 Iris ‘Citrea’ believed extinct - replaced with 50 Iris ‘Flutter-By’- 1998. Iris 

‘Flutter-By’ replaced by 50 Iris ‘La Perle’- 1999 

86 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

•	 Iris ‘Dorothea’ temporarily replaced with 16 Iris ‘La Perle’-1998. Iris ‘La 

Perle’ replaced by 16 Iris ‘Flutter-By’-1999 

•	 Iris ‘Ditton Purple’ believed extinct - replaced with 20 Iris ‘Cynea’- 1998 

•	 Iris ‘Eburna’ believed extinct- replaced with 17 Iris ‘The Bride’- 1998 

•	 Iris ‘Fritz Brown’ unknown - replaced with 6 Iris ‘Romeo’ 

•	 Iris ‘Foster Yellow’ replaced with 3 Iris ‘Flavescens’(?) 

•	 Iris ‘Halfdan’ replaced with 6 Iris ‘Helge’-1998 

•	 Iris ‘Ingeborg’ replaced with 5 Iris IB#1- 1998 

•	 3 Iris kochii planted- 1998, temporarily enhanced with 8 additional Iris 

‘Crimson King’ 

•	 Iris ‘Northung’ replaced with 6 Iris ‘Darius’- 1998 

•	 Iris ‘Pauline’ replaced with 2 Iris ‘Princess Royal’- 1998 

•	 Iris ‘Pearl Blue’ replaced with 4 Iris ‘Celeste’-1998 

•	 Iris ‘Prosper Laugier’ temporarily replaced with Iris ‘Indian Chief’ 

•	 Iris ‘Prince Victor’ replaced with Iris IB#2 

•	 Iris ‘Shrewsbury’ replaced with 3 Iris ‘Plumeri’ 

•	 Iris ‘White Knight’ not planted, other irises moved to fll gap, no substitution 

•	 Phlox subulata ‘G.F. Wilson’ replaced with 31 Phlox subulata ‘Rosea’ 

•	 Phlox subulata ‘Vivid’ replaced with 18 Phlox subulata ‘Emerald Pink’-1998, 6 

Phlox ‘Red Wings’ also added in 2000 

•	 Phlox subulata ‘Alba’ replaced with 26 Phlox subulata ‘White snow’, also 5 

‘Snowfake’ added Spring 2000 

•	 Sedum stoloniferum replaced with 24 Sedum spurium ‘Dragon’s blood’, Spring 

1998, 12 added Summer 1999 

Circular Drive 

•	 Elaeagnus sp. planted, may have been misidentifed by nursery 

87 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

 

Size of New Trees 

The construction documents prepared by Carol R. Johnson and Associates for 

Phase II indicated large trees, some of which were as big as 4-6” caliper. After 

consultation with National Park Service horticulturists, this specifcation was 

changed to dramatically reduce the size of the new trees. In the end, the strategy 

to replace missing trees with saplings or small individuals no larger than 2” caliper 

helped to minimize both the period of establishment, site disturbance, and cost. 

This issue is particularly well illustrated by the tulip poplar in the Hollow, which 

was felled by Hurricane Bob in 1991. A seedling volunteer from the historic plant 

nursery at the Lyman estate replaced the new tree. It was relatively easily to install 

and today is well established. 

Additional Drainage Work 

During the implementation, the park maintenance division identifed additional 

drainage issues, particularly in the circular drive and South Lawn. As a result, 

the contract with D&D Enterprises was modifed to address additional drainage 

work. This included modifcations to the drainage inlet in the circular drive, new 

catch basin on the south border, and new catch basin in the South Lawn. 

MISTAKES 

A few mistakes were made in implementing the planting plans, primarily due to 

erroneous plant identifcation at the nursery. For example, park horticulturists 

remain concerned about the exact identity of the Russian olive near the front 

parking area. It may not be Elaeagnus angustifolia as stipulated in the plans. 

Several mistakes were also made in carrying out the planting plans. Instead of 

transplanting a Siberian dogwood (Cornus alba ‘Sibirica’) from the South Lawn 

to the Rock Garden, a golden twig dogwood (Cornus sericea ‘Flaviramea’) was 

moved. Also, two new birches in the Rock Garden were somehow confused in 

planting, such that the Betula nigra was sited where the Betula lenta should have 

been and vice versa. 

The hawthorns in the Hollow remain one of the most difcult identifcation 

problems to solve. In 1994, the National Park Service identifed the historic trees 

as Crataegus mollis ‘Toba’. During the preparation of the plant inventory and 

herbarium collection, the Arnold Arboretum identifed this tree as Crataegus sp. 

(not Toba). A new tree planted in 1997 was intended to match the historic species 

and is instead a downy hawthorn (C. mollis). Fairsted grounds staf have noted 

that the original remaining tree may be C. x mordensis ‘Toba’. 

Other discrepancies between the planting plans and the existing landscape are due 

primarily to volunteer seedlings that continue to pose a maintenance problem. In 

88 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

fall 2001, the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation did an intensive feld 

check of the updated existing conditions survey and uncovered elm, hemlock, 

maple, mock orange, euonymus, barberry, and viburnum seedlings, several of 

which are already of considerable size. These volunteers have been noted on the 

corrected survey. 

The revised survey also revealed a clump of fuzzy deutzia (Deutzia scabra) and 

sweet mock orange on the west slope. This clump is not shown on the restoration 

planting plans, but is compatible with the massing of nearby shrubs. 

TREATMENT IMPLEMENTATION (2001–2021) 

Since completing Phase II of the Fairsted landscape restoration project in 

2001, the park has implemented additional treatment work that has impacted 

the historic character of Fairsted’s landscape. These treatment projects have 

included major rehabilitation and preservation eforts as well as the installation 

of new systems for drainage and safety on site. This section documents landscape 

treatment projects completed at Fairsted from 2001–2021, organized by the 

fve landscape zones described in this volume’s introduction: Front Drive (FD), 

Hollow (H), Rock Garden (RG), South Lawn (SL), and Service Areas (SA). 

Treatment tasks which took place across the Fairsted landscape or are not easily 

placed within a single landscape zone are categorized as park-wide (PW). Within 

each landscape zone, tasks are ordered chronologically according to when the 

work occurred. In addition to the tasks documented in this chapter, park staf 

have undertaken cyclical maintenance and other important ongoing management 

activities that contribute to the landscape’s condition and historic character. 

PW-1. INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE SYSTEM 

Between 2006 and 2013, a host of Life/Safety systems and building rehabilitation 

work tasks were completed at Fairsted. Included within this work were upgrades 

to and installation of a drainage system throughout the site to mitigate water 

infltration and fooding issues. New cisterns and dry wells, storm drains, and 

perimeter catchments were installed throughout the site, primarily around 

the Barn and within the Service Areas driveway and parking lot (Figure 1.61). 

Upgrades and maintenance work was also conducted on existing drains and 

catchments within the South Lawn and Front Drive. To minimize the impact to the 

landscape and potential archeological resources, the installation of drainage lines 

was carried out within previously disturbed areas to the greatest extent possible. 

Also installed as part of this work were high water detectors throughout the site. 

89 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.61. Installation of new base 

material in the service court during 

site infrastructure improvements. 

Looking northwest, 2008. (OCLP) 

PW-2. INSTALLATION OF NEW FIRE SUPPRESSION AND HVAC SYSTEMS 

Completed in conjunction with the work outlined in PW-1, project work was 

carried out between 2010–2012 to install new fre suppression and HVAC 

systems for the Fairsted building complex. Work consisted of the installation of 

a comprehensive fre suppression system to replace an existing system dating 

to 1925 as well as the halon fre suppression system in the ofce wing vault; the 

installation of a geothermal HVAC system to replace window air conditioning 

units determined to be historically inappropriate and supplement the building’s 

heating systems; and a variety of rehabilitation work to the building. While most 

of this work involved the installation of new conduits, connections, and other 

associated infrastructure within the building complex itself, some work did result 

in site excavation and landscape changes, particularly the installation of the 

geothermal HVAC system (Figure 1.62). 

This work included the installation of a transformer and pad on the east side 

of barn as well as the excavation of various areas around the site in order to lay 

utility lines. To minimize the impact to the landscape and potential archeological 

resources, the installation of drainage lines was carried out within previously 

disturbed areas to the greatest extent possible. 

90 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.62. Condenser units for HVAC 

system installed between 2010 and 

2012 on the north facade of the offce 

wing. (OCLP) 

PW-3. INSTALLATION OF VISITOR WAYFINDING SIGNAGE 

In fall 2018, fourteen wayfnding signs were installed throughout and adjacent to 

Fairsted to improve visitor wayfnding at the site (Figure 1.63). Work included the 

installation of three free-standing signs on weighted platforms, four signs afxed 

to the spruce pole fence at various points to direct visitors to parking areas and 

building entrances, two signs placed by the spruce pole arch (a main National 

Park Service sign as well as signage to indicate accessible parking and site entrance 

locations), and fve wayfnding signs afxed to windows at various locations 

around the building complex (Figure 1.64). 

Figure 1.63. Wayfnding signage at Fairsted’s northern boundary 

along Dudley Street, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.64. Interpretive wayside panel at the northeast corner of 

the park area, looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

91 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

PW-4. TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT WORK 

Over the past twenty years, various removals, and replacements-in-kind, of trees 

throughout the Fairsted landscape have taken place. This work has included: 

•	 The removal and replacement in-kind of a dead ash tree in the southeast 

corner of Fairsted in August 2009 

•	 The removal and replacement in-kind of a dead Canadian hemlock on the 

north side of the ofce wing along Dudley Street in 2014–2015. 

•	 The Removal and replacement of eastern hemlocks at various locations in 

the northern portion of Fairsted in 2016. Trees removed included: Two along 

the north border of the parking area; one near the ofce wing on the Dudley 

Street side; and one at the top of the Hollow, which was damaged during a 

winter storm in 2013 when a vehicle came through the spruce pole fence. 

Three eastern hemlocks were subsequently planted along the eastern edge of 

the Hollow. 

PW-5. RESURFACING OF FRONT DRIVE, SERVICE AREA DRIVE, AND PARKING 

AREAS 

Following the installation of a new site drainage system and life/safety 

infrastructure lines during project work under PW-1, work was carried out in the 

spring and summer of 2014 to rehabilitate the Front Drive and accessible parking 

area as well as the service drive and primary visitor/staf parking area. Project 

work focused on restoring the Front Drive and accessible parking area, Service 

Areas driveway and parking area, and the drive and rear patio area around the 

barn to a more visually accurate representation of what existed during the period 

of the Olmsted frm’s operation ca. 1933, as well as improve drainage and provide 

barrier-free access. 

Due to the classifcation of coal cinders (the original materials used to pave 

the service parking area in the 1930s) as hazardous in the 1990s, a temporary 

substitute material consisting of a 50/50 mixture of 3/8” crushed stone and stone 

dust was applied during the 1993 restoration work. Following the removal of the 

existing gravel driveway topping and compacting of the existing sub-base, this 

material mixture was reapplied during the 2014 project work (Figure 1.65). The 

drives and parking areas remain in good condition today, with some minor signs 

of deterioration along curbing and edges as well as minor growth of grasses and 

weeds. 

Along with the resurfacing work, a ramp and granite step adjacent to the barn 

was constructed to allow barrier-free access to the exhibit space entrance 

(Figures 1.66, 1.67). The breezeway between the house and barn was also partially 

reconstructed to allow for better accessibility. 

92 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.65. Service drive with 

recently-restored crushed stone and 

stone dust surface. Looking south, 

2014.(OCLP) 

Figure 1.66. Granite steps and landing 

providing accessible entry to the 

breezeway between the barn and 

the house, looking southwest, 2021. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 1.67. Front elevation from 

construction documents for the 

granite steps and landing at the 

breezeway between the barn and the 

house, 2014. (OCLP) 

93 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

PW-6. REPAIR AND RECONSTRUCTION OF SPRUCE POLE FENCE, ENTRANCE 

ARCH, AND CHAIN LINK FENCE 

Between 2004–2009, 650 linear feet 

of the perimeter spruce pole fence 

along Fairmount, Dudley, and Warren 

Streets, as well as the spruce pole 

entrance arch, were rehabilitated. 

This work involved the removal and 

replacement of deteriorated spruce 

poles, posts, and fence framing 

members as well as the salvaging of 

elements where appropriate. During 

this period, the black chain link fence 

along the Fairsted border with the 

former Clark sisters’ property was also 

reconstructed. Most of the perimeter 

fence work was completed by 2006; 

however, due to the life systems work undertaken during the same period (PW-1 

and PW-2), the entrance arch and remaining fence work was completed between 

2008– 2009. In 2022, the entire length of the spruce pole fence along the Fairsted 

boundary, as well as the entrance arch, were reconstructed by the Historic 

Preservation Training Center (Figure 1.68). 

SL-1. REPLACEMENT OF OLMSTED ELM 

One of the most consequential changes to the Fairsted landscape over the last 

decade has been the removal and replacement of the historic Olmsted Elm. 

Despite careful stewardship by park maintenance staf, the elm had shown 

increasingly severe symptoms of decline in the early 2000s. Crown dieback, bark 

and branch shedding, spreading Armillaria root rot, wood fungi, a widening 

vertical seam along its main trunk, and decades-long exposure to Dutch elm 

disease were all threatening the integrity of the tree. In the summer of 2010, park 

maintenance crews attempted to stabilize the tree by removing a 24-inch diameter 

limb which had cracked just above the trunk (Figure 1.69). However, in October 

2010 the elm was declared hazardous by the Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation’s arborist consultant, Davey Tree Specialists Co. The consultant’s 

recommendation of the tree’s removal followed a similar judgement made in 

December 2009 by U.S. Forest Service tree pathologist Dr. Kevin Smith, who 

at the time determined that the tree was at the end of its lifespan and at risk of 

structural failure. 

In March 2011, initial work was completed removing the Olmsted Elm down 

to the stump, which was removed in November of the same year (Figure 1.70). 

Figure 1.68. Reconstruction of the spruce pole 

archway, 2022. (OCLP) 

94 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.69. Removal of a limb from 

the original Olmsted elm as an 

attempt to stabilize the tree. Looking 

northeast, 2010. (OCLP) 

Figure 1.70. Crew removing the fnal 

section of the trunk of the original 

Olmsted elm, looking northeast, 2011. 

(OCLP) 

Prior to the stump’s removal, archeological work was conducted in October by 

the Public Archeology Laboratory, Inc. of Pawtucket, Rhode Island (Figure 1.71). 

The aim of the investigation was to investigate the presence and, if found, the 

signifcance of any potential archeological resources within the project site area. 

A variety of resources were found during the investigation, including a seven-inch 

diameter ceramic drainage pipe; various cultural materials likely dating to the 

eighteenth-century, including ceramics, glass fragments, nails and other metal 

hardware; personal items, including a tobacco pipe stem, buttons, and a slate 

writing stylus; brick, roofng slate, coal and coal ash; and a few pieces of French 

ballast fint. Public Archeology Laboratory staf determined that the materials 

and associated soil layers were likely placed prior to 1895, likely during landscape 

work to the South Lawn conducted under Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and came 

from elsewhere on the property. It is possible that dredged soil, perhaps from 

95 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 1.71. Archeological work in 

the vicinity of the former Olmsted 

elm, prior to removal of the stump. 

Looking northeast, 2011. (OCLP) 

Boston Harbor, was incorporated into the loam fll, as evidenced by the presence 

of the ballast fint. No pre-contact materials were identifed during the survey.14 

The following year, the park commenced a search for a successor tree. While the 

park had worked with the Arnold Arboretum to cultivate clones derived from 

cuttings of the original elm, these proved inviable as replacements due to a lack 

of sufcient growth or susceptibility to Dutch elm disease. The decision was 

made in 2012 to instead select a Jeferson elm cultivar from the Halka Nurseries 

of Millstone, New Jersey to serve as successor tree, primarily due to the species’ 

disease tolerance to Dutch elm disease. 

In April 2013, the park held a formal replanting ceremony for the successor elm. 

Attendees included park and Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation staf, 

representatives of the companies who carried out the consultation and removal 

work, the Friends of Fairsted, and staf and students from the nearby William 

Lincoln Elementary School. Following remarks, students of Lincoln Elementary 

as well as participants in the National Park Service Branching Out youth program 

assisted the park landscape maintenance crew in planting the new Jeferson elm 

(Figure 1.72). Subsequent to the replanting, the successor elm sufered damage 

during a severe storm, and was replaced by another Jeferson elm specimen in 

2015.15 

96 
Record of Treatment, Fairsted

Figure 1.72. Young participants of 

the NPS Branching Out program and 

students from the William H. Lincoln 

Elementary School assist park staff 

in planting the replacement Olmsted 

elm in 2013. (Matt Teuten) 

SA-1. OFFICE COURTYARD RESTORATION 

Work completed in 2014 focused on rehabilitation of the ofce courtyard. Work 

consisted of the replacement of plants, improvements to the deteriorated historic 

trellis system, repair and replacement of damaged and deteriorated historic 

exposed aggregate concrete pavers and exposed aggregate concrete steps and 

edging; improvements to deteriorated dry laid stone walls; and improvements to 

existing soil conditions to improve extant historic plant growth. 

SA-2. REPLACEMENT OF BARN AND LAUNDRY YARD FENCES 

In 2010, the stockade fence enclosing the barnyard was replaced, following the 

removal of the original fence during the work conducted under PW-1 and PW2. During these two projects, park staf determined that the then-extant fence, 

originally installed during restoration work in 1987–88, was beyond repair. As part 

of the work, the entirety of the fence was replaced in-kind. An eight-foot-long 

section of the fence, adjacent to a transformer east of the barn, is removable to 

allow for access by technicians. 

Around the same time as the barnyard fence was replaced in-kind, the 

laundry yard fence was also rebuilt. This work was undertaken following the 

determination by park staf that the fence was water damaged beyond repair. 

Work involved the replacement of existing fr, pine, and spruce fence materials 

with mahogany. All measurements, post locations, and fasteners matched the 

original fence; no ground disturbance was required as the fence sits on a low stone 

wall. 

97 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

SA-3. COURTYARD STAIRWAY AND MASONRY WALL REPAIR 

In the summer and fall of 2009, work was undertaken to repair a below grade 

stairway and masonry wall within the service courtyard on the south wall of 

the former planting department, which provides access to a mechanical room. 

Work, undertaken under PEPC 26455, involved the removal of failing sections 

of the masonry wall and the restoration of the masonry and fat coping stone cap 

sections to their historic condition, and the resetting of the stairwell to resolve 

safety hazards. The stairway and stairway wall were rebuilt to match their original 

confguration and appearance, and existing masonry components (excluding 

removed mortar) were reused where able to allow for the restoration to historic 

condition. One non-historic feature added were weep holes installed in the 

stairway wall. 

ENDNOTES, RECORD OF TREATMENT, FAIRSTED 

1 See Appendix A in Cynthia Zaitzevsky, Fairsted: Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Volume 1: Site History. Boston, MA: National Park Service and the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University, 1997. 

2 NPS staf originally developed the visual information system as an integrated series of maps and database using a MacIntosh in order to track and plan for maintenance activities on the site. This system is no longer used. 

3Timothy Baugh, Ricardo Elia, and Thomas F. Tartaron. “Geophysical Remote Sensing Survey at Fairsted, the Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site in Brookline, Massachusetts.” Ofce of Public Archeology Report of Investigations 

No. 116. Boston University, Boston, MA, May 1993. 

4 The abbreviation includes the frst three letters of the genus and frst three letters of the specifc epithet (e.g., Ulm 

ame for Ulmus americana). 

5 DO-28: Cultural Resource Management Guideline, cultural landscapes; and Section 106, 36 CFR, Part 800. 

6 This tree, located at the edge of the Rock Garden bordering the South Lawn, is a replacement of an earlier historic 

fowering crab apple, for which the exact species could not be identifed in historic photographs. Therefore, it was 

retained rather than replaced. 

7 Replaced because of deteriorated condition. 

8 Cynthia Zaitzevsky. Fairsted, Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Volume 1: 

Site History, p. #. 

9 This vine is actually two plants, each with an identifcation number. 

10 Planted during NPS ownership, but prior to this project. 

11 Planted during NPS ownership, but prior to this project. 

12 Planted during NPS ownership, but prior to this project. 

13 The original, historic plant was retained and pruned rather than removed and replaced in kind as specifed in the 

drawings. 

14 “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site Archeological Overview and Assessment,” Technical Report. Public 

Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. July 2012. 

15 Michele Clark, FRLA Archivist, and Jill Trebbe, FRLA Site Manager, in comments on a February 2022 draft of this 

report. 

98 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

RECORD OF TREATMENT, G REENHILL 

PARCEL 

This chapter summarizes major landscape treatment projects undertaken at the 

Green Hill parcel between 2001–2021. These include several notable projects that 

have enhanced the landscape’s historic character, including the restoration of the 

stone wall and spruce pole fence along Warren Street. However, most treatment 

work completed at the Green Hill parcel has consisted of cyclical maintenance 

tasks, such as pest and exotic plant management, the removal and replacement 

of hazard trees, and other ongoing activities. These important activities are not 

comprehensively documented here. 

The frst section of this chapter provides an account of research and treatment 

planning for the Green Hill parcel, particularly the Cultural Landscape Report 

for the Green Hill Parcel, published in 2017. This is followed by an overview of 

the treatment plan included in the 2017 report and the landscape zones that 

have been used by the park to organize and manage the Green Hill parcel. The 

fnal section consists of descriptions of specifc treatment tasks that have been 

implemented at the Green Hill parcel since 2001. 

RESEARCH AND TREATMENT PLANNING 

CULTURAL LANDSCAPE REPORT FOR THE GREEN HILL PARCEL 

In 2017, the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation completed the 

Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel. The primary landscape 

research and treatment planning document for the 5.31-acre parcel, the report 

includes a historical overview of the Green Hill site and an analysis of landscape 

characteristics and features. The 2017 report builds on research that was begun 

in 2015, in response to a technical assistance request from park staf on the care 

of the Green Hill parcel, particularly related to identifying construction and 

installation dates for key resources, including the stone wall and spruce pole fence 

along Warren Street (Figure 2.1). 

The fnal chapter of the Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel is 

dedicated to treatment of the historic landscape and recommends a series of 

specifc tasks to enhance the landscape’s historic character. Rehabilitation is 

identifed as a primary treatment approach and is intended to: 

•	 Perpetuate the historic features and characteristics of the Green Hill par99 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 2.1. Section of the spruce pole 

fence along Warren Street at the 

edge of the Green Hill parcel, looking 

southeast, 2020. Shortly after this 

photograph was taken, the fence was 

restored. Note the historic stone wall 

beneath the fence. (OCLP) 

cel landscape, including vegetation, views, and small-scale features 

•	 Improve the ecological health of the Green Hill parcel landscape 

•	 Reinforce continuity between Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel 

•	 Accommodate residential privacy 

The treatment philosophy and task 

recommendations included in the 

cultural landscape report employ 

a treatment reference date of ca. 

1930 to maintain continuity with 

the restored Fairsted landscape. 

Continuity between the landscapes 

is particularly important in the 

context of the historic borrowed vista 

toward Green Hill from Fairsted’s 

conservatory and South Lawn (Figure 

2.2). Primary objectives outlined 

in the cultural landscape report for 

enhancing the Green Hill parcel’s 

historic character include removal of 

hazardous trees and invasive species, 

replacement of missing historic 

trees, rehabilitation of meadow and 

understory vegetation, and repair of 

the historic stone wall along Warren 

Street. Specifc treatment task 

Figure 2.2. Vista to the Green Hill parcel from 

Fairsted’s South Lawn, looking south, 2021. 

(OCLP) 

100 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

recommendations proposed in the 2017 report have guided management of the 

Green Hill parcel landscape in recent years. Major landscape treatment work that 

has been completed is documented in the Treatment Implementation section of 

this chapter. 

NATIONAL REGISTER DOCUMENTATION 

Since 1985, the Green Hill parcel has been listed in the National Register of 

Historic Places as part of the Green Hill Historic District, which comprises 34 

contributing historic properties and fve non-contributing properties in the 

area directly south of Fairsted, primarily along Warren, Sargent, Cottage and 

Fairmount streets. The district’s period of signifcance is identifed simply as the 

“nineteenth century”, although construction dates for contributing structures 

within the distract span from ca. 1742 to 1920. 

The National Register listing for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 

recorded in 1966, does not include the Green Hill parcel, which was still in private 

ownership at the time. In 2014, updated draft documentation was completed to 

expand the National Register boundaries for Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site to include the 5.31-acre parcel, which the park had acquired in 2001. 

Although the draft documentation would expand the park’s boundary, it did not 

identify any historic resources at the Green Hill parcel. The National Park Service 

research begun in 2015 was also intended to enhance the draft National Register 

documentation by listing resources at the Green Hill parcel. In fall of 2021, 

updated National Register documentation for Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site was submitted to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation 

Ofcer for review. The updated documentation, which remains under review, 

would expand the park’s National Register historic site boundaries to include the 

Green Hill parcel. 

INVASIVE PLANT MANAGEMENT PLANNING 

Management of non-native invasive plants at the Green Hill parcel is 

recommended as part of several treatment tasks in the 2017 cultural landscape 

report. Following donation of the parcel as conservation land in 1980, minimal 

management had resulted in widespread establishment of invasive trees, shrubs, 

and herbaceous plants throughout the landscape (Figure 2.3). Volunteer Norway 

maple (Acer platanoides) specimens had grown up along the parcel’s northern 

boundary and were obscuring the historic vista from Fairsted’s South Lawn. 

Understory vegetation throughout the site had been colonized by bishop’s 

goutweed (Aegopodium podagraria L.), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), and 

porcelain berry (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata), among many other species. 

101 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

In November 2016, the National Park 

Service Northeast Region Exotic Plant 

Management Team prepared an exotic 

plant treatment plan for the Green Hill 

parcel. The plan, which is included 

as an appendix to the 2017 cultural 

landscape report, directs actions to 

control invasive exotic species and 

replant or reseed afected portions of 

the landscape with native species. For 

the purposes of the plan, the Green 

Hill parcel landscape is divided into 

seven vegetation treatment areas and 

specifc actions are recommended for 

each area. The execution of the plan 

began during 2016–2017 and longterm exotic invasive plant management 

eforts have continued to the present. 

These eforts are documented 

in more detail in the Treatment 

Implementation section below. 

TREATMENT PLAN/ZONES 

The Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel proposes landscape 

treatment using a system of three distinct treatment zones that identify areas 

of the historic landscape to be managed for prescribed character. Proposed 

treatment of the three zones, which comprise woodland (zone 1), screen (zone 2), 

and meadow (zone 3), is primarily related to management of vegetation features to 

maintain desired landscape character. 

The woodland zone, which lies along the eastern boundary of the parcel and 

an area in the vicinity of the former Clark house, contains a canopy of mostly 

deciduous trees with a lower understory. The screen zone, along the Warren Street 

frontage and along the southern property boundary, is composed of a sub-canopy 

of mid-height trees and woody shrubs, including rhododendron (Rhododendron 

spp.), underplanted with herbaceous vegetation. The meadow zone consists of 

two subzones. The open meadow subzone (zone 3a) spreads across most of the 

core of the parcel and contains grasses and wildfowers with scattered deciduous 

specimen trees. The fescue meadow subzone (zone 3b) is immediately south of 

Fairsted’s south lawn and contains primarily low-growing fescue species, selected 

to maintain the historic vista from Fairsted into the Green Hill parcel. 

Figure 2.3. Arborist climbing a large tree at 

the Green Hill parcel in 2003, soon after park 

acquisition of the site. Note the dense woody 

vegetation that characterized much of the 

landscape. (OCLP) 

102 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

1 See Drawing 4

wing 5 See Dra 2 

145

150

155

160

165

165

170

185

180

175

180

1 See Drawing 4

wing 5 See Dra 2 

145

150

155

160

165

165

170

185

180

175

180

Cultural Landscape Report 

Green Hill Parcel 

Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site 

Brookline, Massachusetts 

Treatment Plan 

Option 1 

 

SSF-2 Repair 

stone wall along 

Warren Street 

VG-3 Remove 

Norway maples National Park Service VG-2 Reestablish meadow 

grass and wildfower 

planting Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation 

www.nps.gov/oclp 

SOURCES 

1. Bryant Associates Survey, 1999 

2. MEA Partial Topographic Survey, 2006 

3. Aerial Photograph, MassGIS, 2009 

VG-6 Establish 

See Fig. 40 VG-2 Reestablish specimen trees 

A VG-4 Replace missing screen planting DRAWN BY along Warren 

Street meadow grass and Adrine Arakelian (2011), Shanasia Sylman (2015), Angelina R. wildfower planting Jones (2016), and Chris Beagan (2015), OCLP 

AutoCAD Map 3D, Photoshop CS5, Illustrator CS5 

LEGEND 

Proposed Vegetation Zone Boundary 

Olmsted NHS Building VG-3 Remove VG-5 Phase out 

Canadian 

hemlocks Other Building 

Norway maples 

VG-1 Remove 

invasive understory B Deciduous Tree species See Fig. 38 

Evergreen Tree 

C See Fig. 44 Tree to be Removed 

Proposed Canopy Tree 

Shrub 

Lawn / Groundcover 

Asphalt / Bituminous Concrete Road 

Stonedust Drive / Walk ZONE 1: WOODLAND 1.4 acres 

Stone Wall 

ZONE 2: SCREEN .5 acres Ledge 

ZONE 3A: OPEN MEADOW 3.2 acres 

NOTES 

1. Contour Interval = 5’-0” 

ZONE 3B: FESCUE MEADOW .2 acres 2. All features shown in approximate scale and location. 

0’ 50’ 100’ 200’ 

Drawing 2 

Figure 2.4. Treatment Plan for the Green Hill parcel, Option 1. (OCLP) 

Cultural Landscape Report 

Green Hill Parcel 

Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site 

Brookline, Massachusetts 

Treatment Plan 

Option 2 

 

SSF-2 Repair 

stone wall along 

Warren Street 

VG-3 Remove 

Norway maples National Park Service VG-2 Reestablish meadow 

grass and wildfower Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation planting Potential break in fence for 

vehicular visibility www.nps.gov/oclp 

SSF-1 Replace SOURCES spruce pole 

fence along 1. Bryant Associates Survey, 1999 

Warren Street 2. MEA Partial Topographic Survey, 2006 

3. Aerial Photograph, MassGIS, 2009 

A VG-6 Establish 

See Fig. 40 VG-2 Reestablish VG-4 Replace missing 

specimen trees screen planting DRAWN BY along Warren 

wildfower planting 

meadow grass and Adrine Arakelian (2011), Shanasia Sylman (2015), Angelina R. 

Jones (2016), and Chris Beagan (2015), OCLP 

AutoCAD Map 3D, Photoshop CS5, Illustrator CS5 

Street 

LEGEND 

Proposed Vegetation Zone Boundary 

Olmsted NHS Building VG-3 Remove VG-5 Phase out Norway maples Canadian 

hemlocks Other Building 

VG-1 Remove 

invasive understory B Deciduous Tree species See Fig. 47 

Evergreen Tree 

C See Fig. 44 Tree to be Removed 

Proposed Canopy Tree 

Shrub 

Lawn / Groundcover 

Asphalt / Bituminous Concrete Road 

Stonedust Drive / Walk ZONE 1: WOODLAND 1.6 acres 

Proposed Fence on Stone Wall 

ZONE 2: SCREEN .3 acres Ledge 

ZONE 3A: OPEN MEADOW 3.1 acres 

NOTES 

1. Contour Interval = 5’-0” 

ZONE 3B: FESCUE MEADOW .3 acres 2. All features shown in approximate scale and location. 

0’ 50’ 100’ 200’ 

Drawing 3 

Figure 2.5. Treatment Plan for the Green Hill parcel, Option 2. (OCLP) 

103 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

The three management zones are represented on a treatment plan with two 

options that depict slightly diferent extents for each zone (Figures 2.4, 2.5). 

Since publication of the cultural landscape report in 2017, the park has primarily 

employed option 1 to guide treatment projects at the Green Hill parcel. In option 

1, the woodland zone contains 1.4 acres in areas along Warren Street and in the 

southwestern and northwestern corners of the site. Along the site’s southeastern 

boundary, the woodland zone is separated from Warren Street by the screen 

zone, which also runs along the site’s southern boundary and along a portion of 

the private drive that leads to the former Gardner house, amounting to .5 acres in 

total. The open meadow zone consists of 3.2 acres throughout most of the central 

portion of the site, while the fescue meadow zone contains .2 acres near the center 

of the Green Hill parcel’s northern boundary. 

TREATMENT IMPLEMENTATION 

This section contains descriptions of treatment projects that have been 

implemented at the Green Hill parcel since the park acquired the historic 

landscape in 2001. Completed treatment tasks are labeled with alphanumeric 

codes that refer to the landscape zones employed in the 2017 cultural landscape 

report and described in the preceding section. These codes identify tasks as 

occurring park-wide (PW), within the screen zone (SZ), or within the woodland 

zone (WZ). There are no tasks listed within the meadow zone because treatment 

in this zone has consisted of cyclical management and is described within 

park-wide tasks. Treatment tasks within each landscape zone are ordered 

chronologically according to when the work occurred. 

PW-1. TREE REMOVAL 

Soon after acquisition of the Green Hill parcel in 2001, the park made eforts to 

reduce fre risk through limited removal of brush and large trees (Figure 2.6). In 

more recent years, major tree removal projects have been implemented. In 2016, 

a variety of removal work was carried out by the Exotic Plant Management Team, 

park staf, and contractors at both Green Hill and Fairsted. At Green Hill, this 

work included: 

•	 The removal of a hazardous, approximately 60-foot-tall Norway maple near 

Warren Street 

•	 The removal of a white pine as well as the removal of a large leader log which 

fell of the same tree on the Green Hill-Fairsted property line 

From 2017–2019, work was carried out throughout the Green Hill landscape removing invasive and “weed” species determined to be non-contributing according 

104 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

to the 2017 treatment plan, primarily 

in the screen and woodland zones. 

Along with 74 Norway maples, four 

tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), 

three butternut (Juglans cinerea), one 

cherry (Prunus sp.), one buckthorn 

(Rhamnus sp.), and one linden (Tilia 

sp.) were removed. Two trees determined to be hazardous, one fowering 

dogwood (Cornus forida) and one European beech (Fagus sylvatica), were 

also removed. The majority of Norway 

maples removed were located on the 

southern portion of the property along 

Warren Street and the southern property boundary. About a dozen Norway 

maples along the Green Hill-Fairsted 

property lines were removed to restore 

the historic “borrowed view” between 

the two properties, originally devised 

by Frederick Law Olmsted Sr. This work was carried out with fnancial support 

from park abutters. 

Along with their non-contributing status, the decision to remove the trees, particularly the Norway maples, was made for a variety of reasons. Namely, the invasive 

nature of Norway maples to regenerate quickly and outcompete other species, the 

precedence of their removal from Fairsted during the 1993–1996 restoration, and 

the species’ susceptibility to Asian Long-horned Beetle. 

PW-2: INVASIVE PLANT AND PEST MANAGEMENT 

Since the completion of the 2017 cultural landscape report and commencement 

of treatment work at the Green Hill parcel, a long-term program of invasive plant 

management has been conducted. This work has been carried out in collaboration 

with the Northeast Region Exotic Plant Management Team and has included a 

variety of techniques including herbicide application and pulling plants by hand. 

This work is cyclical and is intended to bring about the desired character and 

vegetation composition of the landscape, especially in the meadow zone. 

Park management of the Green Hill parcel has also included projects to control 

populations of invasive insects and other pests. During the summer of 2016, the 

insecticide Safari was applied via an aerial spray to treat adelgid on Hemlocks 

throughout the Green Hill landscape. 

Figure 2.6. Tree removal work at the northern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, looking 

north, 2005. Note the former Clark sisters’ 

house in the background. (NPS) 

105 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 2.7. Historic stone wall 

along Warren Street at the eastern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel 

before restoration, looking east, 2019 

(OCLP). 

Figure 2.8. Mason restoring a portion 

of the historic stone wall along 

Warren Street, looking north, 2019. 

(OCLP) 

SZ-1: RESTORATION OF WARREN STREET STONE WALL 

Carried out in conjunction with SZ-2, the Historic Preservation Training Center 

restored the stone wall along the Warren Street property boundary from 2017– 

2019 (Figure 2.7). This work involved the removal of vegetation and thorough 

pressure washing of the existing wall, dismantling and reconstructing damaged 

wall sections according to historic records, salvaging stones where able and 

replacing in-kind as needed, and selectively removing loose mortar joints and 

repointing (Figure 2.8). 

106 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

SZ-2. REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF SPRUCE POLE FENCE ALONG WARREN STREET 

Already in a state of disrepair when the National Park Service acquired the Green 

Hill parcel in 2001, the historic spruce pole fence at the parcel’s eastern boundary 

was temporarily stabilized in spring 2007 by wire-tying sections to a metal support 

system. Deterioration continued, however, and the fence was determined to be a 

threat to public safety both within the parcel as well as to passing pedestrian and 

vehicular trafc on Warren Street. In 2009, the Historic Preservation Training 

Center (HPTC) removed approximately 700 linear feet of existing spruce pole 

fence and structural supports as well as 120 linear feet of non-contributing 

stockade fence along the Warren Street property boundary. Following this 

project, only three short sections of the fence remained along the parcel’s eastern 

Figure 2.9. Section of the spruce pole 

fence along Warren Street at the 

eastern boundary of the Green Hill 

parcel, looking north, 2015. At the 

time, only three short sections of the 

fence remained. (OCLP) 

Figure 2.10. Section of the 

deteriorated spruce pole fence 

along Warren Street at the eastern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, 

looking south, 2020. Note the metal 

support brace on the inside of the 

fence to the left. (OCLP) 

107 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

boundary (Figure 2.9). The condition of the remaining sections continued to 

deteriorate (Figure 2.10). 

In 2019, restoration work to the stone wall (SZ-1) and replacement of the spruce 

pole fence along the entire length of the eastern boundary was carried out, also by 

the HPTC (Figures 2.11, 2.12, 2.13). As part of the fence reconstruction work, steel 

bracing was installed behind the fence, composed of 2-inch diameter galvanized 

steel pipes regularly spaced every 8 feet and attached to a steel brace set into the 

ground, to ensure continued stability (Figure 2.14). 

Figure 2.11. Scaffolding constructed 

atop the historic stone wall at the 

eastern boundary of the Green Hill 

parcel as part of the spruce pole 

fence reconstruction project, looking 

southwest, 2020. (Olmsted NHS) 

Figure 2.12. Contractors 

reconstructing the spruce pole fence 

at the edge of the Green Hill parcel 

along Warren Street, looking west, 

2020. (Olmsted NHS) 

108 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

Figure 2.13. Reconstructed section of 

the spruce pole fence along Warren 

Street at the edge of the Green Hill 

parcel, looking south, 2020. (Olmsted 

NHS) 

Figure 2.14. Galvanized steel 

pipes incorporated into bracing 

system installed on western side 

of reconstructed spruce pole fence, 

looking east, 2021. (Olmsted NHS) 

SZ-3: WARREN STREET SCREEN PLANTINGS 

Carried out in conjunction with SZ-1 and SZ-2, work was undertaken in fall 

2019 to rehabilitate the understory along Warren Street to refect the landscape’s 

historic character (Figures 2.15, 2.16, 2.17). Project work was managed by Gregory 

Lombardi Design, landscape architects, and installation was performed by 

Parterre Gardens, landscape contractor. Similar to the 2017–2019 tree removal 

work discussed in PW-1, planting was carried out in part with fnancial support 

from site abutters. Prior to planting, archeological feld work on site included 

excavation of 45 shovel test pits (Figures 2.18, 2.19, 2.20). 

The palette of species planted within the Warren Street screen zone largely follows 

the recommendations of the 2017 treatment plan, with a few cultivar substitutions 

due to plant availability. The planting scheme was based upon knowledge of what 

109 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 2.15. Rhododendrons in the screen zone along the eastern Figure 2.16. A variety of understory shrubs in the screen zone 

edge of the Green Hill parcel soon after planting, looking along the eastern edge of the Green Hill parcel soon after planting, 

northeast, 2019. (Olmsted NHS) looking north, 2019. (Olmsted NHS) 

is known to have grown at Green Hill 

during the historic period, as well as 

vegetation that exists on the Fairsted 

property and matches the massing of 

plants that existed during the historic 

period on the Green Hill parcel. These 

species include crabapple (Malus 

spp.), downy hawthorn (Crataegus 

mollis), mountain laurel (Kalmia 

latifolia), and rosebay rhododendron 

(Rhododendron maximum). To assist 

in the growth of the screen plantings, 

a drip irrigation system was installed 

along the Warren Street property 

boundary. 

Figure 2.17. An area of the screen zone along 

the eastern edge of the Green Hill parcel, 

recently planted with understory shrubs, 

looking south, 2019. (Olmsted NHS) 

WZ-1: REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS OAK TREE 

Prior to the completion of the Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel 

and sitewide tree removal described in PW-1, a large red oak tree was removed 

within the woodland zone along the left-hand side of the drive for 111 Warren 

Street, near the property entrance. The tree was determined to be dying and 

hazardous by park staf and was removed to prevent the possibility of it falling into 

Warren Street and onto electrical wires. 

110 
Record of Treatment, Green Hill Parcel

Figure 2.18. Archeologists digging 

test pits in the screen zone along 

Warren Street before planting, 

looking southeast, 2019. (Olmsted 

NHS) 

Figure 2.19. Archeological work 

underway before the installation of 

plantings in the screen zone along 

Warren Street, looking southeast, 

2019. (Olmsted NHS) 

Figure 2.20. Archeologist 

investigating contents of test pit 

before planting began in screen zone 

along Warren Street, 2019. (Olmsted 

NHS) 

111 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

112 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.1. Fairsted, looking northeast 

across the South Lawn from the west 

slope, 2021. (OCLP) 

EXISTING CONDITIONS 

This chapter documents the existing landscape conditions at Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site. Sections describing the park’s operations and 

setting precede a narrative description of the park’s historic landscape. The 

landscape description is divided across two sections that separately address 

Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel, the park’s two distinct landscape areas. A 

brief section evaluating the overall condition of the park landscape concludes the 

chapter. 

PARK OPERATIONS 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site encompasses 7.06 acres spread 

across two parcels along Warren Street in Brookline, Massachusetts. Fairsted, the 

historic home and ofces of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. and his successors, sits on 

1.75 acres at the park’s northern end (Figure 3.1). The 5.31-acre Green Hill parcel, 

historically part of a larger estate owned by the Gardner family, lies immediately 

south of Fairsted (Figure 3.2). In addition to the 7.06 acres that the US government 

holds in fee-simple ownership at Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 

the park retains an access easement on a .15-acre lot on Warren Street, at the 

eastern edge of the Green Hill parcel. The easement lot contains the eastern end 

of a drive that serves private residences at 135 and 111 Warren Street, which abut 

the Green Hill parcel to the west. 

113 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.2. View of the Green Hill 

parcel, looking east toward the 

woodland zone from the meadow 

zone, 2021. (OCLP) 

Legislatively established on October 12, 1979, the purpose of Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site is “to preserve and interpret for the beneft, 

inspiration, and education of present and future generations the home and ofce 

of Frederick Law Olmsted, the great American landscape architect and designer.”1 

In 1980, the National Park Service acquired Fairsted from the Olmsted Associates 

frm, the descendant of frms operated by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr., and his 

sons into the early twentieth century. More than twenty years later, in 2001, the 

park acquired the Green Hill parcel from the Brookline Land Trust to preserve 

Fairsted’s setting and historic southward views. 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site is managed jointly with two other 

National Park Service sites in the Boston region. Longfellow House-Washington’s 

Headquarters National Historic Site is located on Brattle Street in Cambridge 

and John Fitzgerald Kennedy National Historic Site sits along Beals Street in the 

Coolidge Corner neighborhood of Brookline (Figures 3.3, 3.4). The three historic 

sites share a superintendent and some support services, including maintenance, 

administration, and educational programming. Fairsted serves as headquarters 

for the three sites. Management of Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

is supported by the Friends of Fairsted, a non-proft organization that organizes 

volunteer assistance, programming, public outreach, and fundraising eforts. 

The Fairsted grounds are open to the public daily from dawn to dusk throughout 

the year. During various days in the spring, summer, and fall, tours of the historic 

ofces are ofered and exhibits are open on the frst foor of the historic house. 

The house’s visitor entrance is located near the northwestern edge of the circular 

front entry drive, through a door in the eastern façade of the ofce wing. An 

accessible concrete walk, installed by the park in 1997, brings visitors from the 

circular drive to the entrance door. Visitor parking is located of Dudley Street, 

in a parking area that historically served the Olmsted frm. Between 2010–2020, 

114 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.3. Longfellow HouseWashington’s Headquarters National 

Historic Site, 2007. (NPS) 

Figure 3.4. John Fitzgerald Kennedy 

National Historic Site, date unknown. 

(NPS) 

the park recorded approximately 8,000 visitors per year. Park archives also serve 

thousands of researchers online and in-person each year. Park staf routinely scan 

and transmit original plans and other documents stored in the collection. 

LANDSCAPE SETTING 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site is located in the Town of 

Brookline, Massachusetts, an afuent suburb situated immediately west of 

Boston. Incorporated in 1705, Brookline was an agricultural community until the 

nineteenth century, when it became a fashionable setting for the grand country 

estates of wealthy Bostonians. By 1900, Brookline had the highest per capita 

income in the United States. Rail and road infrastructure provided convenient 

115 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.5. The Coolidge Corner 

neighborhood of Brookline, date 

unknown. The MBTA Green Line 

trolley is pictured to the left. (Town of 

Brookline) 

connections to Boston, encouraging Brookline’s development as a desirable 

residential suburban community. Despite this evolution, the town preserved many 

aspects of its historic pastoral character, which infuenced Frederick Law Olmsted, 

Sr.’s decision to move his home and ofce to Brookline in 1883.2 

Today, Brookline remains afuent and notable for its distinct character defned by 

winding roads, rustic stone walls, and exclusive neighborhoods shaded by mature 

trees. In 2020, the town of 6.75 square miles was home to approximately 63,000 

residents, representing a growth rate of nearly nine percent over the previous 

decade. Median household income was $117,326 and the median value of owneroccupied housing units was $933,200.3

 More than half of Brookline’s land area, 

including the neighborhood around Fairsted, is zoned for single-family housing. 

A handful of densely developed business districts, including Coolidge Corner and 

Brookline Village, are located primarily in the town’s northern half, where areas 

of multi-family housing are concentrated (Figure 3.5).4 These areas are typically 

well-served by public transportation, including buses and the Massachusetts Bay 

Transit Authority’s Green Line trolley. 

The Brookline Hills area, where Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

is located, falls near the center of Brookline. The leafy residential neighborhood 

contains large, prominent homes and narrow roads lined by stone walls and 

centuries-old trees (Figure 3.6). The community gets its name from its varied 

topography, which is punctuated by several large drumlins ranging from 240 to 270 

feet in elevation. Outcroppings of Roxbury puddingstone are common throughout 

the area, and quarried puddingstone is found in stone walls, foundations, and 

other structures. Public transportation is limited in the Brookline Hills, and multifamily housing is excluded. Boylston Street (Massachusetts Route 9), the main 

east-west thoroughfare through Brookline, runs approximately one quarter mile 

north of Fairsted. Brookline Reservoir Park, an open space area surrounding the 

town’s historic reservoir, is located on the southern side of Boylston Street, with 

its southern edge less than .1 mile northwest of Fairsted (Figure 3.7). 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site borders two historic districts listed 

on the National Register of Historic Places. The Brookline Town Green Historic 

District, which encapsulates the historic core of colonial Brookline, borders 

116 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.6. Warren Street, which 

runs along the eastern boundary of 

Olmsted NHS, looking northwest, 

2021. The spruce pole fence along the 

eastern boundary of the Green Hill 

parcel is visible on the opposite side 

of Warren Street. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.7. Brookline Reservoir Park, 

date unknown. (Town of Brookline) 

Fairsted to the north. Centered at the intersection of Warren Street and Walnut 

Street, the district, which has been primarily residential since the nineteenth 

century, contains approximately sixty historic buildings. South of Fairsted, the 

Green Hill Historic District includes 34 historic contributing properties that 

were mostly built as country estates for wealthy Bostonians during the nineteenth 

century.5 The Green Hill parcel, which constitutes the southern portion of the 

park, falls within the Green Hill Historic District. 

117 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

FAIRSTED LANDSCAPE 

Fairsted occupies a 1.75-acre corner lot immediately southwest of the intersection 

of Warren Street and Dudley Street (Figure 3.8). The historic site’s landscape, 

which has been restored to refect its ca. 1930 appearance, demonstrates the 

picturesque domestic character that Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. cultivated after 

purchasing the property in 1883. Diverse, naturalistic border plantings of trees 

and shrubs provide enclosure at Fairsted’s edges and exemplify the sinuous 

geometry typical of Olmsted’s work (Figure 3.9). Other Olmstedian design 

elements, including exposed rock outcroppings overgrown with vines and 

sweeping lawns punctuated by specimen trees, contribute to the landscape’s 

distinctive character (Figure 3.10). Fairsted’s natural topography, which climbs 

approximately twenty feet from The Hollow near the site’s northeastern corner to 

Figure 3.8. Northeast corner of 

Fairsted, looking south across Dudley 

Street soon after reconstruction of 

the spruce pole fence, 2022. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.9. View toward Fairsted’s 

southeast corner from the South 

Lawn, 2021. Note the dense plantings 

of trees and shrubs along the parcel’s 

edge. (OCLP) 

118 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.10. The Hollow’s large 

puddingstone outcropping 

overgrown with vines (back) and the 

dry-laid stone wall at the northern 

edge of the Front Drive, looking 

northeast, 2016. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.11. Spruce pole fence 

and archway at Fairsted’s eastern 

boundary with Warren Street, looking 

northwest, 2022. Fairsted’s Front 

Drive passes through the archway. 

(OCLP) 

a high point on the western slope beside the former Clark property, is emphasized 

and carefully manipulated in the landscape’s historic design. 

Fairsted’s eastern and northern boundaries, which run respectively along 

Warren Street and Dudley Street, are marked by a rustic spruce pole fence that 

was designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr. in 1883 (Figure 3.11). At Fairsted’s 

western boundary, the rustic fence continues south from Dudley Street, following 

Fairmount Street for approximately 150 feet until it meets a private residential 

parcel that contains the historic Clark sisters’ cottage. The boundary between the 

former Clark property and Fairsted is demarcated by a chain link fence mounted 

on cedar posts. To the south, Fairsted’s border with the Green Hill Parcel is 

defned by a dry-laid, vernacular, feldstone wall that is approximately two to three 

feet high and believed to date from ca. 1810 (Figure 3.12). A standard National 

Park Service sign hangs from a post at Fairsted’s northeastern corner, next to the 

119 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.12. The historic stone wall 

at Fairsted’s southern boundary with 

the Green Hill parcel, looking east, 

2016. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.13. NPS site identifcation 

sign at the northeast corner of 

Fairsted, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

Warren Street – Dudley Street intersection, and directs drivers to a visitor parking 

area of Dudley Street (Figure 3.13). 

The Fairsted landscape is arranged around a cluster of buildings and outbuildings 

that historically composed the home and ofces of Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr., 

and his successors. Near the center of the landscape stands the historic home, a 

two-and-one-half story Federal style building that was constructed in 1810 and 

substantially altered after Olmsted acquired the site in 1883 (Figure 3.14). The 

house’s front door, protected by a vestibule, faces east toward Warren Street 

(Figure 3.15). Between 1883 and ca. 1926, several additions were appended to the 

northern side of the original house, providing ofce space that the Olmsted frm 

occupied until 1980. The historic ofce complex stretches nearly to Fairsted’s 

northern boundary with Dudley Street (Figure 3.16). 

120 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.14. The southern facade of 

the historic Fairsted house from the 

South Lawn, looking north, 2021. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 3.15. The historic front 

entrance on the eastern facade of the 

Fairsted house, looking northwest 

from the Front Drive, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.16. Fairsted’s historic offce 

wing, looking south from Dudley 

Street, 2021. (OCLP) 

121 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.17. Historic barn (center) 

connected to the house’s service wing 

by a breezeway (left), looking west 

from the service area courtyard, 2021. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 3.18. The historic shed built 

into the slope at the western edge of 

the parking area, looking northwest, 

2021. (OCLP) 

West of the house and ofce complex stand two historic outbuildings. A two story, 

post and beam barn, moved from the South Lawn in the 1880s, is connected by 

a breezeway to the house’s rear service wing (Figure 3.17). One-story additions 

are attached to the barn on its northern and southern sides. Approximately ffty 

feet west of the barn, a detached wooden shed is built into the slope at the edge 

of the visitor parking area, near the historic site’s boundary with Fairmount Street 

(Figure 3.18). 

Surrounding the home and ofce complex is a series of designed landscape spaces that 

have been restored to refect their character in ca. 1930, when the Olmsted frm, under 

the management of Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., was prolifc in residential design. Demonstrating many of the design principles characteristic of the frm’s public and private 

work, the spaces retain the overall composition devised at the end of the nineteenth 

century, following Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr.’s acquisition of the property. This 

122 
Existing Conditions

composition is refected in the fve landscape zones that have been used to organize the 

Fairsted landscape in this and earlier Cultural Landscape Report volumes. The following sections contain narrative descriptions and graphic documentation of each of the 

fve zones, arranged in the order that a typical visitor might experience them. 

FRONT DRIVE 

Signs at the visitor parking area behind the historic ofce wing direct visitors to 

Fairsted’s front drive by way of a concrete sidewalk along the southern side of Dudley 

Street. After turning south onto Warren Street at Fairsted’s northeast corner, the concrete sidewalk meets a historic front entry walkway, which is constructed of irregularly shaped, dry-laid fagstones. A curb of rough-hewn bluestone and puddingstone 

separates the front entry walkway from Fairsted’s stone dust front driveway, which 

meets Warren Street at an asphalt apron approximately twenty-fve feet south of the 

Dudley Street intersection. Running parallel, the front driveway and entry walkway 

pass eastward beneath Fairsted’s front gate arch, a picturesque, modifed gable-end, 

center-ridge structure that spans two sections of the spruce pole fence to its north and 

south (Figure 3.19). 

On the eastern side of the arch, the driveway encircles a central planting bed containing a mature Canadian hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) that towers over the surrounding 

space (Figure 3.20). The hemlock also screens the street from the house’s historic 

front entrance, which is positioned at the drive’s western edge, approximately sixty 

feet from the front gate archway (see Figure 3.15). A puddingstone curb encloses the 

central planting bed, within which several puddingstone boulders are also informally 

arranged. The circular driveway’s outer edge is retained by a curb of bluestone and 

puddingstone that also wraps around a small accessible parking area, created in 1965, 

extending approximately twenty feet southeast from the circular drive (Figure 3.21). 

Figure 3.19. Fairsted’s front entrance 

archway, looking southeast from the 

Front Drive, 2022. Note the fagstone 

walkway running beneath the 

archway to the left. (OCLP) 

123 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.20. The Front Drive, looking 

southwest from beneath the spruce 

pole arch, 2021. Note the drive’s 

circular arrangement and the central 

bed planted with a mature hemlock 

and shade-tolerant shrubs and 

herbaceous species. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.21. Accessible parking area at 

the southeastern edge of the circular 

Front Drive, looking southeast, 2021. 

Note the border planting of trees 

and shrubs between the parking area 

and the spruce pole fence, which is 

obscured in the distance. (OCLP) 

The historic driveway’s stone dust surface continues seamlessly into the non-historic 

parking area. 

Beneath the central hemlock, ferns mingle with winged euonymus (Euonymus alatus), 

woodbine (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), and shade tolerant herbaceous plants. Narrow 

planting beds fanking the house’s historic front entrance contain pachysandra (Pachysandra terminalis) and rock cotoneaster (Cotoneaster horizontalis), while a wider 

planting area between the driveway and the spruce pole fence along Warren Street is 

dense with deciduous shrubs including sweet mockorange (Philadelphus coronarius), 

common quince (Cydonia oblonga), and common lilac (Syringa vulgaris) (see Figure 

3.21). An American elm (Ulmus americana) and a cucumber magnolia (Magnolia acuminata), both planted around the turn of the twenty-frst century, also stand between 

the drive and the Warren Street fence. 

124 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.22. Accessible concrete 

walk leading to the house’s visitor 

entrance from the front drive, looking 

northwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

The present-day house visitor entrance is located north of the historic front door, in 

the eastern façade of the ofce addition that once contained the Olmsted frm’s clerical 

department. It is reached by an accessible concrete walk from the northwestern edge 

of the circular driveway (Figure 3.22). From the front driveway, visitors may choose 

to enter the house or proceed into two adjacent historic landscape spaces, both built 

around pre-existing natural features. To the south, the Rock Garden ofers a boulderlined path that winds around ledge outcroppings to the expansive South Lawn. On the 

drive’s north side, a natural depression contains the Hollow, a secluded, sunken garden 

that features a narrow, circuitous walk and dense plantings of yew (Taxus spp.) and 

mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), among other species. From the driveway, visitors 

can look down into the Hollow, which is reached by descending a set of stone steps 

from the present-day concrete entrance walk (Figure 3.23). The narrative will next offer a description of the Hollow before proceeding to the Rock Garden. 

HOLLOW 

The Hollow exhibits the wild, picturesque aesthetic presented in many of 

Frederick Law Olmsted, Sr.’s signature works. Its distinctive appearance is 

achieved through the enhancement of natural features, especially a large, exposed, 

puddingstone outcropping, accompanied by naturalistic designed elements 

(Figure 3.24). The outcropping, which is draped with woodbine, defnes the 

Hollow’s eastern edge, and the façade of the ofce wing marks the space’s western 

limit. To the north, the spruce pole fence separates the sunken garden from 

Dudley Street while a rustic stone wall along the Hollow’s southern edge retains 

the front driveway, sitting approximately ten feet above the Hollow’s low point. 

Visitors move through the Hollow along a two-foot-wide, cobble-edged, 

stone-dust path that follows an irregular, elliptical route (Figure 3.25). Near its 

125 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.23. View down into the 

Hollow from the Front Drive, looking 

northwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.24. The Hollow, looking 

southeast, 2021. The large Roxbury 

puddingstone outcropping (center 

back) is complemented by designed 

landscape elements to create the 

space’s picturesque character. A 

section of the spruce pole fence along 

Warren Street is visible east of the 

outcropping. (OCLP) 

southernmost point, the path meets the rustic stone steps leading down from the 

concrete entrance path (Figure 3.26). To the north, the Hollow path connects 

to an entrance in the eastern façade of the ofce wing. The path surrounds a 

central planting bed that stretches approximately sixty feet from east to west and 

fuctuates in width from about ten to ffteen feet (Figure 3.27). Rock cotoneaster 

and fre thorn (Pyracanthus sp.) are planted at the central bed’s eastern and 

western ends, respectively, while epimedium (Epimedium sp.) and Japanese 

pachysandra (Pachysandra terminalis) mix around puddingstone boulders 

arranged informally throughout the bed. 

Additional planting beds surround the path on all sides, partially obscuring the 

spruce pole fence along Dudley Street, the puddingstone ledge at the Hollow’s 

eastern end, and the masonry retaining wall that supports the front driveway 

126 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.25. Segment of the stone 

dust path in the Hollow, looking 

northwest toward the offce wing, 

2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.26. Rustic stone steps that 

connect the Hollow to the concrete 

visitor entrance path above. Looking 

southwest from the Hollow path, 

2022. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.27. The central planting bed 

in the Hollow, looking southeast, 

2021. A fre thorn shrub is pictured 

at center in the western end of the 

planting bed. (OCLP) 

127 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

to the south. A red oak (Quercus rubra) and tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera) 

stand along the space’s northern edge with Dudley Street while three Canadian 

hemlocks are planted between the puddingstone ledge and the spruce pole fence 

to the east. Dense underplantings of shrubs in these outer beds include mountain 

laurel, shrub willow (Salix sp.), and dwarf bush-honeysuckle (Diervilla lonicera). 

At the western base of the puddingstone ledge, common juniper (Juniperus 

communis), Japanese yew (Taxus cuspidata ‘Capitata’), and other deciduous 

and evergreen shrubs intermingle. This planting continues south to the base 

of the stone retaining wall, where other yew varieties and drooping leucothoe 

(Leucothoe fontanesiana) fank a small grotto built into the base of the wall (Figure 

3.28). A fowering dogwood (Cornus forida) and rhododendron (Rhododendron 

maximum) anchor a wide planting bed adjacent to the ofce wing, which also 

contains a cluster of English weeping yew (Taxus baccata ‘Repandens’). One of 

the plants in the yew cluster has been pruned back to its crown and reduced 

to a stump. Immediately west of the stone entrance stairs, a historic shagbark 

hickory (Carya ovata) shades the Hollow’s southwest corner. Taken together, the 

diverse, layered plantings of the Hollow reinforce the sunken garden’s secluded, 

picturesque character. 

ROCK GARDEN 

The secluded atmosphere of the Hollow is also achieved in the Rock Garden, 

an intimate space tucked into Fairsted’s southeastern corner, the eastern edge 

of which is defned by the spruce pole fence along Warren Street. The dry laid 

stone wall along Fairsted’s boundary with the Green Hill parcel marks the Rock 

Garden’s southern boundary while the South Lawn borders the space to the west. 

Figure 3.28. Yew (left) and drooping 

leucothoe (right) fank a small grotto 

in the stone retaining wall along the 

southeastern edge of the Hollow, 

looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

128 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.29. Northern edge of Rock 

Garden, looking south from the lawn 

area south of the Front Drive, 2021. 

(OCLP) 

From the front drive, visitors reach the 

Rock Garden by walking south across 

a small lawn area (Figure 3.29). 

Approximately thirty-fve feet south 

of the front drive, the lawn meets an 

augmented natural mound dotted 

with areas of exposed granite ledge. 

Near the northeastern edge of the 

mound, which is densely planted with 

evergreen trees and shrubs, visitors 

can fnd the northern end of a stone 

dust path. The path follows a winding 

route along the mound’s eastern and 

southern sides and leads to the eastern 

edge of the South Lawn (Figure 

3.30). Stones of varying sizes edge 

the path on both sides and integrate 

the circulation feature into the Rock 

Garden’s mounded topography. At its highest point, the mound at the center of 

the Rock Garden reaches approximately ten feet above the grade of the South 

Lawn. 

Trees planted on the central mound, including Hinoki false cypress 

(Chamaecyparis obtusa), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and Panicled 

goldenraintree (Koelreuteria paniculata) enhance the seclusion of the Rock 

Garden. Between the central mound and the spruce pole fence to the east, a 

dense arrangement of diverse trees and shrubs creates a naturalistic border 

planting that contains white ash (Fraxinus americana), American elm (Ulmus 

Figure 3.30. Stone dust path winding through 

the Rock Garden, looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

129 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.31. Border planting of 

trees and shrubs between the Rock 

Garden’s central mound and the 

spruce pole fence along Warren 

Street to the east. Looking southeast, 

2021. (OCLP) 

americana), white pine (Pinus strobus), and red oak, among other species (Figure 

3.31). A massive cucumber magnolia (Magnolia acuminata), directly south of the 

non-historic accessible parking area beside the front drive, is underplanted with 

winged euonymus and sweet mockorange (Philadelphus coronarius).This density 

of planting is continued between the Rock Garden path and the Green Hill border 

wall to the south, where river birch (Betula nigra), shagbark hickory, and a massing 

of eastern red cedar are planted. 

Broadleaf and conifer evergreen shrubs, including mountain laurel, mountain 

pieris (Pieris foribunda), and American yew are found along both sides of 

the Rock Garden’s winding stone dust path, providing a variety of hues 

and textures in all seasons. The path’s northern entrance is marked by two 

buckthorns (Rhamnus sp.), while historic specimens of English yew (Taxus 

baccata ‘Repandens’) and a tall Japanese yew (Taxus cuspidata) are underplanted 

with a mass of mountain laurel at the western end of the path. A wide granite 

outcropping is exposed at the westernmost edge of the Rock Garden. Standing at 

the ledge outcropping, in the shade of a nearby crabapple (Malus sp.), visitors can 

gaze west across the wide, open expanse of the South Lawn (Figure 3.32). 

SOUTH LAWN 

The South Lawn is the largest landscape space at Fairsted. Characterized by a 

broad, undulating swath of turf, it occupies most of the southern half of the site 

(Figure 3.33). Its southern edge runs along the stone wall at the Green Hill parcel 

boundary and its northern limit meets the house’s southern façade, where wisteria 

(Wisteria chinensis) and bower actinidia (Actinidea arguta) climb a steel strapping 

system. To the east, the lawn extends to the Rock Garden, while the bottom of 

the western slope near the boundary of the former Clark property represents 

130 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.32. Granite outcropping and 

crabapple (left) standing at western 

edge of the Rock Garden, looking 

south, 2021. The historic borrowed 

vista into the Green Hill parcel is 

visible in the distance. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.33. South Lawn, looking 

northeast toward the historic house, 

2021. A young elm, the successor of 

the historic Olmsted elm, is visible 

near the center of the lawn to the 

right. (OCLP) 

its western reach. Near the center of the lawn stands an American elm that was 

planted in 2011 to replace a grand historic specimen, known as the “Olmsted 

Elm”, that had declined (see Figure 3.33). The historic elm was the central 

organizing element of the South Lawn and the replacement is intended to assume 

this role when it reaches maturity. 

Sinuous border plantings along the southern and western edges of the South Lawn 

obscure the limits of the space from any singular vantage, encouraging the illusion 

of a broader expanse than the lawn’s actual spread (Figure 3.34). At the base of 

the western slope, the curving border planting comprises historic shrubs nearly 

ten feet tall, including arrowwood viburnum (Viburnum dentatum), fuzzy deutzia 

(Deutzia scabra), and mockorange. On the lawn’s southern edge, the naturalistic 

border includes three groupings of Canadian hemlock that contain nearly twenty 

trees in total. These groupings are complemented with Japanese yew, drooping 

131 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.34. Sinuous border plantings 

at the southwestern corner of the 

South Lawn, including a bay of grass 

that climbs the western slope (right). 

Looking southwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

leucothoe, mountain pieris, and other shrubs. A variety of herbaceous woodland 

species, including jack in the pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), wood aster (Aster 

sp.), bellfower (Campanula sp.), foxglove (Digitalis purpurea), false Solomon’s 

seal (Maianthemum racemosum), ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris), and 

Solomon’s seal (Polygonatum odoratum) mingle beneath the shrubs. 

A swath of grass at the South Lawn’s southwestern corner ascends the western 

slope, enhancing the sinuous edge and creating space for a yellowwood (Cladrastis 

kentukea) that is planted approximately ten feet above the lower plane of the 

South Lawn (see Figure 3.34). Facing northeast from this grassy slope, visitors can 

enjoy a historic view of the house and the South Lawn, with the American elm at 

its center (see Figure 3.1). Immediately to the north, the western slope is planted 

with pitch pine (Pinus rigida), silver linden (Tilia tomentosa), European larch 

(Larix decidua), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), and Schwedler Norway maple 

(Acer platanoides var. schwedleri) (Figure 3.35). Farther north, a portion of the 

western slope is used as a reserve garden, as it was during the historic period. 

A historic vista is ofered from the South Lawn’s northern edge, near the house’s 

conservatory. Looking south from this area, visitors can take in a “borrowed view” 

of the meadow on the adjacent Green Hill parcel, framed by Canadian hemlocks 

and an American elm planted in the southern border (see Figure 3.32). West of 

the conservatory, of the corner of the house, a planting bed containing common 

lilac, Vanhoutte spiraea, and other shrubs obscures a green wooden lattice fence 

that encloses the laundry yard at the southern edge of the Service Areas (Figure 

3.36). English ivy (Hedera helix) acts as a dense groundcover beneath the shrubs. 

To reach the Service Areas, visitors can walk along a stone dust path that skirts the 

northwest corner of the South Lawn. 

132 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.35. Northwest corner of 

South Lawn, bordered by dense 

planting on the west slope (left), 

looking northwest, 2021. The park’s 

reserve garden is located beyond the 

trees near the center of the image. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 3.36. Planting bed near 

northwest corner of South Lawn, 

looking northeast, 2021. The lattice 

fence surrounding the laundry yard 

is visible beyond the shrubs in the 

planting bed. (OCLP) 

SERVICE AREAS 

The Service Areas landscape zone contains a series of spaces that historically 

supported the ofce and domestic service functions at Fairsted. To the north 

and west, the spruce pole fence along the property line separates the Service 

Areas from Dudley Street and Fairmount Street. To the east, the ofce wing, with 

its multiple additions, defnes the zone’s edge. The historic main house and the 

South Lawn defne the southern limits. Historically, discrete landscape spaces 

within the Service Areas have served diferent purposes, which are evident in their 

present-day character. These spaces include the service drive, parking area, ofce 

courtyard, service yard, barnyard, and laundry yard. 

An opening in the spruce pole fence on Dudley Street provides access to the 

service drive, which runs along the western side of the ofce wing and terminates 

133 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.37. Entrance to the service 

drive from Dudley Street, looking 

south, 2021. The parking area is 

located through the gap in the spruce 

pole fence to the right. (OCLP) 

at the service yard to the south (Figure 3.37). The Dudley Street entrance to the 

service drive historically served Olmsted frm employees and today serves park 

visitors. Additional spruce pole fence segments fank the service drive on both 

sides along its way to the service yard, with gaps permitting entry to the parking 

area to the west and the ofce courtyard to the east. The service drive is surfaced 

with crushed stone, a material that is continued into the parking area and service 

yard. 

The parking area is tucked into the northwest corner of Fairsted and is defned to 

the north and west by the spruce pole fence at the property boundary. A tuliptree, 

a white pine, and a historic cucumber magnolia stand immediately inside the fence 

along the western boundary. The southern edge of the parking area is marked 

by a green, wooden stockade fence that encloses the barnyard. To the east, the 

parking area edge is delineated by two sections of spruce pole fence, separated 

by a wide opening that allows vehicle access from the service drive (Figure 3.38). 

Near the parking area’s southwestern corner, a historic wooden shed is built into 

a steep slope planted with sugar maple and paper birch (Betula papyrifera) (see 

Figure 3.18). At the area’s southeastern corner, a sugar maple is planted near the 

intersection of the spruce pole fence and the green stockade fence. 

On the eastern side of the service drive, opposite the parking area, the ofce 

courtyard is enclosed by the ofce vault to the north, the drafting wing to the east, 

and the planting department wing to the south (Figure 3.39). A section of spruce 

pole fence runs along the service drive on the courtyard’s west side, with a narrow 

gap to allow pedestrian access. Within the courtyard, aggregate concrete pavers 

are arranged in an orthogonal pattern and create a broad walk directly from the 

service drive to the historic employee entrance at the rear of the drafting wing. A 

rectangular planting bed sits in the middle of the southern half of the courtyard 

and smaller beds are arranged along the edges of the space. These beds are planted 

134 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.38. Parking area, looking 

southeast toward the house’s offce 

wing, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.39. Offce courtyard, looking 

southeast, 2021. The space is defned 

by the facades of the planting 

department (right), drafting wing 

(center), and plan vault (left). (OCLP) 

with a collection of annual and perennial fowering plants, including a formal 

rose arrangement in the central bed. Dutchman’s pipe (Aristolochia macrophylla) 

climbs the northern façade of the planting department at the southern edge of 

the courtyard and yew is planted in a narrow bed directly south of the gap in the 

spruce pole fence. 

On the southern side of the planting department wing, the service yard is almost 

entirely enclosed, except for a gap where the service drive passes between the 

planting wing and the barn. The planting department’s southern façade runs along 

more than half of the service yard’s northern edge. To the south, the northern 

façade of the house marks the yard’s southern edge. On the yard’s eastern side, the 

clerical department wing delineates the edge of the space, and the barn indicates 

its limit to the west. Various entrances provide access to these buildings from 

the yard. Refecting its historical purpose, the appearance of the service yard 

135 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.40. Northeast corner of the 

service yard, looking northeast, 2022. 

Note the planting bed with mature 

Hinoki false cypress (Chamaecyparis 

obtusa) (right) and threadleaf false 

cypress (Chamaecyparis pisifera 

‘Filifera’) (left), which were both 

removed later the same year. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.41. Laundry yard, looking 

southwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

is relatively plain, with the space’s crushed stone surface meeting the building 

facades on the southern and western edges. On the northern and eastern edges, 

narrow planting beds contain a Japanese yew, a historic Hinoki falsecypress, and a 

historic threadleaf falsecypress (Chamaecyparis pisifera ‘Filifera’) (Figure 3.40). 

Two other discrete spaces within the Service Areas, the laundry yard and the 

barnyard, are both adjacent to the historic barn. The laundry yard is located of 

the barn’s southern façade and is completely enclosed by the barn to the north, 

the house’s rear service wing to the east, and a green, wooden lattice fence to 

the south and west. The small space features a mowed turf surface and a variety 

of vines, including English ivy, climbing the lattice fence, which sits on a simple 

brick foundation (Figure 3.41). On the northern and western sides of the barn, the 

“L”-shaped barnyard wraps around the structure. Larger than the laundry yard, 

136 
Existing Conditions

the barnyard has a ground surface 

of exposed earth with three rows 

of concrete pavers arranged along 

the length of the barn on its south 

side (Figure 3.42). A green wooden 

stockade fence, approximately six 

feet tall, defnes the outer edges of the 

space on all sides. A dry laid stone wall 

runs along the base of the fence on 

the barnyard’s southern and western 

edges. Figure 3.42. The barnyard, looking south, 2021 

(OCLP) 

GREEN HILL PARCEL LANDSCAPE 

The Green Hill parcel occupies 5.31 undeveloped acres immediately south of 

Fairsted. The historic landscape, which was once part of a sprawling estate owned 

by the Gardner family, contains a variety of plant communities that developed 

through natural succession during the twentieth century and have been modifed 

by National Park Service management practices since 2001. Wooded areas, 

primarily near the parcel’s edges, contain diverse canopy trees and understory 

shrubs, many of which have been planted in recent years as part of landscape 

treatment projects (Figure 3.43). Other areas, especially near the northern edge 

and center of the parcel, are managed as meadow with varying height and species 

composition (Figure 3.44). Near the center of the parcel’s northern boundary, a 

fescue meadow of approximately .2 acres complements the historic vista to the 

Green Hill parcel from Fairsted’s South Lawn (Figure 3.45). 

Figure 3.43. Wooded area within 

the screen zone near the Green 

Hill parcel’s southeastern corner, 

looking south, 2021. Note the 

wooden fence along the parcel 

boundary with a private abutter to 

the south. (OCLP) 

137 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.44. View of an area within 

the Green Hill parcel’s meadow zone, 

looking northwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.45. Fescue meadow at the 

northern edge of the Green Hill 

parcel, looking north toward Fairsted, 

2021. Note the glimpse of the Fairsted 

house through the vegetation along 

the parcel boundary. (OCLP) 

The topography of the Green Hill parcel climbs nearly 40 feet from the eastern 

boundary along Warren Street to a high point near the site’s northwestern limit. 

Along the parcel’s southern boundary line, the landscape slopes dramatically 

toward the east, while a gentler descent characterizes the area along the site’s 

northern boundary with Fairsted. Six contiguous lots, all acquired by the National 

Park Service in 2001, constitute the Green Hill parcel. The park also holds an 

access easement on a .15-acre lot near the center of the parcel that contains the 

eastern end of an entrance drive (Figure 3.46). At the western edge of the .15-

acre lot, the drive splits into two segments which separately serve two private 

residences immediately west of park land, one of which is the historic Gardner 

house. 

To the east, the private entrance drive meets Warren Street, which runs along the 

entirety of the Green Hill parcel’s eastern boundary, where a spruce pole fence 

138 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.46. Private drive running 

through a .15-acre lot at the Green 

Hill parcel on which that park 

holds an access easement, looking 

southwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

Figure 3.47. Warren Street and the 

spruce pole fence at the eastern 

boundary of the Green Hill parcel, 

looking southwest, 2021. (OCLP) 

sits atop a historic mortared stone wall (Figure 3.47). At its northern boundary, 

where the Green Hill parcel meets Fairsted, the border is marked by a historic 

dry-laid stone wall (see Figure 3.12). At its southern edge, the parcel borders a 

private residential property. For most of its length, the parcel’s western boundary 

follows the eastern edges of the two private entrance drive segments that serve the 

abutting residences. North of the drives, the boundary follows an irregular line 

to meet the northern edge of the former Clark sisters’ house lot. To the south, it 

follows the edge of the southern drive to a position directly south of the former 

Gardner house, where a narrow strip of park land exists. 

The 2017 Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel, which is discussed 

in the previous chapter, identifes three distinct landscape zones that guide park 

management of the Green Hill parcel (see Figure 2.4). The woodland zone (zone 

1), which contains a canopy of mostly deciduous trees with an understory of 

139 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

deciduous and evergreen shrubs, is located along the eastern boundary of the 

parcel and in the site’s northwest and southwest corners. The screen zone (zone 

2) wraps around the southern half of the parcel, stretching from the Warren Street 

frontage to the eastern edge of the private drive that serves the former Gardner 

residence. It is composed of a sub-canopy of mid-height trees and woody shrubs 

underplanted with herbaceous vegetation. The meadow zone occupies the 

remainder of the site and consists of two subzones. The open meadow subzone 

(zone 3a) spreads across most of the core of the parcel and contains grasses 

and wildfowers with scattered deciduous specimen trees. The fescue meadow 

subzone (zone 3b) is immediately south of Fairsted’s south lawn and contains 

primarily low-growing fescue species, selected to maintain the historic vista from 

Fairsted into the Green Hill parcel. 

Unlike the landscape zones at Fairsted, which refect a series of designed 

landscape spaces created at the end of the nineteenth century, the Green Hill 

parcel’s landscape zones are the product of park planning and contemporary 

landscape treatment. They are useful for organizing the parcel’s landscape and 

prescribing management practices to enhance intended landscape character. 

The rest of this section consists of detailed descriptions of each of the Green Hill 

parcel’s landscape zones. 

WOODLAND ZONE 

The woodland zone comprises approximately 1.4 acres, primarily in a narrow 

strip following the Green Hill parcel’s eastern boundary along Warren Street. 

North of the private drive that divides the parcel, the woodland zone is directly 

adjacent to the spruce pole fence and stone wall that run along Warren Street. 

However, south of the drive, the woodland zone is separated from the fence and 

wall by a portion of the screen zone. The woodland zone also covers two patches 

at the northern and southern ends of the site’s western boundary. At the northern 

end of the western boundary, the patch of woodland wraps around the western 

and southern sides of the former Clark house lot. To the south, the woodland 

patch borders the western end of the drive that serves the former Gardner 

residence. 

Within the woodland zone, a canopy of mature, primarily deciduous trees 

shades a subcanopy consisting of smaller trees and shrubs (Figure 3.48). The 

canopy is composed of diverse tree species, including European beech (Fagus 

sylvatica), American linden (Fagus sylvatica), and sugar maple (Acer saccharum). 

The understory demonstrates a similar diversity, with specimens of fowering 

dogwood (Cornus forida), sourwood (Oxydendron arboreum), eastern redbud 

(Cercis candensis), and witchhazel (Hamamelis virginiana), among other species. 

The composition of the canopy and subcanopy has been modifed in recent years 

through park management, particularly a major planting project completed in 

140 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.48. An area within the 

woodland zone at the Green Hill 

parcel, 2021. (OCLP) 

2019. Prior to the park’s recent treatment projects, the woodland zone’s canopy 

featured many specimens of Norway maple (Acer platanoides), a non-native 

invasive species. More than 75 Norway maple specimens were removed from the 

Green Hill parcel prior to the 2019 planting project, which also extended into the 

adjacent screen zone. 

SCREEN ZONE 

South of the private drive, the screen zone occupies the eastern, southern, and 

western edges of the Green Hill parcel. Covering approximately .5 acres, the zone 

consists of a narrow band of small trees and shrubs that screen the Green Hill 

parcel and the abutting private residences from Warren Street (Figure 3.49). Along 

Figure 3.49. Screen zone along the 

Green Hill parcel’s eastern boundary, 

looking south, 2021. Note the recently 

planted rhodoendrons near the 

center of the image and the spruce 

pole fence to the left. (OCLP) 

141 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

the site’s eastern boundary, the screen zone is located between the spruce pole 

fence to the east and the woodland zone to the west. The screen zone continues 

along the parcel’s southern boundary before turning toward the north to follow 

the parcel’s western boundary at the eastern edge of the private drive of the 

former Gardner house. 

The composition of the screen zone’s vegetation has been transformed by the 

park’s landscape treatment eforts at the Green Hill parcel. In 2019, more than one 

hundred subcanopy trees and shrubs were planted within the screen zone. Prior 

to planting, more than ffty canopy trees, mostly Norway maple specimens, were 

removed from the zone. The palette for the 2019 planting project was intended 

to achieve several goals, including the approximation of the Green Hill parcel’s 

historic vegetation composition and the enhancement of ecosystems services and 

wildlife habitat. 

Small trees and shrubs planted in 2019, 

including specimens of fowering 

dogwood, eastern redbud, white 

fringetree (Chionanthus virginicus), 

cranberry viburnum (Viburnum 

trilobum), and bayberry (Myrica 

pensylvanica), have not yet reached 

maturity but are becoming established 

in the screen zone (Figure 3.50). A 

distinctive element of the screen zone 

planting is a dense massing of rosebay 

rhododendron (Rhododendron 

maximum) that begins near the 

southern end of the Green Hill 

parcel’s eastern boundary and wraps 

around the parcel’s southern edge, 

climbing the steep slope that defnes 

this area (Figure 3.51). 

OPEN AND FESCUE MEADOW ZONE 

The meadow zone, at approximately 3.4 acres, is the largest landscape zone at 

the Green Hill parcel and is further divided into two subzones that are managed 

to achieve diferent characters. Most of the Green Hill parcel’s land area falls 

within the open meadow subzone, which spreads across approximately 3.2 acres 

at the site’s core and is colonized by herbaceous meadow species with a few 

scattered trees and shrubs. The much smaller fescue meadow subzone, containing 

approximately .2 acres, is contained to one discrete area near the center of 

the parcel’s northern boundary. This subzone, which is managed to maintain 

Figure 3.50. A young eastern redbud in the 

screen zone, looking northeast, 2021. (OCLP) 

142 
Existing Conditions

Figure 3.51. Rhododendron planting 

wrapping around the southeast 

corner of the Green Hill parcel in 

winter, looking southeast, 2022. 

(OCLP) 

Figure 3.52. An area of the open 

meadow subzone, 2021. Note the 

goldenrod in the foreground. (OCLP) 

vegetation at a lower height than the open meadow subzone, is counterpart to the 

historic vista from Fairsted’s South Lawn. The lower height of the fescue meadow 

subzone’s vegetation permits views into the interior of the Green Hill parcel. 

The composition of vegetation in each meadow subzone is infuenced by cyclical 

park management. Herbaceous species including black-eyed Susan (Rudbeckia 

hirta), conefower (Echinacea purpurea), and goldenrod (Solidago sp.) intermingle 

throughout the open meadow subzone (Figure 3.52). These species, which can 

grow to a height of several feet during the summer, ofer a variety of textures 

and colors and are typically mown once per year to discourage establishment of 

woody plants. In contrast, the fescue meadow subzone is managed to maintain 

a more homogeneous mix of species, primarily consisting of fne fescue (Festuca 

sp.), a low-maintenance, creeping turf that typically reaches a maximum height of 

one foot (Figure 3.53). Near the southwestern edge of the open meadow subzone, 

143 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Figure 3.53. Fescue meadow subzone, 

looking south, 2021. (OCLP) 

a small outcropping of Roxbury puddingstone is located on a slightly elevated 

landform. This is one of the only areas of exposed ledge at the Green Hill parcel. 

LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS 

In 2015, the overall condition of the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

landscape was evaluated as “fair”, due to “clear evidence of minor disturbances 

and deterioration by natural and/or human forces.”6 This overall evaluation was 

based on an evaluation of the Fairsted landscape as “good” and the Green Hill 

parcel landscape as “poor”. Since 2015, major landscape treatment eforts at 

the Green Hill parcel, many of which are documented in the previous chapter, 

have improved the landscape’s condition. At the same time, the condition of the 

Fairsted landscape has been preserved by regular park maintenance. Due to these 

improvements, the park landscape appears in “good” overall condition in 2021. 

ENDNOTES, EXISTING CONDITIONS 

1 Cultural Landscapes Inventory, Fairsted, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 2015, 4. 

2 Cultural Landscapes Inventory, Fairsted, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 2015, 46. 

3 US Census QuickFacts, Brookline CDP, Massachusetts, https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/brooklinecdpmassachusetts 

(accessed February 4, 2022). 

4 Town of Brookline, Massachusetts, Zoning Map 10-CC, https://www.brooklinema.gov/DocumentCenter/View/19957/ 

GIS-Zoning34X46pdf (accessed February 4, 2022). 

5 Beagan, Christopher and Angelina Jones, Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel, Boston: National Park Service Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 2017, 24. 

6 Cultural Landscapes Inventory, Fairsted, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 2015, 115. 

144 




Appendix A

 APPENDIX A: TREATMENT CHRONOLOGY 

AND PROJECT PARTICIPANTS 

CHRONOLOGY 

The following chronology documents the series of research, planning, and 

landscape treatment projects that occurred at Fairsted from 1979–2001. A source 

key is included at the end of the chronology and sources are referenced in 

brackets [ ] where applicable. 

1979 

Events 

•	 Congress authorized the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site. The National Park Service acquired real estate at 99 Warren Street, 

Brookline, MA. 

1980 

Events 

•	 National Park Service acquired the contents of the archives from the 

Olmsted Associates. Olmsted frm correspondence sent to the Library of 

Congress. 

•	 Shary Page Berg became Site Manager 

Treatment Work 

•	 Vines removed from facades of house and cut to the ground [5] 

1981 

Events 

•	 April 26, Olmsted National Historic Site ofcially opened to the public 

[12] 

Treatment Work 

•	 Cladrastis kentukea (yellowwood) tree removed at southwest corner of 

property [1] 

Maintenance 

•	 Rhododendrons along southwest bank of Hollow cut back to ground [1] 

•	 Yews in Hollow thinned [1] 

•	 Olmsted Elm treated with methoxychlor to help prevent Dutch Elm 

disease [1] 

•	 Captan applied as fungicide to grapes near pool [1] 

149 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

1982 

Research and Planning 

•	 Historic Grounds Report completed by Lucinda Whitehill (now Brockway) 

•	 Historic Resource Study completed by Amy McMillan 

Maintenance 

•	 (1982-3): Yews in hollow cut back [6] 

1983 

Research and Planning 

•	 General Management Plan for the Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site completed; 1960 preservation period established for the 

landscape [2] 

•	 University of Virginia, Landscape Architecture department team completed a survey/plan of the grounds. This plan was incorporated into the 

Historic American Building Survey project for the site. 

•	 Historic American Building Survey (HABS) documented Olmsted NHS 

historic structures. 

Maintenance 

•	 (1983-84): Olmsted elm pruned [6] 

•	 Large birches in rock garden fall during storm [6] 

1984 

Treatment Work 

•	 Vault, ofce wing and house restored [6] 

•	 Brick terrace, swimming pool, and herb garden (installed by Richardson) 

removed [6, 14] 

•	 Betula papyrifera and two Phellodendron amurense removed [1] 

•	 Hostas and Vinca minor planted in the Hollow [1] 

Maintenance 

•	 (1984-86) Spruce pole fence replaced [6, 14] 

•	 Front drive, service area, and parking lot resurfaced with pea stone [6] 

•	 Japanese maples near pool moved to west slope prior to removal of pool 

[6] 

•	 Tsuga canadensis on northeast corner of property died [1] 

1985 

Events 

•	 Hurricane Gloria did minor damage to the grounds in September. 

•	 Hollow fooded by water from Warren and Dudley Street. 

•	 Charles Pepper came to Fairsted as gardener, then grounds supervisor. 

150 
Appendix A

Research and Planning 

•	 Draft “Historic Structures Report” for the Olmsted NHS fences prepared 

by Andrea Gilmore 

Treatment Work 

•	 Ash removed from corner of property, space used as holding area for 

young Liberty Elms [6] 

•	 South Lawn perennial garden removed and plants moved to temporary 

garden behind shed; Malus sp. moved from side of building to former 

perennial garden [11] 

•	 Vinca interplanted with moss in rock garden [6] 

•	 Dogwood moved from south lawn to west slope [6] 

•	 Entrance arch rebuilt by NPS (Olmsted NHS Maintenance Division) according to original plans [6] 

•	 Stone dust path from parking lot to entrance and conservatory installed 

[6] 

•	 Garden near service area shed restored, including trellis, roses, and new 

paper birches[6] 

•	 Former pool area re-graded [11] 

•	 Visitor entrance and circulation path reconstructed, rose moved here 

from perennial garden [11] 

•	 South Lawn graded and re-seeded [12] 

Maintenance 

•	 Olmsted elm pruned [6] 

1986 

Research and Planning 

•	 Section 106 compliance and construction contract for drainage work to 

repair fooding in the hollow and lower drafting room [14] 

•	 Draft “Report on the Olmsted National Historic Site Landscape Period 

and Philosophy” by Shary Page Berg and Charlie Pepper completed. Proposed a change in the preservation period for the landscape from 1960 to 

1930 [11] 

Treatment Work 

•	 Site drainage improved, including addition of drain under arch, curb 

along Dudley Street. [6] 

•	 Dry well installed in parking lot in June [11] 

Maintenance 

•	 Tulip, oak, and elm trees pruned [11] 

1987 

Events 

•	 Administration of the Olmsted, Longfellow, and Kennedy National Historic Sites centered at Fairsted. Rolf Diamant named Superintendent. 

151 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Research and Planning 

•	 Amendment to park General Management Plan changed the restoration 

date for the landscape from 1960 to ca. 1930, based on 1986 draft report; 

forwarded to SHPO and Advisory Council for concurrence. [10] 

•	 Boundary between Fairsted and Clark property surveyed [6] 

•	 Olmsted NHS Historic Structure Report (Vol. II) completed [12] 

•	 Parking lot restoration report completed [12] 

Treatment Work 

•	 Two Norway maples at the southeast corner and sugar maple #3 removed 

in March [11] 

•	 House repainted in dark red color based on Historic Structures Report 

paint analysis 

•	 Chain link fence dividing Fairsted from Clark property replaced with 

black metal fence and posts [6] 

•	 (1987-88): Laundry yard fence constructed [6] 

Maintenance 

•	 Wisteria and Actinidia vines cut back to 2-3 feet above the ground to allow for work on exterior of house. [6] 

•	 Magnolia and sugar maple trees pruned in March [11] 

1988 

Research and Planning 

•	 Archeologists fnd remnants of pre-Olmsted stone wall and dry well during work on the parking lot [6] 

Treatment Work 

•	 Large elm of circular drive replaced with Liberty elm, but the replacement did not survive [6] 

•	 (1988-89): Parking lot restored to historic confguration and resurfaced in 

coal cinders (original material) [6] 

Maintenance 

•	 (1988-89): Yews in Hollow cut back [6] 

1989 

Events 

•	 Cultural landscape management program started in the Northeast Regional Ofce. Nora Mitchell named the program manager. [12] 

Research and Planning 

•	 Nora Mitchell and Olmsted NHS staf (particularly Charlie Pepper) began working on planning for landscape restoration project

 Treatment Work 

•	 Four temporary experimental trellises designed by Pepper installed on 

the south façade of the house. The trellis alternatives tested for two years 

and then replaced with the preferred solution. [5] 

152 
Appendix A

•	 Spruce pole and board fences moved slightly for emergency vehicle access after parking lot restoration [6] 

1990 

Research and Planning 

•	 Resource management plan completed [12] 

•	 NPS, Preservation Assistance Division (WASO) publishes Tech Note on 

the Fairsted trellis system. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Final trellis system of spiraled stainless steel strapping installed, based on 

historic system[6] 

Maintenance 

•	 Dead birch tree from Rock Garden removed in August [11] 

1991 

Events 

•	 Barbara Keene came to Fairsted as work leader, later grounds supervisor. 

Lauren Meier, Historical Landscape Architect transferred to Olmsted 

NHS from NPS Washington Ofce, Preservation Assistance Division. 

Research & Planning 

•	 Cooperative agreement established with the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University. 

•	 Historical research/volume 1 of the Cultural Landscape Report (Site 

History) initiated through cooperative agreement with the Arnold Arboretum (Amendment 2). Cynthia Zaitzevsky, PhD. selected as principal 

researcher. [9] 

•	 Plant identifcation by NPS and Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University 

initiated through cooperative agreement (also Amendment 2). Plants 

collected at Fairsted by Barbara Keene. Identifcation/confrmation and 

preparation of herbarium specimens made at the Arnold Arboretum by 

Steven Spongberg (identifcation), Susan Hardy-Brown (preparation of 

herbarium specimens) and other specialists 

•	 Cooperative agreement with Boston University Ofce of Public Archeology established for electronic survey of Fairsted Grounds. Site data collected using electronic survey equipment and ground penetrating radar. 

Site map generated using Sokkia mapping software. Rick Elias and Dave 

Clayton, principal researchers 

Treatment Work 

•	 Replacement red oak planted in the Hollow, but it did not survive [6] 

•	 White pine replaced at corner of Dudley St. and Fairmount St., inside 

spruce pole fence in June. 

•	 Woody plant propagation initiated at the Arnold Arboretum through the 

cooperative agreement. Plants vegetatively propagated at the Arnold Ar153 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

boretum greenhouse and grown in the historic plant nursery. First round 

of plants propagated in 1991 included Actinidia arguta, Cydonia oblonga, 

Pyracantha coccinea, Rosa multifora, and Wisteria sinensis. 

Maintenance 

•	 Hurricane Bob hit August 30-September 1; destroyed Tulip tree and Red 

Oak in Hollow. 

•	 (1991-94): Stone reset near arch to prevent tripping hazards [6] 

1992 

Events 

•	 Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation established by the NPS, 

New England Regional Director as a partnership between the Northeast 

Regional Ofce, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, and the 

Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University. Nora Mitchell and Lee Farrow 

serve as co-directors. Lauren Meier serves as Manager of Preservation 

Planning Projects 

Research and Planning 

•	 Began to document existing and historic conditions for Fairsted Treatment Plan. 

•	 Continued feld identifcation and collection of herbarium specimens by 

NPS (Barbara Keene); confrmation of identifcation and preparation of 

herbarium sheets began at Arnold Arboretum 

Treatment Work 

•	 Propagation of signifcant plants at the Arnold Arboretum greenhouse 

[15] 

•	 Metal plant tags attached to woody plants at Fairsted. The plant inventory/numbering system originally developed for the Olmsted NHS Preservation Maintenance Guide by Margie Cofn. [13] 

1993 

Research and Planning 

•	 First electronic survey completed for Fairsted grounds 

•	 (1993-94): Archaeological testing carried out by the NPS Cultural Resources Center, Lowell MA; Steven Pendery, principal researcher. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Hazardous hemlock removed on north side of parking lot [6] 

•	 Parking lot resurfaced with 50/50 mix of 3/8” crushed stone and stone 

dust [6]. Cinders removed because of new regulations on hazardous 

materials. 

Maintenance 

•	 (1991-94): Barberry pruned (left/south of arch) [6, p. 110] 

154 
Appendix A

1994 

Research & Planning 

•	 Public meetings and information sharing in preparation for beginning of 

treatment work. 

•	 Draft “Cultural Landscape Report, volume 2: Treatment Plan” completed 

•	 Landscape treatment drawings prepared by Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation (Existing Conditions Plan, 1930 Period Plan, Treatment Plan, Shrub Removal Plan, Tree Removal Plan) 

•	 Plans and specifcations prepared by the Olmsted Center for phase 1 

(removals) 

•	 Section 106 Compliance for phase 1 work (removals) undertaken 

Treatment Work 

•	 All trees and shrubs not present in 1930 removed (131 nonhistoric trees; 

100 nonhistoric shrubs). Work carried out by Olmsted NHS maintenance 

staf and a contract with Tree Specialists Inc. [9] 

•	 Large Japanese yew at base of ledge in the Hollow, along Dudley Street 

bank replaced with smaller one [9] 

•	 Hazardous hemlock, removed in 1993, replaced on north side of parking 

lot [6] 

•	 One Betula lenta (sweet/black birch) planted in Rock Garden [8] 

•	 Magnolia acuminata, Rhododendron kaempferi propagated at the Arnold 

Arboretum [15] 

1995 

Research & Planning 

•	 Cynthia Zaitzevsky’s Cultural Landscape Report, Volume 1: Site History 

completed [12] 

•	 Olmsted Center completes schematic design for phase 2 work including 

accessible entrance into ofce. 

•	 Task Order for construction documents for phase 2 work by Carol Johnson Associates, Inc. through indefnite quantities contract with Archetype. Beth Gavrin prepared plans and specifcations following Olmsted 

Center schematic design. 

•	 Compliance for phase 2 work completed. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Planting [8] 

•	 Hollow: Epimedium macranthum (epimedium), Euonymous 

fortunei var. radicans (wintercreeper euonymous), Liriodendron 

tulipifera (tuliptree), Rhododendron schlippenbachii (royal 

azalea), Cotoneaster horizontalis (rock cotoneaster), Diervilla 

lonicera (dwarf bush honeysuckle), Juniperus chinensis (Chinese juniper), Juniperus communis (common juniper), Pyr155 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

acantha coccinea (scarlet frethorn), Taxus baccata ‘Repandens’ 

(English yew) 

•	 Circular Drive: Elaeagnus sp. (Russian olive), Euonymous alatus 

(winged euonymous), Spiraea x vanhouttei (Vanhoutte spirea), 

Xanthorhiza simplicissima (yellowroot), Cydonia oblonga (common quince),), Euonymous fortunei var. radicans (wintercreeper 

euonymous), Syringa vulgaris (common lilac), Cotoneaster 

horizontalis (rock cotoneaster), Philadelphus coronarius (sweet 

Mock Orange) 

•	 Rock Garden: Spirea x vanhouttei (Vanhoutte spirea), Viburnum 

cassinoides (witherod viburnum), Viburnum dentatum (arrowwood viburnum), Philadelphus coronarius (sweet Mock Orange) 

•	 Service Areas: Syringa vulgaris (common lilac), Dennstaedtia 

punctilobula (hay-scented fern), Cydonia oblonga (common 

quince) 

•	 Shrub planting around reconfgured lawn, fall [13]. Included 

Cornus alba ‘Sibirica’ (Tatarian dogwood), Cornus sericia ‘Flaviramea’ (redosier dogwood), Rosa virginiana (Virginia rose), 

Ilex glabra (inkberry), Ilex crenata (Japanese holly), Leucothoe 

fontanesiana (drooping leucothoe), Rosa wichuraiana (memorial rose), Forsythia intermedia ‘Spectabilis’ (border forsythia), 

Euonymous fortunei var. radicans (wintercreeper euonymous), 

Euonymous alatus (winged euonymous), Taxus cuspidata (Japanese yew) [8]. 

•	 Field pipe with spigots installed for watering plants through purchase 

order with Bay State Irrigation in the fall [9] 

Maintenance 

•	 Barbara Keene consulted with Michael Talbot (ecological landscape 

services) for soil testing to determine improvements needed, and about 

natural pest management strategies [13] 

•	 Lawn reconfgured following tree removal, grass seeded [13] 

•	 Pruned in the Hollow: existing historic Taxus canadensis cluster (June) 

[11]; Taxus and Taxus cuspidata (spring) [13]; Rhododendron maximum 

[8] 

1996 

•	 Ground supervisor position vacant for one year [13] 

Research and Planning 

•	 Completion of construction documents for phase 2 by Carol Johnson 

•	 Compliance documentation submitted to SHPO for accessible ramp. 

•	 Contract let for construction of new accessible entrance ramp, sidewalk, 

tree planting, drives and paths resurfacing, masonry repairs, construction of rustic wire mesh fence along west slope boundary, pipe arbor, and 

156 
Appendix A

drainage improvements. Contract with D&D Enterprises started spring 

1997, active through 1998. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Planted: one Acer saccharum (sugar maple), Service Area, spring; two 

Aristolochia durior (Dutchman’s pipe) on new pipe arbor; one Rhododendron maximum (rosebay rhododendron) in Hollow.[8] 

1997 

Events 

•	 Olmsted NHS and the Olmsted Center receive historic preservation 

award from Brookline Historic Preservation Commission 

•	 Emo DeWitt appointed Horticulturist/grounds supervisor [13] 

Research and Planning 

•	 Olmsted NHS gardener Mona McKindley consulted with the Historic 

Iris Preservation Society and independent growers related to propagating, locating, or identifying herbaceous plants, bulbs, and roses 

Treatment Work 

•	 One Ulmus americana (American elm), propagated from the historic “Olmsted Elm”, planted near the Rock Garden (southeast corner). A second 

Ulmus americana provided by the contractor, also planted. 

•	 Planting [8] 

•	 Hollow: Dennstedtia punctilobula (hay-scented fern), Iris cristata 

(dwarf crested iris/woodland iris), Quercus rubra (red oak), 

Epimedium macranthum (epimedium), Taxus cuspidata ‘Nana’ 

(Japanese yew) 

•	 Circular Drive: Cornus forida (fowering dogwood), Euonymous 

alatus (winged euonymous) 

•	 Rock Garden: Pinus rigida (pitch pine), Betula nigra (river birch), 

Fraxinus americana (white ash), Kalmia latifolia (mountain 

laurel), Quercus rubra (red oak) 

•	 South Lawn: Tilia tomentosa (silver linden), Betula nigra (river 

birch), Pinus rigida (pitch pine), Tsuga canadensis (Canadian 

hemlock), Pinus strobus (white pine), Syringa vulgaris (common 

lilac), Spirea x vanhouttei (Vanhoutte spirea), Aristolochia durior 

(Dutchman’s pipe) 

•	 Service Area: Syringa vulgaris (common lilac) 

157 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

1998 

Events 

•	 The National Park Service, Arnold Arboretum, and Cynthia Zaitzevsky 

received ASLA Merit Award in Research for Fairsted Cultural Landscape 

Report, Vol. 1:Site History. 

•	 The National Park Service and the Arnold Arboretum received ASLA 

Merit Award in Communications for Landscape Explorers. 

•	 Rolf Diamant appointed Superintendent of Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller 

NHP. John Maounis serves as Acting Superintendent. 

Research and Planning 

•	 Fairsted Preservation Maintenance Plan funded by the NPS. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Taxus canadensis (Canadian yew) propagated for replacement 

•	 Planting [8] 

•	 Hollow: Taxus cuspidata ‘Capitata’ (Japanese yew), Taxus 

cuspidata ‘Nana’ (Japanese yew), Dennstaedtia punctilobula 

(hay-scented fern), Iris (various cultivars), Phlox subulata (phlox 

subulata, various cultivars), Sedum stoloniferum, Hosta sieboldiana (sieboldiana hosta), Salix humilis tristis (dwarf grey willow), 

Sedum spurium ‘Dragon’s Blood’ (dragon’s blood sedum) 

•	 Circular Drive: Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Bergenia cordifolia (bergenia), Dryopteris marginalis (marginal shield fern), 

Philadelphus coronarius (sweet Mock Orange), Dennstaedtia 

punctiloba (hay-scented fern) 

•	 Rock Garden: Juniperus virginiana (Eastern red cedar), Cornus sericea ‘Flaviramea’ (redosier dogwood), Pieris foribunda 

(mountain pieris), Rhamnus cathartica (buckthorn), Rhodotypos 

scandens (black jetbead), Philadelphus coronarius (sweet Mock 

Orange) 

•	 South Lawn: Tsuga canadensis (Canadian hemlock), Larix decidua (European larch), Spirea x vanhouttei (Vanhoutte spirea) 

•	 Service Areas: Taxus cuspidata (Japanese yew), Pachysandra terminalis (Japanese spurge pachysandra), Taxus cuspidata ‘Pyramidalis’ (pyramidal Japanese yew), Rosa ‘General MacArthur’, Rosa 

‘Jonkleen J.L. Mock’, Rosa ‘Miss Edith Cavell’, Polystichum munitum (giant holly fern, sword fern), Polystichum braunii (braun’s 

holly fern), Paeonia lactifolia (peony, various cultivars) 

1999 

Events 

•	 National Park Service received ASLA Merit Award in Design for the 

Fairsted landscape restoration 

158 
Appendix A

•	 Olmsted NHS and the Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation received Olmsted Award from Historic Massachusetts, Inc. 

•	 Nora Mitchell becomes Director of the Conservation Studies Institute in 

Woodstock, VT. Charlie Pepper named Acting Director of the Olmsted 

Center. 

•	 Myra Harrison, formerly Director of the Northeast Cultural Resources 

Center, named Superintendent of the Olmsted NHS 

Research and Planning 

•	 New survey completed by Bryant Associates, Inc. in CADD. 

Treatment Work 

•	 One Hosta sieboldiana (sieboldiana hosta) removed from the Hollow in 

spring [8] 

•	 Planting [8] 

•	 Hollow: Dennstaedtia punctilobula (hay-scented fern), Hosta 

lancifolia (narrow-leafed hosta), Iris (various cultivars), Sedum 

stoloniferum, Crataegus mollis (downy hawthorne), Kalmia 

latifolia (mountain laurel), Rhododendron schlippenbachii (royal 

azalea), Salix tristis (dwarf grey willow) 

•	 Circular Drive: Magnolia acuminata (cucumber magnolia), 

Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), Diervilla sessilifolia 

(Southern bush honeysuckle) 

•	 South Lawn: Pieris foribunda (mountain pieris) 

•	 Service Areas: Hedera helix (English ivy), Rosa ‘Dorothy Perkins’ 

2000 

Events 

•	 Historic House Explorers Institute used Fairsted grounds to develop a 

model curriculum program for 7-8 graders 

•	 Robert Page, formerly Manager of the Park Cultural Landscape Program 

in the Washington DC ofce, named Director of the Olmsted Center 

Research and Planning 

•	 Jack Boucher, HABS Photographer documented the restored Fairsted 

landscape. 

Treatment Work 

•	 Twelve Taxus canadensis (Canadian Yew); one Carya ovata (Shagbark 

Hickory); and one replacement Fraxinus americana (White Ash) planted 

in Rock Garden, summer [8] 

159 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

2001 

Events 

•	 The National Association for Olmsted Parks (NAOP) celebrated 20 years 

of landscape preservation in Massachusetts at Fairsted 

Research and Planning 

•	 “Cultural Landscape Report, volume 3: Record of Treatment” completed 

in draft 

•	 Preservation Maintenance Plan initiated 

KEY TO SOURCES OF INFORMATION 

1. Lucinda Adele Whitehill, Historic Grounds Report and Management Plan: 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Brookline, Massachusetts, 

NPS 1982. 

2. National Park Service, General Management Plan, 1983 

3. Historic Resource Study 

4. Historic Structures Report 

5. Karen E. Day, “Preservation Tech Notes, Site Number 1: Restoring Vine 

Coverage to Historic Buildings” Preservation Assistance Division, NPS 

October 1991 

6. Cynthia Zaitzevsky, Fairsted: A Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site, NPS & Arnold Arboretum, 1997. 

7. “Cultural Landscape Report, vol. 2: Treatment Plan” by Lauren Meier 

8. Olmsted NHS Maintenance Division records/feld notes 

9. Lauren Meier, “Notes on Restoring the Woody Plants of Fairsted” Arnoldia 

Summer 1996 

10. National Park Service, GMP Amendment 

11. Maintenance notes and invoices 

12. David Grayson Allen, The Olmsted National Historic Site and the Growth of 

Historic Landscape Preservation: Administrative History. March 1998. 

13. Interview with Barbara Keene, July 26, 2001. 

14. Olmsted NHS Section 106 compliance fles. 

15. Historic Plant Nursery records, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. 

160 
Appendix A

PROJECT PARTICIPANTS (1991-2001) 

The following individuals, institutions, and companies contributed to the 

restoration of the Fairsted landscape between 1991–2001. 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site Management Team 

•	 Myra Harrison, Superintendent (1999-2001) 

•	 Rolf Diamant, Superintendent (1991-1998) 

•	 Lee Farrow Cook, Deputy Superintendent/Site Manager (1991-2001) 

Maintenance Division (treatment implementation) 

•	 Ed Baciagalupo, Chief of Maintenance/Facility Manager (1991-2001) 

•	 Emo DeWitt, Grounds Supervisor/Horticulturist (1997-2001) 

•	 Barbara Keene, Grounds Supervisor/Horticulturist (1991-1997) 

•	 Mona McKinley, Gardener (1997-2001) 

•	 Staf of the maintenance division (1991-2001) 

Archives Staff (historical research, section 106 compliance) 

•	 Jill Trebbe, Supervisory Archivist (1998-present) 

•	 Linda Genovese, Supervisory Archivist (1992-1998) 

•	 Liz Banks, Supervisory Curator (1980-1995) 

•	 Michele Clark, Archivist (1999-present) 

•	 Joyce Connolly, Archivist (1991-1999) 

•	 Wendy Gogel, Museum Specialist (1991-1999) 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation (research, planning, design, compliance, project management) 

•	 Bob Page, Director (2000-2001) 

•	 Nora Mitchell, Director/Cultural Landscape Program Manager (1991-

1999) 

•	 Charlie Pepper, Deputy Director/Horticulturist (1991-2001) 

•	 Lauren Meier, Historical Landscape Architect/Project Manager (1991-

2001) 

•	 Eliot Foulds, Historical Landscape Architect (1993-2001) 

•	 Catherine Evans, Historical Landscape Architect (1991-1995) 

•	 Margie Cofn Brown, Historical Landscape Architect (1991-2001) 

•	 Catherine Morris O’Connor, Landscape Architecture Intern/Technician 

(1992-1994) 

Northeast Cultural Resources Center (archeology) 

•	 Steven Pendery, Archeologist 

161 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

COOPERATORS 

Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University (CLR research and publication, plant identifcation, propagation) 

•	 Robert Cook, Director 

•	 Peter Del Tredici, Director of Living Collections 

•	 Phyllis Andersen, Landscape Historian/Director, Institute for Cultural 

Landscape Studies 

•	 Steven Spongberg, Horticultural Taxonomist (until 1998) 

•	 Kirstin Thornton, Landscape Preservation Assistant 

•	 Jack Alexander, Chief Plant Propagator 

•	 Gary Koller, Senior Horticulturist (until 1998) 

•	 C.J. Patterson, Rhododendron specialist (consultant) 

•	 Susan Hardy-Brown, Curatorial Assistant 

•	 Thomas Ward, Greenhouse Manager 

Boston University, Offce of Public Archeology (electronic survey) 

•	 Rick Elias 

•	 Dave Clayton 

CONSULTANTS 

Landscape Historian (CLR Volume 1) 

•	 Cynthia Zaitzevsky, Phd., Brookline, MA 

•	 Lynn Schad, research assistant 

Graphic Design (CLR Volume 1) 

•	 Andy Winter, Hyde Park, MA 

Tree Removal (Phase 1) 

•	 Tree Specialists, Inc. 

•	 Rolf Briggs, President 

Phase 2 Construction Documents 

•	 Carol R. Johnson Associates, Inc., Cambridge, MA. 

•	 Carol R. Johnson FASLA, project manager 

•	 Beth Gavrin, Landscape Architect 

•	 Archetype, Boston, MA (Indefnite Quantities Contract) 

•	 Joel Bargmann, Architect 

Soil Testing and Analysis 

•	 Michael Talbott and Associates, Dorchester MA 

•	 Michael Talbott 

Seasonal Watering System 

•	 Bay State Irrigation 

•	 Al Costa 

Phase 2 Construction 

•	 D&D Enterprises, Inc. 

162 
Appendix B

 

 

 

APPENDIX B: BIBLIOGRAPHY AND 

SOURCES OF INFORMATION 

BOOKS AND PUBLISHED REPORTS 

Beveridge, Charles E. and Paul Rochelieu. Frederick Law Olmsted: Designing the 

American Landscape. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1995. 

Carden, Marie and Andrea Gilmore. Historic Structures Report, Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site. Lowell, MA: National Park Service, Northeast Region, NE 

Cultural Resources Center, 1998. 

Cofn, Margaret. Guide to Developing a Maintenance Plan for a Historic Landscape. 

Boston, MA: Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1995. 

Day, Karen E. “Restoring Vine Coverage to Historic Buildings: Fairsted, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site, Brookline, Massachusetts.” Preservation Tech Notes. 

October 1991. 

Millman, Amy. Historic Resource Study, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. 

Boston, MA: National Park Service, North Atlantic Region, 1982. 

National Park Service. General Management Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site. Boston, MA: National Park Service, North Atlantic Region, 1983. 

Whitehill, Lucinda. Historic Grounds Report and Management Plan, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site. Boston, MA: National Park Service, North Atlantic 

Region, 1982. 

Zaitzevsky, Cynthia with an Afterword by Mac Griswold. Fairsted, A Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Vol. 1: Site History. 

Cultural Landscape Publication #12. Boston: MA: National Park Service, Olmsted 

Center for Landscape Preservation and the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University, 

1997 

ARTICLES 

Berg, Shary Page. “Fairsted, Documenting and Preserving a Historic Landscape.” APT 

Bulletin 20, no. 1 (1988). 

____. “Rescuing Fairsted.” Landscape Architecture (July-August 1987). 

Beveridge, Charles E. “Frederick Law Olmsted’s Theory on Landscape Design.” Nineteenth Century 13, no. 2 (1977). 

163 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Calkins, Meg. “A New Twist on Trellis Design: Updating an Olmsted detail [Fairsted, 

Brookline, Mass.]” Landscape Architecture (June 2000). 

Deitz, Paula. “Fairsted: At home with Frederick Law Olmsted.” Magazine Antiques 

(August 1995). 

McCormic, Kathleen. “Close to Home [Fairsted].” Preservation: the Magazine of the 

National Trust for Historic Preservation (July-August 1997). 

____. “Vaulting the Garden Wall.” Landscape Architecture (May 1994). 

Meier, Lauren G. “Managing Landscape Character in a Historic Designed Landscape, 

the Restoration of Fairsted, the Olmsted National Historic Site.” APT Bulletin (Spring 

1999). 

____. “Notes on Restoring the Woody Plants of Fairsted.” Arnoldia (Summer 1996). 

____. “Restoring Olmsted’s Garden -- the Restoration of the Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site.” Landscape Design, October 1994 (reprinted by the Maine Alliance for Parks and Landscapes, 1995). 

____. “The Treatment of Historic Plant Material, Interpreting the Secretary’s Standards” and “The National Park Service and Historic Landscape Preservation.” The 

Public Garden, American Association of Botanic Gardens and Arboreta, (April 1992). 

Meier, Lauren G. and Nora Mitchell. “The Treatment of Historic Plant Material.” 

Preservation Technology Update, CRM Bulletin (December 1990). 

O’Connell, Kim A. “Care of Character: Fairsted- the Home and Ofce of Frederick 

Law Olmsted and his Successors- is Restored to all its Picturesque Glory.” Landscape 

Architecture (June 2000). 

Thompson, J. William. “1999 ASLA Awards.” Landscape Architecture (October 1999). 

UNPUBLISHED REPORTS 

Allen, David Grayson. “The Olmsted National Historic Site and the Growth of Historic Landscape Preservation: Administrative History.” National Park Service, Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site, March 1998. 

Baugh, Elia, and Tartaron. “Geophysical Remote Sensing Survey at Fairsted, Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” Boston University Ofce of Public Archeology. 

Boston, MA. 1993. 

Berg, Shary Page and Charles Pepper. “Draft, Olmsted NHS Landscape Preservation 

Period and Philosophy.” Olmsted NHS Administrative Records, September 1986. 

164 
Appendix B

Beveridge, Charles E. “The Fairsted Grounds and Olmsted’s Theory of Residential 

Design.” Paper delivered at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, MA, April 23, 1983. 

Cofn, Margaret. “Cultural Landscape Preservation Guide, Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site.” National Park Service, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, Draft, 1992-3. 

Gilmore, Andrea. “Historic Structures Report, Fences, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” National Park Service, Draft, 1986-7. 

Heitert, Kristen and Ora Elquist. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site Archeological Overview and Assessment,” Technical Report. Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. July 2012. 

Jamison, Thomas R. “Phase 1 Archeological Investigations in Support of the Green 

Hill Landscape Rehabilitation Project, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” 

Hartgen Archeological Associates, Inc. December 2019. 

Meier, Lauren G. “Cultural Landscape Report for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Vol. 2: Existing Conditions, Analysis, and Treatment.” National 

Park Service, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994. 

——. “Draft Treatment Plan, Landscape Restoration Phase 1: Nonhistoric Tree and 

Shrub Removal, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” National Park Service, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. May 1994. 

——. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site: Preservation Period and Philosophy,” April-May 1987, with a Memorandum from Superintendent, Longfellow 

NHS to Regional Director. 

LOCATIONS OF FILES AND RECORDS RELATED TO THE 

FAIRSTED LANDSCAPE RESTORATION, 1991-2021 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 99 Warren Street, Brookline, MA 

02446 

Olmsted Archives 

•	 Administration Division records 

•	 Maintenance Division records and feld notes 

•	 Interpretation and Education Program fles 

•	 Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation fles 

165 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University, Jamaica Way, Jamaica Plain, MA 

•	 Institute for Cultural Landscape Studies fles 

•	 Living Collections/Greenhouse fles 

166 
Appendix C

 

 

APPENDIX C: FAIRSTED PLANT 

INVENTORIES AND PLANT SOURCES 

The following lists and tables include inventories of plants at Fairsted completed 

in 2001 and 2021 as well as a directory of commercial nurseries, seed suppliers, 

and other plant sources that park staf have previously relied upon to acquire 

vegetation for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. This information 

is documented as a resource to present and future stewards of the Fairsted and 

Green Hill parcel landscapes. 

167 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

168 
Appendix C

Trees 

Carya ovata 

Cornus florida 

Crataegus mollis 

Crataegus x mordensis 'Toba' 

Liriodendron tulipera 

Quercus rubra 

Tsuga canadensis 

Shrubs 

Buxus semprivirens 

Clethra alnifolia 

Cotoneaster horizontalis 

Diervilla lonicera 

Juniperus chinensis 

Juniperus communis 

Kalmia latifolia 

Leucothoe fontanesiana 

Philadelphus coronarius 

Pyracantha coccinea 

Rhododendron catawbiense 

Rhododendron maximum 

Rhododendron 

schlippenbacchii 

Rhododendron vaseyi 

Salix tristis 

Taxus baccata 

Taxus baccata 'Repandens' 

Taxus canadensis 

Taxus cuspidata 

Taxus cuspidata 'Capitata' 

Taxus cuspidata 'Nana' 

Herbaceous Plants 

Arisaema triphyllum 

Dennstaedtia punctilobula 

Epimedium macranthum 

Erthronium sp. 

Hosta sieboldiana 

Hosta lancifolia 

Iris cristata 

Iris x 

Pacysandra terminalis 

Phlox subulata 

Sedum stoloniferum 

Vines 

Euonymous fortunei radicans 

Parthenocissus quinquefolia 

Shagbark Hickory 

Flowering Dogwood 

Downey Hawthorn 

Toby Hawthorn 

Tuliptree 

Red Oak 

Eastern Hemlock 

Common Boxwood 

Summersweet 

Rock Cotoneaster 

Dwarf Bush-honeysuckle 

Chinese juniper 

Common juniper 

Mountain Laurel 

Drooping Leucothoe 

Sweet Mockorange 

Scarlet Firethorn 

Catawba Rhododendron 

Rosebay Rhododendron 

Royal Azalea 

Pinkshell Azalea 

Dwarf Grey Willow 

English/Common Yew 

Weeping English Yew 

North American Yew 

Japanese Yew 

Upright Japanese Yew 

Dwarf Japanese Yew 

Jack in the pulpit 

Hay-scented Fern 

Epimedium 

Trout Lily 

Sieboldi Hosta 

Narrow-leaved Hosta 

Dwarf Crested Iris 

Bearded Iris 

Spurge 

Creeping Phlox 

Sedum 

Wintercreeper 

Virginia Creeper 

Trees 

Acer spicatum Mountain Maple 

Cornus florida Pink Flowering Dogwood 

Eleagnus angustifolia. Russian Olive 

Fraxinus Americana American Ash 

Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Magnolia 

Pinus Rigida Pitch Pine 

Pinus strobus White Pine 

Rhamus carthartica Common Buckthorn 

Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 

Ulmus americana American Elm 

Shrubs 

Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry 

Berberis vulgaris Native Barberry 

Chaenomeles speciosa False or Flowering Quince 

Cotoneaster horizontalis Rock Cotoneaster 

Cydonia oblonga Common Quince 

Diervilla sessifolia S. Bush-honeysuckle 

Euonymous alatus Winged Euonymus 

Philadelphus coronarius Sweet Mockorange 

Rhodotypos scandens Jetbead 

Spirea x vanhouttei Vanhoutte Spirea 

Syringa persica Persian Lilac 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 

Tradescantia virginiana Spiderwort 

Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood Viburnum 

Xanthorhiza simplicissima Yellowroot 

Herbaceous Plants and Groundcovers 

Bergenia cordifolia Bergenia 

Dennstaedtia punctilobula Hay-scented Fern 

Dryopteris marginalis Marginal Shield Fern 

Hedra helix English Ivy 

Osmunda cinnamomea Cinnamon Fern 

Pacysandra terminalis Japanese Spurge 

Polygonatum biflorum Solomon’s Seal 

Smilacina racemose False solomon’s seal 

Scilla sp. Scilla, Squall 

Vinca minor Myrtle 

Vines 

Euonymous fortunei radicans Wintercreeper Euonymous 

Wisteria sinensis Chinese Wisteria 

169 

FAIRSTED PLANT LIST BY LANDSCAPE ZONES (2021) 

HOLLOW FRONT DRIVE, Entrance, Front Door 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Trees 

Betula lenta 

Betula nigra 

Chamaecyparis obtusa 

Fraxinus americana 

Juniperus virginiana 

Koelreutaria paniculata 

Malus sp. 

Pinus rigida 

Pinus strobus 

Quercus rubra 

Rhamnus cathartica 

Tsuga Canadensis 

Ulmus americana 

Shrubs 

Berberis vulgaris 

Cornus alba 'Siberica' 

Euonymous alatus 

Kalmia latifolia 

Philadelphus coronarius 

Pierus foribunda 

Pyrancantha coccinea 

Rhodotypos scandens 

Spirea x vanhouttei 

Taxus baccata 'Repandens' 

Taxus canadensis 

Taxus cuspidata 

Viburnum cassinoides 

Viburnum dentatum 

Herbaceous Plants 

Aster sp. 

Dennstaedtia punctilobula 

Vinca minor 

Vines 

Euonymous fortunei radicans 

Hedra helix 

Wisteria sinensis 

Sweet/Black Birch 

Shagbark Hickory 

Hinoki Falsecypress 

White Ash 

Eastern Red Cedar 

Goldenraintree 

Crabapple 

Pitch Pine 

White Pine 

Red Oak 

Buckthorn 

Eastern hemlock 

American Elm 

Native Barberry 

Tatarian Dogwood 

Winged Euonymous 

Mountain Laurel 

Sweet Mockorange 

Mountain Andromeda 

Scarlet Firethorn 

Jetbead 

Vanhoutte Spirea 

Weeping English Yew 

Canadian Yew 

Japanese Yew 

Witherod Viburnum 

Arrowwood Viburnum 

Wood aster 

Hay-scented Fern 

Myrtle 

Wintercreeper Euonymous 

English Ivy 

Chinese Wisteria 

Trees 

Acer platanoides 'Schwedleri' 

Acer saccharum 

Betula lenta 

Betula papyrifera 

Cladrastis lutea 

Larix decidua 

Pinus rigida 

Pinus strobus 

Rhamnus cathartica 

Tilia tomentosa 

Tsuga canadensis 

Ulmus americana ‘Jefferson’ 

Shrubs 

Cornus alba 'Siberica' 

Cornus sericea 

Deutzia carnea densiflora 

Deutzia scabra candidissima 

Euonymou alatus 

Forsythia intermedia 

'Spectabilis' 

Ilex crenata 

Ilex glabra 

Kalmia latifolia 

Leucothoe fontanesiana 

Philadelphus coronarius 

Pierus floribunda 

Pyracantha coccinea 

Rhododendron maximum 

Rhodotypos scandens 

Rosa multiflora 

Rosa virginiana 

Rosa wichuraiana 

Rubus sp. 

Spirea x vanhouttei 

Syringa persica 

Syringa vulgaris 

Taxus cuspidata 

Viburnum dentatum 

Weigela florida 

Herbaceous plants 

Agapodium podagraria 

Arisaema triphyllum 

Aster sp. 

Fragaria sp. 

Hemerocalis sp. 

Matteuccia struthiopteris 

Vines

Actinidea arguta 

Aristolichia durior 

Euonymous fortunei 

Euyonomous fortune ‘Vegeta’ 

Vitis sp. 

Wisteria sinensis 

Schwedler Maple 

Sugar Maple 

Sweet/Black Birch 

Paperbark Birch 

Yellowwood 

European Larch 

Pitch Pine 

White Pine 

Common Buckthorn 

Silver Linden 

Eastern Hemlock 

American Elm 

Tatarian Dogwood 

Red-osier Dogwood 

Deutzia 

Fuzzy Deutzia 

Winged Euonymous 

Border Forsythia 

Japanese Holly 

Inkberry 

Mountain Laurel 

Drooping Leucothoe 

Sweet Mockorange 

Mountain Andromeda 

Scarlet Firethorn 

Rosebay Rhododendron 

Jetbead 

Japanese Rose 

Virginia Rose 

Memorial Rose 

Wild Blackberry 

Vanhoutte Spirea 

Persian Lilac 

Common Lilac 

Japanese Yew 

Arrowwood Viburnum 

Old Fashioned Weigela 

Goutweed 

Jack-in-the-pulpit 

Wood Asters 

Wild strawberry 

Orange Daylily 

Ostrich Fern 

Hardy Kiwi 

Dutchman's Pipe 

Wintercreeper 

Variegated Wintercreeper 

Wild Grape 

Chinese Wisteria 

170 

ROCK GARDEN SOUTH LAWN, West Slope, Shed Area 
Appendix C

Trees 

Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Maple 

Acer saccharum Sugar Maple 

Chamaecyparis obtusa Hinoki Falsecypress 

Chamaecyparis pisifera Japanese Falsecypress 

Liriodendron tulipifera Tuliptree 

Magnolia acuminata Cucumber Magnolia 

Pinus strobus White Pine 

Tsuga canadensis Canadian Hemlock 

Shrubs 

Berberis thunbergii Japanese Barberry 

Cydonia oblonga Common Quince 

Philadelphus coronarius Sweet Mockorange 

Rhodotypos scandens Black Jetbead 

Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac 

Taxus cuspidata Japanese Yew 

Taxus cuspidata 'Pyramidallis' Pyramidial Japanese Yew 

Herbaceous Plants including Groundcovers

Agapodium podagraria Goutweed 

Aspidium munitum Giant Holly Fern 

Aspidium spinulosum 

Dilatatum Fern 

Begoniax tuberhybrida Tuberous Begonia 

Euyonomous fortune var. 

Radicans Wintercreeper 

Iris ensata Japanese Iris 

Lobularia maritima Sweet Alyssum 

Pachysandra terminalis Japanese Pachysandra 

Paeonia (multiple varieties) Garden Peony 

Rosa (multiple varieties) Roses 

Sedum spectabula ‘Carmen’ Sedum Carmen 

Vinca minor Myrtle 

Vines 

Aristolochia durior Dutchman's Pipe 

Euonymous fortunei radicans Wintercreeper Euonymous 

Hedera helix English Ivy 

... Wild Grape (on fence) 

171 

SERVICE AREAS, Parking Lot, Service Court, Office 

Courtyard 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

TREES 

CARYA 

OVATA 

SHAGBARK 

HICKORY 13-1 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CORNUS 

FLORIDA 

FLOWERING 

DOGWOOD 13-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CRATAEGUS 

MOLLIS 

DOWNY 

HAWTHORNE NEW 1 NOV. 1999 

LITTLE 

VALLEY 

WHOLESALE 

NURSERY 

CRATAEGUS SP. TOBY HAWTHORNE 12-1 HISTORIC EXISTING 

ORIGINALLY LISTED 

AS CRAETAGUS 

MOLLIS ‘TOBA’. ID’D 

BY THE ARBORETUM AS C. SP., NOT 

‘TOBA’. COULD BE 

C. X MORDENENSIS 

‘TOBA’. 

LIRIODENDRON 

TULIPIFERA TULIPTREE NEW 

PLANTED 1 

TO REPLACE 

HISTORIC 

TREE 

1995 

SEEDLING 

FROM 

LYMAN 

ESTATE 

HISTORIC TREE 

FELLED BY HURRICANE BOB (1991). 

REPLANTED IN 1995 

WITH A SEEDLING 

FROM LYMAN ESTATE. 

QUERCUS 

RUBRA RED OAK NEW 

PLANTED 1 

TO REPLACE 

HISTORIC 

TREE 

1997 

HISTORIC TREE 

FELLED BY HURRICANE BOB (1991); 

REPLANTED TWICE. 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK 

12-5 

12-6 HISTORIC EXISTING 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK NEW 1 1991 SHEMIN 

NURSERY 

NEW ONE LOCATED 

NEXT TO THE TWO 

MATURE TREES, 

PLANTED AS DIRECTED BY C. PEPPER. 

SHRUBS 

BUXUS 

SEMPERVIRENS 

COMMON 

BOX 13-3 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CLETHRA 

ALNIFOLIA 

SUMMERSWEET CLETHRA 

13-4 HISTORIC EXISTING 

COTONEASTER 

HORIZONTALIS 

ROCK COTONEASTER NEW 12 1995 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

DIERVILLA 

LONICERA 

DWARF BUSHHONEYSUCKLE 

NEW 26 1995 QUANSETT 

NURSERY 

REMOVED TWO 

SHRUBS IN AUTUMN 1999 TO 

MAKE ROOM FOR 

NEW DOWNEY 

HAWTHORNE. REPLANTED AFTER 

TREE WAS PLANTED. 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER EUONYMOUS 

12-9 

12-10 

12-11 

12-12 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

172 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER EUONYMOUS 

NEW 48 1995 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

GROWING FROM 

TOP OF WALL 

DOWN THE CLIFF 

FACE. MONA 

PLANTED THREE 

NEW PLANTS BELOW THE CLIFF 

TO GROW UP THE 

WALL BECAUSE 

THERE IS MORE 

SOIL THERE. THEY 

ARE NOT YET ESTABLISHED. 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER EUONYMOUS 

NEW 3 OUTSTANDING 

AWAITING DEVELOPMENT OF APPROPRIATE TRELLIS 

SYSTEM. 

JUNIPERUS 

CHINENSIS 

CHINESE JUNIPER NEW 4 1995 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

JUNIPERUS 

COMMUNIS 

COMMON 

JUNIPER NEW 5 1995 WESTON NURSERIES 

KALMIA 

LATIFOLIA 

MOUNTAIN 

LAUREL 13-5 HISTORIC EXISTING 

KALMIA 

LATIFOLIA 

MOUNTAIN 

LAUREL NEW 5 1999 

LEUCOTHOE 

FONTANESIANA 

DROOPING 

LEUCOTHOE 12-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

PHILADELPHUS 

COROARIUS 

SWEET 

MOCKORANGE 

12-13 

12-14 

12-15 

12-16 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

PYRACANTHA 

COCCINEA 

SCARLET FIRETHORN NEW 1 1995 

PROPAGATED FROM 

HISTORIC 

PLANT ON 

SOUTH 

LAWN (CUTTINGS TAKEN 1991) 

RHODODENDRON 

CATAWBIENSE 

CATAWBA 

RHODODENDRON 

13-7 

13-29 

13-31 

13-32 

13-33 

13-34 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODODENDRON 

MAXIMUM 

ROSEBAY 

RHODODENDRON 

13-8 

13-35 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODODENDRON 

MAXIMUM 

ROSEBAY 

RHODODENDRON NEW 1 1996 

RHODODENDRON 

VASEYI 

PINKSHELL 

AZALEA 12-22 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODODENDRON 

SCHLIPPENBACHII 

SCHLIPPENBACH RHODODENDRON 

(AZALEA)/ 

ROYAL AZALEA 

NEW 

PLANTED 

TWICE, 

1995 AND 

APRIL 1999 

SYLVAN 

NURSERY, 

1995 

WESTON 

NURSERIES, 

1999 

173 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SALIX HUMILIS 

TRITIS 

DWARF GREY 

WILLOW NEW 39 NOV. 1998 

ROOTED 

CUTTINGS 

FROM 

PRAIRIE 

MOON 

NURSERY 

ALSO CALLED 

S. TRISTIS VAR. 

HUMILUS, 

DWARF UPLAND WILLOW, 

OR PRAIRIE 

WILLOW. 

SEE MONA’S 

ADDITIONAL 

TYPED NOTES. 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

ENGLISH/ 

COMMON 

YEW 

12-23 

12-24 

12-27 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

FIELD NOTES LIST 

12-25 AS ONE TO 

BE REPLACED, BUT 

IT IS MISSING. 12-26 

IS ALSO MISSING. 

12- 23, 24, AND 27 

ARE EXISTENT. 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

ENGLISH/ 

COMMON 

YEW 

NEW 5 1995 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

‘REPANDENS’ 

WEEPING 

ENGLISH YEW 

13-9 

13-10 

13-11 

13-12 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

‘REPANDENS’ 

WEEPING 

ENGLISH YEW NEW 11 1995 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

TAXUS 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

YEW 12-28 HISTORIC EXISTING RETAINED PLANTING, CUT BACK 

TAXUS 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

YEW NEW 5 SUMMER 

2000 

PROPAGATED BY 

BILL CULINA 

OF THE NEW 

ENGLAND 

WILDFLOWER SOCIETY 

NOT AVAILABLE 

COMMERCIALLY 

DUE TO MORE 

POPULAR ENGLISH 

VARIETIES FOR ORNAMENTAL GARDENING 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA 

JAPANESE 

YEW 

12-30 

12-31 HISTORIC EXISTING 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA 

‘CAPITATA’ 

JAPANESE 

YEW NEW 3 JUNE 1998 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA 

‘NANA’ 

JAPANESE 

YEW NEW 7 1997-1999 

VINES 

PARTHENOCISSUS 

QUINQUEFOLIA 

VIRGINIA 

CREEPER, 

WOODBINE 

NO ID HISTORIC EXISTING 

PARTHENOCISSUS 

TRICUSPIDATA 

BOSTON IVY NO ID HISTORIC EXISTING 

RUBUS SP. BRAMBLE NO ID HISTORIC EXISTING 

174 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

HERBACEOUS PLANTS (PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, FERNS, ROSES, BULBS) 

DENNSTAEDTIA 

PUNCTILOBULA 

HAY-SCENTED 

FERN NEW 

TRANSPLANTED 

15, FALL 

1997 FROM 

ISLAND 

AND ROCK 

GARDEN TO 

LEDGE TOP. 

100 PLANTS 

(BARE 

ROOTS). 60 

6” PLANTS 

WITH FOLIAGE. 

SUMMER 

1998 

SPRING 

1999 

BARE ROOTS 

FROM HORTICO NURSERIES 

WESTON 

NURSERIES 

FOR POTTED 

FERNS WITH 

FOLIAGE 

ON LEDGE ABOVE 

HOLLOW AND IN 

CENTER ISLAND 

BED. PLANTED IN 

CLUMPS OF 3 TO 

5. COULD ADD 60 

MORE UP NEAR 

HEMLOCKS FOR 

FULLER LOOK. 

EPIMEDIUM 

MACRANTHUM EPIMEDIUM NEW 

TRANSPLANTED 

FROM 

DENSE 

AREAS OF 

ISLAND. 

PLANTED 

24 NEW, 

SPRING 

1998. 

SUMMER 

1997 

SPRING 

1998 

SUMMER 

1998 

PURCHASED 

NEW 

PLANTS 

FROM 

SHADY 

OAKS NURSERY 

EPIMEDIUM 

GRANDIFLORA 

WAS SUBSTITUTED FOR E. 

MACRANTHUM 

TWO VARIETIES OR 

MAYBE THREE IN 

THIS BED, COULD 

BE ‘VERSICOLOR’ 

AND ‘SULPHURELLUM’ (DIVIDED 

FROM EXISTING 

PLANTS 1995) AND 

‘GRANDIFLORA’. 

HOSTA 

SIEBOLDIANA 

SIEBOLDIANA 

HOSTA NEW 30 1998 SEMIN 

NURSERIES 

ONE REMOVED 

IN SPRING 1999 

BECAUSE OF VARIGATED LEAVES. 

DIFFICULT TO FIND 

ORIGINAL CULTIVAR WITH NO 

MODERN BRED 

VARIATIONS. 

HOSTA 

LANCIFOLIA 

NARROWLEAFED 

HOSTA 

NEW 

25 

30 IN 4” 

POTS 

SPRING 

1999 

SEPT. 1998 

HORTICO, 

INC. 

DIFFICULT TO FIND 

IN QUANTITY BECAUSE ORIGINAL 

CULTIVAR IS NO 

LONGER POPULAR. 

PLANTED 25 INSTEAD OF 80 BECAUSE 6” POTTED 

PLANTS FILLED IN 

AREA. 

175 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS 

CRISTATA 

DWARF 

CRESTED IRIS 

WOODLAND 

IRIS 

NEW 

APPROX. 

300 IN CENTER BED 

40 PLANTED 

ON OTHER 

SIDE OF 

PATH NEAR 

FALL 1997 

SCOT 

BROTHERS 

NURSERY 

NOTES ON PLANTING PLAN DID NOT 

CLARIFY WHAT 

COLOR. 

TODAY IRIS CRISTATA COMES IN 

WHITE OR BLUE. 

WE PLANTED ALL 

BLUE. 

PLANTED IN 

CLUMPS OF 1, 3, 5. 

ONE TO TWO BLUE/ 

VIOLET FLOWERS, 

YELLOW-RIDGED 

CREST STREAKED 

WITH PURPLE 

BEARDED 

IRISES 

ON THE SEPALS. 

SWORD SHAPED 

LEAVES. HEIGHT 

4-6”, BLOOMS APRMAY. 

SAVED BUNDLE 

OF APPROX. 30 

TO PLANT ACROSS 

PATH UNDER 

RHODODENDRON. 

(WERE THESE 

PLANTED?) 

IRIS 

PSEUDOPUMILA 

IRIS BUCHARICA 

JUNO IRIS 

(NOT BEARDED) 

NEW 50 FALL 1998 

THE DAFFODIL MART 

COMPANY, NOW 

BRENT AND 

BECKY’S 

BULBS 

I. BUCHARICAOR SUBSTITUTED FOR I. 

PSEUDOPUMILA THE NAME 

PSEUDOPUMILA HAS BEEN 

APPLIED TO 

A FEW RARE, 

BEARDED IRIS 

SPECIES, NONE 

OF WHICH IS 

OF REMARKABLE GARDEN 

VALUE TO 

ANY BUT THE 

COLLECTOR 

AND NONE OF 

WHICH ARE 

HARDY IN MA 

A DWARF, EARLY 

FLOWERING IRIS, 2 

TO 6 GOLDEN YELLOW FRAGRANT 

FLORETS WITH 

BLOTCHES OF 

GREEN ON STEM, 

GLOSSY FOLIAGE. 

BLOOMS EARLY 

SPRING, 4”-6”. 

PLANTED 50 BECAUSE THEY ARE 

SOLD IN CLUSTERS 

OF 50 

COULD HAVE ALSO 

SUBSTITUTED IRIS 

DANFORDIAE OR 

IRIS RETICULATA. 

176 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS 

PUMILA 

‘ATROVIOLACEA’ 

NEW 32 SUMMER 

1998 

HERMIT 

MEDLAR’S 

WALK, 

WINTERBERRY GARPLANTED VERY 

SMALL RHIZOMES. 

ALTHOUGH NO 

LONGER CONSIDERED A TRUE SPECIES, THIS DWARF 

BEARDED IS VERY 

SHORT, VERY EARLY 

BLOOMER , DEEP 

PURPLE. DESCRIBED 

BY THE BOTANIST 

DENS AUGUSTINO TODERO IN 1856. 

MAY HAVE LOST 2 

OR 3 DUE TO ROT 

– RHIZOME ROOTS 

NOT WELL DEVELOPED YET. 

IRIS 

‘ALCAZAR’ 

(VILMORIN, 1910) 

NEW 4 SUMMER 

1998 

HISTORIC 

IRIS PRESERVATION 

SOCIETY 

(DONATED 

BY ANNER 

WHITEHEAD) 

TALL, BEARDED 

IRIS. AN EXCELLENT 

IRIS WITH LIGHT 

MAUVE STANDARDS AND VIOLET 

FALLS, 36” TO 45”. 

IRIS 

‘CATERINA’ 

(FOSTER, 1909) 

NEW 39 SUMMER 

1998 

SUPERSTITION IRIS 

GARDENS 

IRIS ‘MOTHER 

OF PEARL’ MAY 

BE A GOOD 

SUBSTITUTE 

TALL BEARDED. 

A MIDSEASON 

BLOOMER. LARGE 

FLOWERS, SAME 

COLOR AS I. PALLIDA. NOT COLD 

HARDY IN MA. 

SUBSTITUTION ADVISABLE. 

IRIS 

‘CITREA’ 

(GOOS & KOENEMANN, 1899) 

NEW 50 SUMMER 

1998 

SUPERSTITION IRIS 

GARDEN 

AND 

WINTERBERRY GARDENS 

DONATED 

BY DANA 

BROWN 

FROM 

SUBSTITUTED 

I. ‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

THEN LATER 

REMOVED 

‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

AND REPLANTED WITH ‘LA 

PERLE’ 

IRIS ‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

REPLANTED WITH 

IRIS ‘LA PERLE’ 

SPRING 1999. 

DWARF BEARDED, 

VERY EARLY 

BLOOMER, LEMON 

YELLOW SELF, 

ORANGE BEARD. 

ALMOST CERTAINLY 

EXTINCT. 

IRIS ‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

LUBBOCK, 

TEXAS 

WAS TOO TALL FOR 

THIS SPOT. IRIS ‘LA 

PERLE’ UNAVAILABLE UNTIL DONATED 

IRIS 

PALLIDA 

‘DALMATICA’ 

NEW 89 SUMMER 

1998 

SUPERSTITION IRIS 

GARDENS 

A SELECTED FORM 

OF THE SPECIES 

I. PALLIDA, TALL 

BEARDED, LT. 

LAVENDER-BLUE, 

HARDY. 

177 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS 

‘DOROTHEA’ 

(CAPERNE, 1901) 

NEW 

TEMPORARILY PLANTED 16 IRIS 

‘FLUTTERBY’ 

SPRING 

1999 

WINTERBERRY GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED I. 

‘LA PERLE’ FOR 

FOR I. ‘DOROTHEA’. LATER 

REMOVED I. 

‘LA PERLE’ AND 

REPLANTED 

WITH I. ‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

INTERMEDIATE 

BEARDED, EARLY 

BLOOMER, BLUEWHITE-LILAC, USUAL FORM BUT WITH 

ORANGE BEARD. 

ORIGINALLY 

PLANTED 16 ‘LA 

PERLE’ HERE IN 

LATE SUMMER, 

1998 BUT DECIDED 

TO SWITCH IT WITH 

THE ‘FLUTTER-BY.’ 

IT BLOOMED TOO 

SMALL AND SPARSE 

FOR THIS SPOT 

RIGHT ALONG THE 

PATH. 

IRIS ‘FLUTTER-BY’ 

(GRACE STURTEVANT, 1924): MTB, 

SOFT BUTTER YELLOW, SLENDER 

GROWTH, SMALL 

FLOWERS, RAMPANT GROWTH. 

IRIS 

‘DITTON 

PURPLE’ 

(BARR, 1910) 

NEW 20 IRIS 

“CYNEA 

SUMMER 

1998 

HERMIT 

MELDAR’S 

WALK 

SUBSTITUTED 

IRIS ‘CYNEA’ 

FOR I. ‘DITTON 

PURPLE’ 

DWARF BEARDED, 

EARLY BLOOMER, 

A DARK PURPLE 

DWARF IRIS, ALMOST CERTAINLY 

EXTINCT. 

IRIS ‘CYNEA’ (GOOS 

AND KOENEMANN 

1899): DWARF 

BEARDED. VIOLET 

BLUE WITH WHITE 

BEARD. 

IRIS 

‘EBURNA’ 

(GOOS & KOENEMANN, 1899) 

NEW 17 I. ‘THE 

BRIDE’ 

SUMMER 

1998 

WINTERBERRY GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

I. ‘THE BRIDE’ 

FOR I. ‘EBURNA’ 

DWARF BEARDED, 

EARLY BLOOMER, A 

CREAMY YELLOW 

DWARF BEARDED, 

ALMOST CERTAINLY 

EXTINCT. 

I. ‘THE 

BRIDE’(CAPARNE, 

1901, GREAT 

BRITAIN): DWARF 

BEARDED, WHITE. 

178 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS SP. 

‘FRITZ 

BROWN’ 

FRITZ BROWN 

IRIS NEW 6 IRIS “ROMEO” 

SUMMER 

1998 

SUPERSTITION IRIS 

GARD 

SUBSTITUTED 

I. ‘ROMEO’ 

FOR I. SP ‘FRITZ 

BROWN’ 

IRISES DESCRIBED 

AS BROWNS AT 

THE TIME WERE 

ACTUALLY DEEP 

LAVENDERS, RUSTY 

COLORED. 

I. ‘ROMEO’ (MILLELT ET FILS), 1924) 

(FRANCE): SMALLER 

MTB, PALE YELLOW STANDARDS, 

GREY-LAVENDAR 

FALLS WITH REDPURPLE BLOTCHES 

ON EITHER SIDE OF 

BEARD. 

IRIS 

‘FOSTER 

YELLOW’ 

(FOSTER, 1909) 

NEW 3 IRIS ‘FLAVESCENS’ 

WINTERBERRY GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

IRIS ‘FLAVESCENS’ FOR I. 

‘FOSTER YELLOW’ 

INTERMEDIATE 

BEARDED, MIDSEASON BLOOMER, 

PRIMROSE TO 

CREAMY YELLOW 

SELF, 18-22”. WIDELY GROWN SINCE 

1813. 

IRIS ‘FLAVESCENS’: 

A MEDIUM TALL 

BEARDED IRIS, 

SMALLER BLOOMS, 

PALE BUTTER YELLOW STANDARDS, 

PEARLY WHITE 

FALLS, LT. BRONZE 

HAFT RETICULATIONS, (FARR, 

1912). 

IRIS 

‘HALFDAN’ 

(GOOS & KOENEMANN, 1908) 

NEW 6 IRIS ‘HELGE’ 

SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY PHILLIP 

EDINGER 

SUBSTITUTED 

IRIS ‘HELGE’ 

FOR I. ‘HALFDAN’ 

IB, WHITISH COLOR. 

NO LONGER AVAILABLE. 

IRIS 

‘INGEBORG’ 

(GOOS & KOENERMANN, 1908) 

NEW 5 IRIS IB#1 SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY PHILLIP 

EDINGER. 

SUBSTITUTED 

MR. EDINGER’S 

IB #1 FOR I. 

‘INGEBORG’. 

IB WHITISH COLOR. 

NO LONGER AVAILABLE. 

IRIS 

‘IRIS KING’ 

(GOOS & KOENEMANN, 1907) 

NEW 5 SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY MR. EDINGER 

IB BUT TODAY 

CLASSIFIED AS A 

“BORDER BEARDED 

IRIS” BECAUSE IT 

BLOOMS WHEN 

THE TALL BEARDED 

DO. BUFF TO GOLD 

STANDARDS, GARNET TO CRIMSON 

FALLS. 

IRIS 

‘JUNIATA’ 

(FARR, 1909) 

NEW 3 SUMMER 

1998 

1 FROM DR. 

TUCKER 

2 FROM MR. 

EDINGER 

TALL BEARDED, 

36” – 48”, CLEAR 

VIOLET BLUR, 

DEEPER THAN I. 

DALMATICA 

179 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS 

KOCHII NEW 

3; ALSO 

TEMP. 

FILLED IN 

WITH 8 

I.‘CRIMSON 

KING’ 

SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY DR. 

TUCKER 

A NATURALLY OCCURRING HYBRID 

BEARDED IRIS. 

INTERMEDIATE 

BEARDED, 18”, DK 

RED-PURPLE, TIDY 

HABIT. 

IRIS 

‘MME. CHERIE’ 

(STURTEVANT, 

1918) 

NEW 3 SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY MR. EDINGER 

A TALL BEARDED, 

ROSY BLEND OF 

COLORS. 

IRIS 

‘MONSIGNOR’ 

(VILMORIN-ANDREIEUX, 1907) 

NEW 4 SUMMER 

1998 

ARGYLE 

ACRES IRIS 

GARDEN 

IB, TODAY CLASSIFIED AS A “BORDER 

BEARDED IRIS”. 

DEEP VIOLET-PURPLE WITH ORANGE 

BEARD. 

IRIS 

‘NORTHUNG’ 

(GOOS & KOENEMANN, 1913) 

NEW 

PLANTED 6 

IRIS “DARIUS” 

SUMMER 

1998 

WINTERBERRY GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

IRIS ‘DARIUS’ 

FOR I. ‘NORTHUNG’ 

A TALL BEARDED, 

LIGHT LIVE AND LILAC. LOST FROM 

CULTIVATION. 

IRIS ‘DARIUS’ 

(BROWN, 1873): 

WARF BEARDED, 

STANDARDS YELLOW, FALLS LILAC. 

IRIS 

‘PAULINE’ 

(FARR, 1913) 

NEW 

2 IRIS 

“PRINCESS 

ROYAL” 

SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY MR. EDINGER 

SUBSTITUTED 

IRIS ‘PRINCESS 

ROYAL’ FOR I. 

‘PAULINE’ 

TALL BEARDED. A 

RED-PURPLE VIOLET 

VARIETY. LOST 

FROM CULTIVATION. 

IRIS ‘PRINCESS ROYAL’ (SMITH, 1902): 

A TALL BEARDED, 

WITH MEDIUM 

BLUE SELF. POSSIBLY A FORM OF IRIS 

PALLIDIA. 

RARE. 

IRIS 

‘PEARL BLUE’ 

(STURTEVANT, 

1925) 

NEW 

PLANTED 4 

IRIS 

”CELESTE” 

SUMMER 

1998 

IRIS COUNTRY 

SUBSTITUTED I. 

‘CELESTE’ FOR 

I. ‘PEARL BLUE’ 

IB, LIGHT BLUE SELF. 

ALMOST CERTAINLY 

LOST. 

IRIS ‘CELESTE’ 

TB (LEMON, C. 

1855) (FRANCE): 

DELICATE LT. BLUE 

SELF, SLIGHTLY 

VIOLET. SMALL 

FLOWER, STANDARDS SLIGHTLY 

CRUMPLED. 

IRIS 

‘PRINCE 

VICTOR’ 

NEW 5 SUMMER 

1998 

MR. EDINGER 

IB# 2 TALL 

BEARDED USED 

AS A NEW CULTIVAR SIMILAR 

TO OR COULD 

BE PRINCE VICTOR. 

180 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

IRIS 

‘QUAKER 

LADY’ 

(FARR, 1901) 

NEW 4 SUMMER 

1998 

ARGYLE 

ACRES 

TALL BEARDED, 32” 

TALL OR MORE, AN 

EXCELLENT IRIS, 

GILDED SMOKY 

LAVENDER COCOA 

WITH A YELLOW 

BEARD. 

IRIS ‘RHEIN NIXE’ 

(GOOS & KEONEMANN, 1910) NEW 5 SUMMER 

1998 

IRIS COUNTRY 

TALL BEARDED, 

STANDARDS WHITE, 

FALLS VIOLET, YELLOW BEARD. 

IRIS 

‘SHREWSBURY’ 

(FARR, 1916) 

NEW 3 SUMMER 

1998 

DONATED 

BY MIKE 

LOWE, HIPS 

SUBSTITUTED I. 

‘PLUMERI’ FOR 

I. ‘SHREWSBURY’ 

INTERMEDIATE BEARDED. 

BLOOMS MIDSEASON, A ROSY, 

BRONZE-VIOLET 

PURPLE BI-COLOR 

IRIS. NO LONGER 

AVAILABLE. 

IRIS ‘PLUMERI’: 

SMALL TB OR MTB. 

1830 GARDEN VARIETY, CRISP BRIGHT 

MAGENTA BLOOMS 

WITH COPPERY 

OVERLY. LISTED IN 

(FARR, 1912) BUT 

GROWN WIDELY 

EARLIER. 

PACHYSANDRA 

TERMINALIS 

PACHYSANDRA NEW 

EACH 

SPRING OR 

SUMMER 

SOME ARE 

TRANSPLANTED 

FROM 

DENSE 

AREAS TO 

SPARSE 

AREAS. 

LOCAL 

NURSERIES 

AS NEEDED. 

181 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

PHLOX 

SUBULATA 

‘G.F. WILSON’ 

NEW 

31 4” POTS 

PHLOX 

SUBULATA 

‘ROSEA’ 

8 POTS 

‘EMERALD 

OCTOBER 

1998 

SPRING 

2000 

HORICO 

NURSERIES 

SUBSTITUTED 

P. SUBULATA 

‘ROSEA’ AND 

P. ‘EMERALD 

BLUE’ FOR P. 

SUBULATA ‘G.F. 

A PALE LAVENDER 

BLUE. 

PLANTED ALL 

THREE VARIETIES IN 

OCTOBER IN CLUSTERS OF 3 AND 5 OF 

THE SAME COLOR. 

MIXED COLORS 

AND PLANTED SIMILARLY ON SLOPE 

ALONG ROCK 

STAIRS LEADING 

INTO HOLLOW. 

‘GF WILSON’ IS 

AVAILABLE IN THE 

SOUTH BUT NOT 

BLUE’ 

SPRING 

WILSON’ SOLD MAIL-ORDER. 

WHAT WE HAVE 

HERE CALLED 

‘EMERALD BLUE’ 

COULD BE THE 

SAME THING. MAY 

WANT TO SWITCH 

THE 31 ROSEA 

WITH ‘EMERALD 

BLUE’ IF THE ROSEA IS NOT BLUE 

ENOUGH. 

PHLOX 

SUBULATA 

‘VIVID’ 

NEW 

18 4” POTS 

OF P. SUBULATA 

‘EMERALD, 

PINK’ 

6 4” POTS 

P. ‘RED 

WINGS’ 

OCTOBER 

1998 

SPRING 

2000 

HORTICO, 

INC. 

SUBSTITUTED 

P. SUBULATA 

‘EMERALD 

PINK’ BECAUSE 

IT MAY BE THE 

SAME COLOR 

AS VIVID. 

A DEEP ROSY PINK. 

AVAILABLE IN GERMANY. 

PHLOX 

SUBULATA 

‘ALBA’ 

NEW 

26 4” POTS 

PHLOX 

SUBULATE 

‘WHITE 

SNOW’ 

5 POTS P. 

‘SNOWFLAKE’ 

4 POTS 

‘WHITE DELIGHT’ 

OCTOBER 

1998 

SPRING 

2000 

SPRING 

2000 

SUBSTITUTED PHLOX 

SUBULATA 

‘WHITE 

SNOW’ FOR 

P. ‘ALBA’ 

MODERN 

WHITES 

MAY BE 

SAME 

THING. 

PHLOX SUBULATA ‘ALBA’ IS 

A WHITE. 

ADDED IN 

5 POTS OF 

‘SNOWFLAKE,’ 

SPRING 2000. 

ADDED 4 POTS 

‘WHITE DELIGHT,’ SPRING 

2001. 

182 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 1: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, HOLLOW (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SEDUM 

STOLONIFERU NEW 

24 4” CELL 

PACKS 

12-QUART 

SIZE PLANTS 

SPRING 

1998 

SUMMER 

1999 

BLUE STONE 

PERENNIALS 

FOUR SEASON’S NURSERY 

SUBSTITUTED 

SEDUM SPURIUM ‘DRAGONS 

BLOOD’ FOR 

SEDUM STOLONIFERUM 

SEDUM SPURIUM, 

‘SPLENDENS’, AND 

‘COCCINEUM’ ARE 

ALL COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE 

TODAY. SPLENDENS 

IS VERY SIMILAR 

BUT LARGER LEAF 

SIZE THAN THE HISTORIC VARIETY. 

CHOSE ‘DRAGON’S 

BLOOD’’ CULTIVAR 

BECAUSE IT WAS 

READILY AVAILABLE. IT HAS RUBYRED FLOWERS IN 

JULY AND BRONZE 

FOLIAGE IN WINTER. 

DIGITALIS 

PURPUREA FOXGLOVES HISTORIC EXISTING 

IN CENTER BED 

APPEARED AFTER 

TULIP TREE FELLED 

BY HURRICANE BOB 

(1991) 

MIXED IN WITH 

HAY-SCENTED FERN 

DICENTRA SP. 

BLEEDING 

HEART 

FUMEWORT 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

IN ROCK CREVASSE 

NEAR HOUSE AT 

WATER OUTLET 

AND BELOW IN 

YEWS. SELF SEEDED. 

FUMEWORT RESEMBLES BLEEDING 

HEART BUT THE 

FLOWER LOOKS 

MORE LIKE A SNAPDRAGON FLOWER 

THAN A HEARTSHAPED FLOWER. 

ERYTHRONIUM SP. 

PROBABLY E. 

AMERICANUM 

TROUT LILY, 

DOG’S TOOTH 

VIOLET 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

MANY IN GROTTO 

DRAINAGE AREA 

SELF SEEDED. VERY 

EARLY BLOOMER 

MARCH/APRIL. 

HIERACIUM SP.? 

HACKWEED, 

“MOUSEEAR” HISTORIC EXISTING 

GROWS IN BACK OF 

FERNS ON LEDGE 

UNDER HEMLOCKS. 

SELF SEEDED. 

COMPOSITE WEED, 

LIKE VERY TALL 

DANDELION BUT 

SMOOTH LANCESHAPED LEAVES. 

183 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 2: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, FRONT DRIVE (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE 

SOURCE SUBSTITUTION 

OF NAME NOTES 

TREES 

ACER 

SPICATUM 

MOUNTAIN 

MAPLE, 

MOOSEWOOD 

NEW 

14 SEEDLINGS, THREE 

WERE IN 

1QT. POTS, 

THE REST IN 

TUBES, NEWLY ROOTED. 

SPRING 

1998 

HERONSWOOD 

NURSEY 

3 DID NOT SURVIVE FIRST YEAR, 

REPLANTED SUMMER 1999. 

CORNUS 

FLORIDA 

FLOWERING 

DOGWOOD NEW 1 APRIL 1997 

BIGELOW NURSERY 

ELAEAGNUS 

ANGUSTIFOLIA 

RUSSIAN 

OLIVE NEW 1 APRIL 1995 

QUANSETT 

NURSERY 

PLANTED ELEAGNUS SP. DUE TO 

MISIDENTIFICATION AT QUANSETT NURSERY. 

REPLACE WITH 

CORRECT SPECIES. 

MAGNOLIA 

ACUMINATA 

CUCUMBER 

MAGNOLIA 23-4 HISTORIC EXISTING 

MAGNOLIA 

ACUMINATA 

CUCUMBER 

MAGNOLIA NEW 1 SPRING 1999 

CLONE OF 23-4, 

OCLP HISTORIC 

PLANT NURSERY PROGRAM 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK 22-3 HISTORIC EXISTING 

ULMUS 

AMERICANA 

AMERICAN 

ELM NEW 1 APRIL 

1997 

BIGELOW NURSERY 

ULMUS 

AMERICANA 

AMERICAN 

ELM NEW 1 1997 

SEEDLING 

FROM HISTORIC 

ULMUS AMERICANA 

SHRUBS 

BERBERIS 

THUNBERGII 

JAPANESE 

BARBERRY 

23-22 

23-23 

23-24 

23-25 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

BERBERIS 

VULGARIS 

NATIVE 

BARBERRY NEW 1 

SEEDLING 

FROM 

BURBERRY IN 

ROCK 

GARDEN 

CHAENOMELES 

SPECIOSA 

COMMON 

FLOWERING 

QUINCE 

22-7 HISTORIC EXISTING 

COTONEASTER 

HORIZONTALIS 

ROCK 

COTONEASTER NEW 2 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

CYDONIA 

OBLONGA 

COMMON 

QUINCE NEW 4 1995 

PROPAGATED 

FROM PARENT PLANTS IN 

PARKING LOT 

1991 

184 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 2: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, FRONT DRIVE (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE 

SOURCE SUBSTITUTION 

OF NAME NOTES 

DIERVILLA 

SESSILIFOLIA 

SOUTHERN 

BUSH-HONEYSUCKLE NEW PLANTED 5 

6” POTS 

SUMMER 

1999 

APPALACHIAN 

GARDENS 

3 EXTRA PLANTS 

ARE IN THE NURSERY AT FAIRSTED 

THIS IS NO LONGER WIDELY 

AVAILABLE BUT 

PROPAGATES 

EASILY FROM 

CUTTINGS. 

EUONYMOUS 

ALATUS 

WINGED 

EUONYMOUS 

22-8 

23-27 HISTORIC EXISTING 

22-8: NOTED ON 

PLAN THAT THIS 

NEEDS TO BE 

REPLANTED, BUT 

SEEDLING LOOKS 

OKAY, 7/2001. ? 

EUONYMOUS 

ALATUS 

WINGED 

EUONYMOUS NEW 17 APRIL 1995 

SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

ONE DIED, TOTAL 

NOW IS 16. 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER 

EUONYMOUS NEW 2 1995 NOT RECORDED 

TWO ALONG 

THE FENCE NEAR 

ENTRANCE ARCH 

WERE PLANTED. 

OTHERS ALONG 

FENCE WERE 

NOT PLANTED, 

AWAITING FENCE 

REPAIR. 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER 

EUONYMOUS NEW 4 N/A 

AWAITING NEW 

DESIGN FOR TRELLIS SYSTEM. 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET 

MOCKORANGE 

23-28 

23-30 

23-31 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET 

MOCKORANGE NEW 3 JUNE 

1998 

WESTON 

NURSERIES 

RHODOTYPOS 

SCANDENS 

BLACK 

JETBEAD 22-9 HISTORIC EXISTING 

SPIRAEA X 

VANHOUTTEI 

VANHOUTTE 

SPIREA 

23-24 

23-35 1 1995 

SYRINGA X 

PERSICA 

PERSIAN 

LILAC 24-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

SYRINGA 

VULGARIS 

COMMON 

LILAC NEW 2 1995 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

VIBURNUM 

DENTATUM 

ARROWWOOD 

VIBURNUM 

22-12 

23-41 HISTORIC EXISTING 

22-12: NOTED ON 

PLAN NEEDS TO 

BE REPLANTED, 

BUT SEEDLING 

LOOKS OKAY, AS 

OF JULY 2001. 

XANTHORHIZA 

SIMPLICISSIMA YELLOWROOT NEW 1 FLAT (25 PLANTS) 1994 SYLVAN NURSERY 

SOME DIED OUT 

BY SPRING, 1998. 

IN SUMMER 

1999 TRANSPLANTED SOME 

FRESH ROOTED 

DIVISIONS IN 

WELL-PREPARED 

HOLES WITH SOIL 

AMENDMENTS. 

185 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 3: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, ROCK GARDEN (2001)HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME COMMON NAME FIELD ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

TREES 

BETULA LENTA SWEET/BLACK 

BIRCH NEW 1 FALL 1994 

TRANSPLANTED 

FROM WILD IN 

HOLLISTON, MA. 

ACCORDING 

TO PLANTING PLAN, 

SHOULD 

BE BETULA 

NIGRA. 

BETULA NIGRA RIVER BIRCH NEW 1 APRIL 1997 EMO’S RECORDS 

ACCORDING 

TO PLANTING PLAN, 

SHOULD 

BE BETULA 

LENTA. 

WHEN 

TREES NEED 

TO BE REPLACED, 

SWITCH 

BETULA 

LENTA WITH 

BETULA 

NIGRA. 

CARYA 

OVATA 

SHAGBARK HICKORY NEW 1 MAY 2000 FOREST FARM 

NURSERY 

FIRST 

PLANTING 

(SPRING 

1999) 

FAILED. 

REPLANTED 

5/2000. 

CHAMAECYPARIS 

OBTUSA 

HINOKI FALSECYPRESS NEW 1 

FRAXINUS 

AMERICANA WHITE ASH 31-14 HISTORIC EXISTING 

FRAXINUS 

AMERICANA WHITE ASH NEW 1 FALL 1997 FIELD DUG, 

SARA 

REPLANTED 

IN MAY 

2000. 

JUNIPERUS 

VIRGINIANA 

EASTERN RED 

CEDAR NEW 8 JUNE 1998 SYLVAN NURSERY 

ONE DIED 

AND A 

SMALLER 

TREE WAS 

PLANTED 

IN SPRING, 

1999. 

KOELREUTARIA 

PANICULATA 

PANICLED GOLDENRAINTREE NEW 1 EMO? 

MALUS SP. CRABAPPLE 32-12 CA. 1960 

UNKNOWN; 

LIKELY REPLACED AN EARLIER TREE 

EXACT CULTIVAR NOT 

KNOWN. 

PINUS 

RIGIDA PITCH PINE NEW 2 APRIL 1997 EMO’S RECORDS 

PINUS 

STROBUS WHITE PINE 31-19 31-20 HISTORIC EXISTING 

QUERCUS 

RUBRA RED OAK NEW 1 APRIL 1997 NR 

ULMUS 

AMERICANA AMERICAN ELM NEW 1 1998 

PROPAGATED 

FROM HISTORIC 

ELM 

186 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 3: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, ROCK GARDEN (2001)HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME COMMON NAME FIELD ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SHRUBS 

BERBERIS 

VULGARIS 

NATIVE BARBERRY 32-18 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CORNUS 

ALBA 

‘SIBRICA’ 

TATARIAN DOGWOOD NEW 1 SUMMER 

1998 

TRANSPLANTED 

FROM CLUSTER ON HILL IN 

SOUTH LAWN 

CORNUS 

SERICEA 

‘FLAVIRAMEA’ 

WAS MISTAKENLY 

TRANSPLANTED 

INSTEAD OF 

ALBA ‘SIBRICA 

EUONYMOUS 

ALATUS 

WINGED EUONYMOUS 

31-27 

31-28 

31-29 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER 

EUONYMOUS NEW 17 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

KALMIA 

LATIFOLIA 

MOUNTAIN LAUREL 

31-37 

31-38 

31-39 

31-40 

31-41 

32-19 

32-21 

32-22 

32-23 

32-24 

32-25 

32-26 

32-27 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

KALMIA 

LATIFOLIA 

MOUNTAIN LAUREL NEW 

PLANTED 

36 INSTEAD 

OF 47 

TO FIT IN 

AMONG 

EXISTING 

PLANTS 

MAY – JUNE 

1997 

SHEMIN NURSERIES 

TWO DIED, 

REPLANTED 

JULY 2001. 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET MOCKORANGE 

31-45 

31-48 

32-30 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET MOCKORANGE NEW 4 EMO’S RECORDS 

187 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 3: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, ROCK GARDEN (2001)HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME COMMON NAME FIELD ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

PIERIS 

FLORIBUNDA 

MOUNTAIN 

PIERIS, 

ANDROMEDA 

NEW 35 SUMMER 

1998 

SHEMIN 

NURSERIES 

WESTON 

NURSERY 

HARD TO 

FIND ORIGINAL CULTIVAR SO WE 

PLANTED 

LITTLE BY 

LITTLE AS 

PLANTS 

CAME IN 

FROM DIFFERENT 

NURSERIES. 

SEVERAL 

PLANTS 

DIED OUT IN 

JULY 2001, 

REPLANTED 

IN GAPS. 

PYRACANTHA 

COCCINEA 

SCARLET 

FIRETHORN NEW 9 

RHAMNUS 

CATHARTICA 

COMMON 

BUCKTHORN 31-57 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHAMNUS 

CATHARTICA BUCKTHORN NEW 3 SUMMER 

1998 

FIELD 

HARVESTED 

THERE 

SHOULD 

HAVE BEEN 

5 TOTAL. 

POSSIBLY 

ONLY 4 

WERE 

PLANTED 

AND ONE 

DIED. 

RHODOTYPOS 

SCANDENS BLACK JETBEAD 

31-62 

31-63 

31-64 

31-65 

31-80 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODOTYPOS 

SCANDENS BLACK JETBEAD NEW 1 1998 

SPIREA X 

VANHOUTTEI 

VANHOUTTE 

SPIREA 31-66 HISTORIC EXISTING 

SPIREA X 

VANHOUTTEI 

VANHOUTTE 

SPIREA NEW 2 1995 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

‘REPANDENS’ 

WEEPING 

ENGLISH YEW 

32-39 

32-40 

32-41 

32-42 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

TAXUS 

BACCATA 

‘REPANDENS’ 

WEEPING 

ENGLISH YEW NEW 5 

ONE DIED, 

FOUR EXISTING AS OF 

JULY 2001. 

TAXUS 

CANADENSIS CANADIAN YEW NEW 12 SUMMER 2000 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA 

‘CAPITATA’ 

JAPANESE YEW 32-35 

32-37 HISTORIC EXISTING 

VIBURNUM 

CASSINOIDES 

WITHEROD 

VIBURNUM NEW 19 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

188 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 3: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, ROCK GARDEN (2001)HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME COMMON NAME FIELD ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

VIBURNUM 

DENTATUM 

ARROWWOOD 

VIBURNUM 32-28 HISTORIC EXISTING 

VIBURNUM 

DENTATUM 

ARROWWOOD 

VIBURNUM NEW 20 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

HERBACEOUS PLANTS (PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, FERNS, ROSES, BULBS 

SCILLA NEW 1 FALL 1994 

TRANSPLANTED 

FROM WILD IN 

HOLLISTON, MA. 

POLYGONATUM 

ODORATUM SOLOMON’S SEAL NEW 1 APRIL 1997 EMO’S RECORDS 

EDGE OF 

LAWN AND 

ROCK GARDEN. 

VINCA NEW 1 MAY 2000 FOREST FARM 

NURSERY 

DIFFICULT 

TO FIND 

ORIGINAL 

CULTIVAR 

WITH NO 

MODERNBRED VARIATIONS. 

RANUNCULUS SEVEN-PETAL 

BUTTERCUP NEW 1 

SEVEN PETAL, DAISYLIKE WILDFLOWER. IN 

LAWN AND 

ROCK GARDEN. 

DENNSTAEADTIA 

PUNCTILOBULA 

HAY SCENTED 

FERN 31-14 HISTORIC EXISTING IN ROCK 

GARDEN 

SOLIDAGO SP. GOLDENROD NEW 1 FALL 1997 FIELD DUG, 

SARA 

189 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 4: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SOUTH LAWN (2001)L HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

TREES 

ACER 

PLATANOIDES 

‘SCHWEDLERI’ 

SCHWEDLER 

MAPLE 

43-59 

HISTORIC EXISTING PROPAGATED 

IN 1991. 

ACER 

SACCHARUM SUGAR MAPLE 43-60 HISTORIC EXISTING 

BETULA 

LENTA 

SWEET/BLACK 

BIRCH 

42-7 

43-68 HISTORIC EXISTING 

PLANTED ELEAGNUS SP. DUE 

TO MISIDENTIFICATION 

AT QUANSETT 

NURSERY. REPLACE WITH 

CORRECT SPECIES. 

BETULA 

PAPYRIFERA 

PAPERBARK 

BIRCH 

44-1 

44-2 

44-3 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

BETULA 

PAPYRIFERA 

PAPERBARK 

BIRCH NEW 1 

APRIL 1997 

REPLANTED 

APRIL 1999 

WESTON 

NURSERY 

OTHER TREE 

HAD TERMITE 

DAMAGE FROM 

THE SHED 

BUILDINGS. 

THE SHED WAS 

REBUILT, AND 

THE TERMITES 

ELIMINATED. 

REPLANTED 

TREE APPEARS 

TO BE BETULA 

NIGRA. IF SO, 

SHOULD BE 

REPLACED. 

CLADRASTIS 

LUTEA YELLOWWOOD NEW 1 CA. 1981 

NAME CHANGE TO 

CLADRASTIS KENTUKEA. 

REPLANTED 

NEAR STUMP 

OF HISTORIC 

TREE (43-71), 

WHICH HAD 

BEEN REMOVED 

IN 1981. 

LARIX 

DECIDUA 

EUROPEAN 

LARCH NEW 1 JUNE 1998 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

PINUS 

RIGIDA PITCH PINE NEW 2 APRIL 1997 

PINUS 

STROBUS WHITE PINE 44-6 HISTORIC EXISTING 

PINUS 

STROBUS WHITE PINE NEW 2 APRIL 1997 

TILIA 

TOMENTOSA SILVER LINDEN NEW 1 APRIL 1997 

190 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 4: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SOUTH LAWN (2001)L HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK 

42-8 

42-9 

42-10 

42-11 

42-14 

42-16 

42-17 

42-18 

42-19 

43-77 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK NEW 21 1997 – 2000 

WESTON 

NURSERY, 

SMALLER 4” 

STOCK. 

REPLANTED 

14 IN AUGUST 

1999. 

SMALLER 

SAPLINGS DO 

BETTER UNDER 

OLD GROWTH 

TREES. 

ULMUS 

AMERICANA AMERICAN ELM 41-1 HISTORIC EXISTING 

VEGETATIVELY 

PROPAGATED 

FOR FUTURE REPLACEMENT. 

SHRUBS 

CORNUS 

ALBA 

‘SIBIRICA’ 

TATARIAN 

DOGWOOD 44-7 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CORNUS 

ALBA 

‘SIBERICA’ 

TATARIAN 

DOGWOOD NEW 16 1995 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

CORNUS 

SERICEA 

‘FLAVIRAMEA’ 

REDOSIER DOGWOOD NEW 17 1995 QUANSETT 

NURSERY 

PLAN CALLED 

FOR CORNUS 

SERICEA, DID 

NOT SPECIFY 

‘FLAVIRAMEA’. 

DEUTZIA 

CARNEA 

DENSIFLORA 

DEUTZIA 

41-3 

41-4 

41-5 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

DEUTZIA 

SCABRA VAR. 

CANDIDISSIMA 

FUZZY DEUTZIA 

43-102 

43-103 

43-104 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

TWO NEARBY 

DEUTZIAS 

ARE NOT ON 

EXISTING 

CONDITIONS 

OR PLANTING 

PLANS. ARE 

THEY SEEDLINGS? 

EUONYMUS 

ALATUS 

WINGED EUONYMOUS 43-79 

43-85 HISTORIC EXISTING 

EUONYMUS 

ALATUS 

WINGED EUONYMOUS NEW 16 1995 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER EUONYMOUS 

42-62 HISTORIC EXISTING 

FORSYTHIA 

INTERMEDIA 

‘SPECTABILIS’ 

BORDER FORSYTHIA NEW 1 1995 

191 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 4: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SOUTH LAWN (2001)L HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

ILEX 

CRENATA 

‘CONVEXA’ 

JAPANESE 

HOLLY NEW 7 1995 WESTON NURSERY 

SHOULD BE 

STRAIGHT I. 

CRENATA. 

ILEX 

GLABRA INKBERRY NEW 13 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

KALMIA 

LATIFOLIA 

MOUNTAIN 

LAUREL 42-20 HISTORIC EXISTING 

LEUCOTHOE 

FONTANESIANA 

DROOPING 

LEUCOTHOE 

42-21 

42-22 

42-23 

42-24 

42-25 

42-26 

42-27 

42-28 

42-29 

42-30 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

LEUCOTHOE 

FONTANESIANA 

DROOPING 

LEUCOTHOE NEW 28 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET MOCKORANGE 

43-98 

43-99 

43-100 

43-101 

43-105 

43-106 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

PIERIS 

FLORIBUNDA 

MOUNTAIN 

PIERIS, ANDROMEDA 

42-31 

42-32 

42-33 

42-34 

42-36 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

PIERIS 

FLORIBUNDA 

MOUNTAIN 

PIERUS, ANDROMEDA NEW 30 MAY 1999 SHEMIN 

NURSERY 

15 DIED DUE 

TO RAIN; REPLANTED 15 IN 

AUGUST 1999. 

21 EXISTING AS 

OF JULY 2001. 

PYRACANTHA 

COCCINEA 

SCARLET FIRETHORN 42-37 

42-38 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHAMNUS 

CATHARTICA 

COMMON 

BUCKTHORN 

43-108 

43-131 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODODENDRON 

MAXIMUM 

ROSEBAY RHODODENDRON 43-109 HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODOTYPOS 

SCANDENS 

BLACK JETBEAD 43-116 

43-117 HISTORIC EXISTING 

ROSA 

VIRGINIANA VIRGINIA ROSE NEW 10 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

ROSA 

MULTIFLORA JAPANESE ROSE 44-8 HISTORIC EXISTING 

IDENTIFIED AS 

MULTIFLORA 

IN 1991/1992 

PLANT INVENTORY, NOT 

SOULIANGENA 

AS PREVIOUSLY 

THOUGHT 

ROSA 

WICHURAIANA 

MEMORIAL 

ROSE NEW 5 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

192 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 4: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SOUTH LAWN (2001)L HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SPIREA 

X VANHOUTTEI 

VANHOUTTE 

SPIREA 43-118 HISTORIC EXISTING 

SPIREA 

X VANHOUTTEI 

VANHOUTTE 

SPIREA NEW 2 MAY 1998 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

SYRINGA 

X PERSICA PERSIAN LILAC 

41-13 

41-14 

41-15 

41-16 

41-17 

41-18 

41-19 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

41-18 AND 

41-19 WERE 

RELOCATED TO 

MAKE SPACE 

FOR NEW PATH. 

SYRINGA 

VULGARIS 

COMMON LILAC 

41-8 

41-9 

41-10 

41-11 

41-12 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

41-12 WAS RELOCATED TO 

MAKE SPACE 

FOR NEW PATH. 

SYRINGA 

VULGARIS 

COMMON LILAC NEW 10 SUMMER 1997 WESTON 

NURSERY 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA JAPANESE YEW NEW 8 1995 SYLVAN NURSERY 

VIBURNUM 

DENTATUM 

ARROWWOOD 

VIBURNUM 

43-122 

43-123 

43-125 

43-126 

43-127 

43-129 

43-130 

44-10 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

WEIGELA 

FLORIDA 

OLD FASHIONED WEIGELA 

41-20 

41-21 HISTORIC EXISTING 

VINES 

ACTINIDIA 

ARGUTA HARDY KIWI 41-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

ARISTOLOCHIA 

DURIOR 

DUTCHMAN’S 

PIPE NEW 2 JULY 1997 WESTON 

NURSERIES 

PLANTED ON 

SPRUCE POLE 

ARCH. 

WISTERIA 

SINENSIS 

CHINESE WISTERIA 41-22 

41-23 HISTORIC EXISTING 

HERBACEOUS PLANTS (PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, FERNS, ROSES, BULBS) 

AGAPODIUM 

PODAGRARIA GOUTWEED HISTORIC EXISTING 

ARISAEMA 

TRIPHYLLUM 

JACK-IN-THEPULPIT 

MATTEUCCIA 

STRUTHIOPTERIS 

PENSYLVANICA 

OSTRICH FERN 

ASTER SP. WHITE WOOD 

ASTER 

ON THE HILL 

MIXED IN WITH 

ROCKS, UNDER 

TREES AND 

SHRUBS. ALSO, 

IN ROCK GARDEN 

193 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 4: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SOUTH LAWN (2001)L HISTORIC SITE 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

DENNSTAEDTIA 

PUNCTILOBULA 

HAY-SCENTED 

FERN NEAR SHED 

194 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

TREES 

ACER 

PSEUDOPLATANUS 

SYCAMORE 

MAPLE 

NEW 1 

ACER 

SACCHARUM SUGAR MAPLE 51-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

ACER 

SACCHARUM SUGAR MAPLE NEW HISTORIC EXISTING 

CHAMAECYPARIS 

OBTUSA 

HINOKI FALSE 

CYPRESS 

52-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CHAMAECYPARIS 

PISIFERA 

JAPANESE FALSE 

CYPRESS 

52-1 

1 

APRIL 1997 

REPLANTED 

APRIL 1999 

WESTON 

NURSERY 

LIRIODENDRON 

TULIPIFERA TULIPTREE 

NEW 

1 CA. 1981 

NAME CHANGE 

TO CLADRASTIS 

KENTUKEA. 

MAGNOLIA 

ACUMINATA 

CUCUMBER 

MAGNOLIA 

51-3 1 JUNE 1998 SYLVAN 

NURSERY 

PINUS STROBUS WHITE PINE 51-27 REPLACED, 

1991 SAGA 

TSUGA 

CANADENSIS 

CANADIAN 

HEMLOCK 

51-4 

51-5 

53-1 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

51-4 WAS RELOCATED DURING PARKING 

LOT RENOVATIONS. 

SHRUBS 

BERBERIS 

THUNBERGII 

JAPANESE 

BARBERRY 

52-3 

53-2 HISTORIC EXISTING 

CYDONIA 

OBLONGA 

COMMON 

QUINCE 

51-7 

51-8 

51-9 

51-10 

51-11 

51-12 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER 

EUONYMOUS NEW 3 FRLA, 

HOLLOW 

TRANSPLATED 

3 TO BED 

FROM SEDUM 

IN COURTYARD. 

EUONYMOUS 

FORTUNEI VAR. 

RADICANS 

WINTERCREEPER 

EUONYMOUS NEW 

PHILADELPHUS 

CORONARIUS 

SWEET 

MOCKORANGE 

51-13 

51-14 

51-15 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

RHODOTYPOS 

SCANDENS BLACK JETBEAD 51-16 HISTORIC EXISTING 

SYRINGA 

VULGARIS COMMON LILAC 

51-17 

51-18 

51-19 

51-21 

51-22 

51-25 

51-26 

HISTORIC EXISTING 

195 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SYRINGA 

VULGARIS COMMON LILAC NEW 

SPRING 

1997, SUMMER 1998 

LOCAL 

NURSERIES 

PLANTED 

PIECEMEAL 

AS BECAME 

AVAILABE AT 

DIFFERENT 

NURSERIES. 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA JAPANESE YEW 52-4 HISTORIC EXISTING 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA JAPANESE YEW NEW 1 JUNE 1998 WESTON NURSERY 

TAXUS 

CUSPIDATA 

‘PYRAMIDALIS’ 

PYRAMIDAL 

JAPANESE YEW NEW 3 SPRING 1998 

VINES 

ARISTOLOCHIA 

DURIOR 

DUTCHMAN’S 

PIPE NEW 3 1998 WESTON NURSERIES 

ARISTOLOCHIA 

DURIOR 

DUTCHMAN’S 

PIPE NEW 4 

HEDERA HELIX ENGLISH IVY NEW 5 OCT. 1998 

ROOTED CUTTINGS FROM 

IVY GROWING 

UP TRUNK OF 

HEMLOCK IN 

FRONT DRIVE 

CIRCULAR 

BED. 

HERBACEOUS PLANTS (PERENNIALS, ANNUALS, FERNS, ROSES, BULBS) 

ASPIDIUM 

MUNITUM 

GIANT HOLLY 

FERN, SWORD 

FERN 

NEW 35 SUMMER 

1998 

NATS 

NURSERY 

NAME CHANGE 

FROM ASPIDIUM MUNITUM 

TO POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM IN 20TH 

CENTURY. 

PLANTED IN 

CLUSTERS OF 

1, 3, AND 5. 

LONG, NARROW DEEP 

GREEN 

FRONDS WITH 

TEETH-SHAPED 

EDGES. NATIVE TO PACIFIC NORTHWEST. 

ASPIDIUM 

SPINULOSUM 

DILATATUM 

BRAUN’S HOLY 

FERN, CHRISTMAS 

FERN, SWORD 

FERN 

NEW 24 SUMMER 

1998 

HORTICO 

NURSERY 

NAME CHANGE 

IN 20TH C. TO 

POLYSTICHUM 

BRAUNII. 

BEGONIA 

X TUBERHYBRIDA 

TUBEROUS BEGONIA NEW 

22-24 

EACH 

SPRING 

LOCAL 

NURSERIES: 

WESTON, 

MAHONEY’S, 

LEXINGTON 

GARDENS 

PLANT 8-9 

WHITE, 8-9 

PINK, 2 YELLOW, 2 RED, 1 

OR 2 SALMON/ 

SOFT ORANGE 

IN AMONG 

PACHYSANDRAS. PLANT 

IN CLUSTERS 

OF 1-3. 

196 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

SEDUM 

SPECTABULA SEDUM NEW 

16 4” 

CELL 

PACKS 

BLUE STONE 

PERENNIALS 

SUBSTITUTED 

SEDUM SPECTABULA ‘CARMEN’ FOR 

SEDUP SPECTABULA 

SEDUM SPECTABULA: A 1.5” 

TALL PLANT 

THAT FILLS IN 

WELL: SOFT 

PINK FLOWER, 

TURNS BROWN 

AND NOT ATTRACTIVE IN 

SUMMER. 

IRIS ENSATA 

‘ALBA PLENA’ 

ALBA PLENA 

JAPANESE IRIS 

A DUBLE WHITE 

FROM 1875 

NEW 

3 IRIS 

ENSATA 

‘SHINO 

NO OME’ 

ENSATA 

GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

WITH ‘WARAI 

HOTEI’ (PALE 

LAVENDER 

WITH PINK 

VEINS) 

IRIS ENSATA 

‘BLUE BIRD’ 

BLUE BIRD JAPANESE IRIS NEW 

39 IRIS 

ENSATA 

‘MAHOGANY’ 

ENSATA 

GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

‘MAHOGANY’ 

FOR ‘BLUE 

BIRD’ 

‘BLUE BIRD’: 

A DARK 

PURPLE SINGLE 

BLOOM OR 

COULD BE A 

SIBERIAN IRIS 

(PERRY, 1903) 

OR (CAPERNE, 

1901) A MEDIUM BLUE. 

IRIS ENSATA 

‘PAINTED LACY’ NEW 

3 IRIS 

ENSATA 

‘RENJO 

NO 

TAMA’ 

ENSATA 

GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

‘RENJO NO 

TOMA’ FOR 

‘PAINTED 

LADY’ 

‘PAINTED 

LADY’ 

JAPANESE 

IRIS: PROBABLY 1902, A 

SINGLE WITH 

BLOTCHED 

OR MARBLED 

PURPLE MARKINGS. MANY 

IRISES HAD 

THIS NAME. 

IRIS ENSATA 

‘SEA CREST’ NEW ENSATA 

GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

‘SHINO NO 

OME’ FOR ‘SEA 

CREST 

SEA CREST 

JAPANESE IRIS: 

FROM EARLY 

20TH CENTURY, A WHITE 

COLOR OR 

LIGHT BLUE 

WITH BLUE 

VEINS ‘SHINO 

NO OME’: 

SIMILAR TO 

‘MAHOGANY,’ 

BUT DARKER 

BLUE. 

IRIS ENSATA 

‘UCHIU’ NEW ENSATA GARDENS 

SUBSTITUTED 

‘CHIGOKESHO’ 

FOR ‘UCHIU’ 

UCHIU JAPANESE IRIS: 

1896, A DOUBLE WITH MIDBLUE FALLS 

WITH WHITE 

VEINS AND A 

WHITE ZONE 

AROUND THE 

YELLOW SIGNAL. 

197 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

LOBULARIA 

MARITIMA SWEET ALYSSUM NEW 

NEED 48 

PLANTS, 

2” CELL 

PACKS 

EACH 

SPRING, 

LATE MAY 

LOCAL 

NURSERIES 

ALSO KNOWN 

AS ALYSSUM 

MARITIMUM 

ANNUAL. CREATE A CONTINUOUS BORDER 

AROUND THE 

ROSES. 

PACHYSANDRA 

TERMINALIS 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘‘FICTIVA 

MAXIMA’ 

(MEILLEZ) 1851 

PACHYSANDRA NEW 

15 ROOTED CUTTINGS 

SPRING 

1998 

FRLA, 

HOLLOW 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘GRANDIFLORA 

NIVEAPLENA ‘ 

(RICHARDSON) 

NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

FICTIVA 

MAXIMA 

PEONY: TALL, 

ROSE SHAPED 

FLOWER, 

PALE PINK 

TO WHITE 

CENTER, 

TINGED WITH 

RED, EARLY 

BLOOMER. 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘KARL ROSENFIELD’ (ROSENFIELD) 1908 

RICHARDSON’S 

GRANDIFLORA 

PEONY 

NEW 

1 PAEONIA LACTIFOLIA 

‘MINUET’ 

FALL 1998 SEVALD 

NURSERY 

SUBSTITUTED 

P. LACTIFOLIA ‘MINUET’ 

(FRANKLIN) 

1931 FOR P. 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘GRANDIFLORA 

NIVEAPLENA 

A DOUBLE 

FLOWER, 

PINK COLOR. 

2000: NEW 

INFORMATION 

SUGGESTS P. 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘GRANDIFLORA NIVEAPLENA ‘ HAS BEEN 

RENAMED 

P. ‘HENRY 

WOODWARD’ 

AND IS NOW 

AVAILABLE 

AT SHERIDAN 

NURSERIES, 

ONTARIO. 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘LADY 

ALEXANDRA 

DUFF’ (KELWAY) 

1902 

KARL ROSENFIELD PEONY NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

MEDIUM 

HEIGHT, 

LARGE SEMIROSE FLOWER, 

DARKCRIMSON RED, EARLY BLOOMER. 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘M. JULES ELIE’ 

(CROUSSE) 1888 

LADY ALEXANDRA DUFF PEONY NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

TALL, ROSE 

TYPE FLOWER, 

MEDIIUM 

PINK, EARLY 

TO MID-SEASON BLOOMER. 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘MADAM EMILE 

GALLE’(CROUSSE) 

1881 

M. JULES ELIE 

PEONY NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

TALL, DOUBLE 

CROWN FLOWER, LIGHT 

FLESH-TONE 

PINK, EARLY 

BLOMER. 

198 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘THERESE’ (DESSENT) 1904 

MME. EMILE 

GALLE PEONY A 

DOUBLE FLOWER, 

PINK COLOR. 

NEW 

1 P. LACTIFOLIA 

‘ELLA 

CHRISTIANSEN’ 

FALL 1998 SEVALD 

NURSERY 

SUBSTITUTED 

PAEONIA LACTIFOLIA ‘ELLA 

CHRISTIANSEN’ 

(BRAND) 1925 

FOR PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

NEW INFORMATION 

IN 2000 

SUGGESTS 

‘MADAM 

EMILE GALLE’ 

IS AVAILABLE FROM 

STAUDENGARTNEREI 

‘MADAM 

EMILE GALLE’ 

GRAFIN VON 

ZEPPELIN 

IN LAUFEN/ 

BADEN, GERMANY. 

PAEONIA 

LACTIFOLIA 

‘WALTER FAXON’ 

(RICHARDSON) 

PEONY THERESE NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

TALL, DOUBLE 

ROSE FLOWER 

SHAPE, ROSE 

PINK COLOR 

WITH PALER 

TONES IN 

CENTER, 

MID-SEASON 

BLOOMER. 

ROSA 

‘DUCHESS OF 

WELLINGTON’ 

PEONY WALTER 

FAXON NEW 1 FALL 1998 

HOLLINGSWORTH 

NURSERY 

MEDIUM 

HEIGHT, 

SEMI-ROSE 

FLOWER, PINK 

WITH PALE 

OUTER EDGE, 

BLOOMS MIDSEASON. 

ROSA 

‘GENERAL 

SUPERIOR 

ARNOLD 

JANSSON’ 

DUCHESS OF 

WELLINGTON 

ROSE HT (DICKSON) 1909 A YELLOW NEW 1 VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

TEMPORARILY 

SUBSTITUTED 

MRS. AARON 

WARD ROSE 

FOR R. ‘DUCHESS OF WELLINGTON’ 

MRS. AARON 

WARD ROSE, 

HT ( PERNETDUCHER) 

1907: PALE 

BUFF YELLOW, 

SOMETIMES 

YELLOW, A 

FULL SHRUB 

THAT BLOOMS 

HEAVILY 

AND REPEATEDLY. CAN GET 

LARGE. 

199 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

ROSA 

‘GENERAL 

MACARTHUR’ 

GENERAL SUPERIOR ARNOLD 

JANSSON ROSE 

NEW 1 

TEMPORARILY 

SUBSTITUTE 

ROSA ‘BARCELONA’ FOR 

GENERAL SUPERIOR ARNOLD 

JANSSON ROSE. 

GENERAL 

SUPERIOR 

ARNOLD JANSSON ROSE HT 

(LEENDERS), 

1912: SEE 

DICKERSON’S 

BOOK PLATE 

274. PERFECTLY FORMED 

BUDS, DISTINCTIVE, 

FIERY RED. 

ROSA ‘BARCELONA’ 1932 

HT (KORDES): 

DEEP RED, 

FRAGRANT, 

RE-BLOOMS. 

GENERAL MACARTHUR ROSE NEW 4 SPRING 

1998 

VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

GENERAL 

MACARTHUR ROSE 

HT (HILL), 

1905: REPEAT 

BLOOMER, 

VIVID SCARLET, ALMOST 

VERMILLION, 

FRAGRANT. 

AS THE HT 

MATURES, 

THE COLOR 

OF DEEPENS 

TO IT’S TRUE 

COLOR.FOLIAGE ALMOST 

A BLUEISH 

BLACT TINGE 

THROUGHOUT 

WINTER 2001 

SOME DIED, 

RE-ORDER 3 

MORE, 5/2001 

ROSA 

‘GOLDEN 

EMBLEM’ 

GOLDEN EMBLEM ROSE NEW 

1 ROSA 

‘SOUVENIR DE 

CLAUDIVINTAGE 

GARDENS 

TEMPORARILY SUBSTITUTED ROSA 

‘SOUVENIR DE 

CLAUDIUS’ FOR 

GOLDEN EMBLEM ROSE HT 

(MCGREEDY) 

1917: BUD 

IS YELLOW, 

SPLASHED 

WITH SHADED 

RED. LARGE, 

US’ R. ‘GOLDEN 

EMBLEM’ 

DOUBLE, WELL 

FORMED. 

7/2001- SMALL 

DUE TO WINTER DIE-BACK. 

200 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

ROSA 

‘JONKLEEN J.L. 

MOCK’ 

JONKLEEN J.L. 

MOCK ROSE NEW 2 

SPRING 

1998 

APRIL 2000 

VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

JONKLEEN J.L. 

MOCK ROSE 

HT/ CLIMBER 

(LEENDERS) 

1909: OCHRE 

AND LIGHT 

RED, INSIDE 

PETALS A 

SILVERY-PINK, 

OUTSIDE 

CHERRY-ROSE. 

ROSA 

‘LADY ALICE 

STANLEY’ 

LADY ALICE 

STANLEY ROSE NEW 

1 ‘MRS. 

WAKEFIELD 

CHRISTIEMILLER’ 

SPRING 

2000 

VINTAGE 

GARDENS, 

CUSTOM 

PROPAGATED 

SUBSTITUTED 

R. FOR R. ‘LADY 

ALICE STANELY’ 

LADY ALICE 

STANLEY 

ROSE HT 

(MCGREEDY) 

1909: DEEP 

CORAL ROSE 

OUTSIDE, PALE 

SILVERY PINK 

INSIDE. WELLPROPORTIONED WITH 

PETALS GENTLY CURVED 

BACK AND 

GRACEFULLY 

OVERLAPPING 

ONE ANOTHER. FRAGRANT. 

DIED. RE-ORDER AND REPLANT SAME 

ROSE, 5/2001. 

ROSA 

‘MAMAN 

TURBAT’ 

MAMAN TURBAT 

ROSE NEW 2 SPRING 

2000 

VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

SUBSTITUED 

ROSA ‘MME. 

MONNET’ FOR 

R. ‘MAMAN 

MAMAN TURBAT ROSE ( 

TURBAT) 1911: 

A THORNLESS ROSE 

WITH GLOSSY 

GREEN FOLIAGE, STRONG 

PANICLES OF 

30 PLUS, LONG 

LASTING BLOSSOMS. CHINA 

PINK WITH 

PEACH-BLOSTURBAT’ SOM PINK 

AND GOLD 

AND FLESHCOLORED 

TONES 

ROSA ‘MME. 

MONNET’ HP 

1885: MAUVEPINK, FRAGRANT. 

201 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

ROSA 

‘MME. LEON 

PAIN’ 

MME. LEON 

PAINE ROSE NEW 1 APRIL 2000 VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

MME. LEON 

PAINE ROSE 

HT (GUILLOT) 

1904: SILVERYWHITE CENTER 

BRIGHTENED 

BY ORANGE 

YELLOW PETALS, REVERSE 

SIDE SALMON 

COLOR TINTED 

VERMILION 

AND YELLOW. 

DIED- REPLANTED IN 

MAY 2001 

WITH A BACKUP PLANT IN 

NURSERY. 

ROSA 

‘MISS EDITH 

CAVELL’ 

MISS EDITH 

CAVELL ROSE NEW 2 SPRING 

1998 

MISS EDITH 

CAVELL ROSE 

POL (MEIDERWYK/SPEKK) 

1917 

SPORT OF ‘ORLEANS ROSE’: 

BRILLIANT 

DARK SCARLET 

OVERLAID 

WITH VELVETY 

CRIMSON 

MAROON. 

GREAT OPEN 

CLUSTERS OF 

BLOSSOMS 

ALL SEASON. 

ROSA 

‘SILVER 

MOON’ 

SILVER MOON 

ROSE NEW 2 MAY 2000 

JUNE 2001 

VINTAGE 

GARDENS 

SILVER MOON 

ROSECLIMBER 

(VAN FLEET) 

1910: A HYBRID OF 

R. LAEVIGATA. 

GROWTH 

UP TO 10M. 

THORNLESS, 

SCENTED 

FOLIAGE OF 

APPLES. WHITE 

FLOWERS IN 

SPRING WITH 

GOLDEN YELLOW STAMENS 

SHOWING. 

202 
Appendix C

APPENDIX C, TABLE 5: FAIRSTED PLANT CHART, SERVICE AREAS (2001) 

SCIENTIFIC 

NAME 

COMMON 

NAME 

FIELD 

ID# 

NO. 

PLANTED 

PLANTING 

DATE SOURCE SUBSTITUTION OF NAME NOTES 

ROSA 

‘DOROTHY 

PERKINS’ 

DOROTHY PERKINS ROSE NEW 2 SPRING 

1999 THE ROSARIE 

DOROTHY 

PERKINS ROSE 

RAMBLER 

(JACKSON & 

PERKINS) 1901: 

SHOOTS UP TO 

20’, A WICHURIAIANA 

HYBRID, 

WITH VIGOROUS, HARDY, 

WILD CANES. 

MASSES OF 

PINK FLOWERS IN JULY. 

FRAGRANT. 

WHITE FLOWERS FADE TO 

PINK IN JULY/ 

AUGUST. 

AS THE PLAN 

DID NOT SPECIFY COLOR, 

PURCHASED 

ONE WHITE, 

ONE PINK. 

THE WHITE IS 

IN THE NURSERY. 

VINCA MINOR PERIWINKLE NEW 

SEVERAL 

FLATS 

ADDED 

TO PARKING LOT 

TO FILL 

IN AFTER 

WEEDING 

SPRING 

1999 

LOCAL NURSERIES 

VIOLA SP. 

LYCOIS SURPRISE LILY 

(PALE LAVENDER) 

203 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

PLANT SOURCES 

Appalachian Gardens 

P.O. Box 82 

Waynesboro, PA 172268-0082 

(717) 762-4312 

Argyle Acres Iris Garden 

Joe / Donna Spears 

910 Pioneer Circle 

Argyle, TX 76226 

(940) 464-3680 

argliris@gte.net 

Bluestone Perennials 

7211 Middle Ridge Road 

Madison, Ohio 44057 

(216) 428-7535 

Brent and Becky’s Bulbs 

7463 Heath Trail, Gloucester, VA. 23061 

(804) 693-3966 

www.brentand beckysbulbs.com 

Croftway Nursery 

England 

Croftway@aol.com 

Ensata Gardens 

9823 E. Michigan Ave 

Galesburg, Michigan 49053 

616) 665-7500 

Ensata@aol.com 

Forest Farm Nursery 

Oregon 

204 
Appendix C

Four Season’s Nursery 

Lexington, MA 

Hermit Medlar’s Walk 

Bill and Ada Godfrey 

9 Bradford Street 

Foxboro, MA 02035 

mwalk@fcl-us.net 

Heronswood Nursery 

7530 NE 228 Street 

Kingston, WA 98346 

(360) 297-4172 

www.heronswood.com 

Historic Iris Preservation Society 

www.worldiris.com 

Joe Spears. President 

argliris@gte.net 

Anner Whitehead, Commercial Source Chairman HIPSource@aol.com 

Phil Edinger, Plant Identifcation Chairman 

(707) 8994-3225 

olldfag@sonic.net 

Mike Lowe, Blackstone, VA 

Webmaster, historic variety database 

2219 Zilles Road 

Blackstone, VA 23824 

Mlowe@worldiris.com 

Miss Libby Cross 

LIBCross@aol.com 

Dr. Art Tucker 

Delaware State University Dept. of Agriculture 

atucker@dsc.edu 

205 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Hollingsworth Nursery 

R3 Box 27 

Marysville, MO 64468 

Hortico Nurseries 

Robson Road R.R. #1 

Waterdown, Ontario, LOR 2H1 Canada 

Iris City 

Greg McCullough 

icity@email.msn.com 

Iris Country 

Roger Nelson 

6219 Topaz Street 

Brooks, Oregon 97305 

(503) 393-4739 

Little Valley Wholesale Nursery 

13022 E. 136 Avenue 

Brighton, CO 80601 

(303) 659-6708 

Lowell Baumunk 

10918 N. Sunshine Dr. 

Littleton, CO 80125 

NATS Nursery Ltd. 

17127 Frasier Highway 

Surrey, British Columbia V3S 4 RS Canada 

www.nats-nursery.com 

206 
Appendix C

New England Wildfower Society 

Garden In the Woods 

180 Hemenway Road 

Framingham, MA 01701-2699 

(508) 877-7630 

Prairie Moon Nursery 

Route E, Box 163 

Winona, MN 55987-9515 

(507) 452-1362 

The Rosarie at Bayfelds 

P.O. Box R 

Waldboro, ME 04572-0919 

www.rosarie.com 

Quansett Nursery 

794 Horseneck Road 

South Dartmouth, MA 02748 

(508) 636-6931 

Scot Brothers Nursery 

P.O. box 581 

Mc Minnville, TN 37111 

1-800-435-1142 

www.tnursery.com 

Sevald Nursery 

4937 3rd Avenue South 

Minneapolis, MN 55409 

Shady Oaks Nursery 

112 10th Ave 

S.E. Waseca, MN 56093-3122 

www.shadyoaks.com 

207 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

Superstition Iris Gardens 

Richard Tasco / Roger Duncan 

2536 Old Highway 

Cathey’s Valley, CA 95306 

randrcv@sierratel.com 

Sylvan Nursery, Inc. 

1028 Horseneck Road 

Westport, MA 02790 

(508) 636-4573 

Vintage Gardens 

2833 Old Gravenstein Highway South 

Sebastopol, CA 95472 

(707) 829-2035 

www.vintagegardens.com 

Weston Nurseries, Inc. 

E. Main St. 

P.O. Box 186 

Hopkinton, MA 01748 

(508) 435-3414 

Winterberry Gardens 

Don and Ginny Spoons 

1225 Reynolds Road 

Cross Junction, VA 22625 

208 
Appendix D

APPENDIX D: FAIRSTED LANDSCAPE 

PLANS 

This appendix lists landscape plans related to the Fairsted restoration and 

associated treatment work. This includes plans used for planning purposes (1904 

survey, HABS plan, 1930 period plan, and 1994 existing conditions) as well as 

those that actually prescribe treatment work. 

The plans listed below are stored in the Olmsted Archives, Series C: Oversize 

Plans and Drawings. When applicable, references are provided to identify fgures 

where plans are reproduced in volumes II and III of the Cultural Landscape Report 

for the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. 

LIST OF PLANS 

1. “Plan of F. L. Olmsted Estate, Brookline, Mass.” April 9, 1904, Plan by White 

and Wetherbee, Civil Engineers, Plan #673-1. Olmsted NHS Archives. [Figure 

1.3, CLR Vol. II] 

2. “Plan of Fairsted, Frederick Law Olmsted N.H.S.” The University of Virginia 

and the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), March 17, 1983. [Figure 

1.1, CLR Vol. II; Figure 1.1, CLR Vol. III] 

3. “Installation of Curbing and Drainage Structure Sheets 1-5” Construction 

Drawing. National Park Service, North Atlantic Region. January 1987. 

4. “Site Layout, Frederick Law Olmsted NHS Parking Area Renovation, Sheet 4.” 

National Park Service, July 1988. [Figure 1.4, CLR Vol. II] 

5. “Frederick Law Olmsted NHS Parking Area Renovation, Sheets 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7” 

National Park Service, July 1988. 

6. “Historic Vine and Trellis Restoration Project.” NPS, Olmsted National 

Historic Site, July 1989. 

7. “Survey Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” Boston 

University Ofce of Public Archeology. October 1991. [Figure 1.2, CLR Vol. II; 

Figure 1.7, CLR Vol. III] 

8. “1930 Period Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” NPS, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994. [Figure 2.35, CLR Vol. II; 

Figure 1.9, CLR Vol. III] 

209 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

9. “1993 Existing Conditions, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” 

NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994 [Figure 2.22. CLR 

Vol. II; Figure 1.8, CLR Vol. III] 

10. “Treatment Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” NPS, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994 [Figure 3.2, CLR Vol. II] 

11. “Tree Removal Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” NPS, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994 [Figure 3.3, CLR Vol. II; 

Figure 1.13, CLR Vol. III] 

12. “Shrub Removal Plan, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site.” NPS, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 1994 [Figure 3.4, CLR Vol. II] 

13. “Accessibility Modifcations to “Fairsted,” Drawing 1” National Park Service, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. December 20, 1993. 

14. “Accessibility Modifcations to “Fairsted,” Drawing 2” National Park Service, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. December 20, 1993. 

15. “Planting Plans, Sheets 4-12, Frederick Law Olmsted NHS ‘Fairsted’ Brookline, 

Massachusetts.” NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, July 10, 

1995. [Figures 3.6–3.13, CLR Vol. II] 

16. “Preliminary Details Fairsted Landscape Phase Two.” NPS, Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation, July 10, 1995. [Figure 3.14, CLR Vol. II] 

17. “Schematic Drainage Diagram, Olmsted NHS, Brookline, Massachusetts” NPS, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, April 1995 

18. “Planting, Layout, and Materials Plan, F. L. Olmsted NHS, Brookline, 

Massachusetts.” Carol R. Johnson Associates, Inc., July 17, 1996 

19. “Site Details Fairsted, F. L. Olmsted NHS, Brookline, Massachusetts, Sheet 3.” 

Carol R. Johnson Associates, Inc., July 17, 1996 

20. “Site Details Fairsted, F. L. Olmsted NHS, Brookline, Massachusetts, Sheet 4.” 

Carol R. Johnson Associates, Inc., July 17, 1996 

21. “Construction Drawings, Fairsted, F.L. Olmsted NHS, Brookline, Massachusetts, 

Driveway Repair and Resurface, Life/Safety Systems Upgrades, and Accessibility 

Improvements.” NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, 2014. 

22. “Repair and Resurface Olmsted Driveways and Parking Area at Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site, Brookline, MA,” Sheets 1-6. NPS, Olmsted 

Center for Landscape Preservation, April 2014. 

210 
Appendix E

APPENDIX E: GREEN HILL PARCEL 

LANDSCAPE PLANS 

This appendix lists landscape plans related to landscape treatment at the Green 

Hill parcel. The plans listed below are stored in the Olmsted Archives. When 

applicable, references are provided to identify fgures where plans are reproduced 

in the Cultural Landscape Report for the Green Hill Parcel. 

LIST OF PLANS 

1. “Access Easement Plan.” Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Green 

Hill Parcel. R. E. Cameron and Associates, Inc. March 26, 1998. 

2. “Existing Conditions Plan.” Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, 

Green Hill Parcel. National Park Service, Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation, 2015. [Drawing 1, CLR for the Green Hill Parcel] 

3. “Treatment Plan, Option One.” Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site, Green Hill Parcel. National Park Service, Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation, 2015. [Drawing 2, CLR for the Green Hill Parcel] 

4. “Treatment Plan, Option Two.” Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site, Green Hill Parcel. National Park Service, Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation, 2015. [Drawing 3, CLR for the Green Hill Parcel] 

5. “Schematic Detail, Spruce Pole Fence.” Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site, Green Hill Parcel. National Park Service, Olmsted Center for 

Landscape Preservation, 2016. [Drawing 10, CLR for the Green Hill Parcel] 

6. “Removal Plan, Canopy and Subcanopy Trees.” Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site, Green Hill Parcel. National Park Service, Olmsted 

Center for Landscape Preservation, 2017. [Drawing 7, CLR for the Green Hill 

Parcel] 

211 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

212 
Appendix F

APPENDIX F: ARTICLES RELATED TO 

LANDSCAPE RESTORATION WORK 

This appendix lists various articles written in trade journals, magazines, and 

newspapers concerning the treatment work conducted at Fairsted between 1990 

and 2012. 

FAIRSTED 

1. Allen, David Grayson. “The Olmsted National Historic Site and the Growth 

of Historic Landscape Preservation.” Landscape Architecture. April 2008. 

2. Calkins, Meg. “A New Twist on Trellis Design: Updating an Olmsted Detail 

[Fairsted, Brookline, Mass.]” Landscape Architecture. June 2000. 

3. Campbell, Karen. “Olmsted witness tree may get new life.” Boston Globe. 

October 2011. 

4. Day, Karen E. “Restoring Vine Coverage to Historic Buildings: Fairsted, 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Brookline, Massachusetts.” 

Preservation Tech Notes. October 1991. 

5. McCormic, Kathleen. “Close to Home [Fairsted].” Preservation: The 

Magazine of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. July-August 1997. 

6. -----. “Vaulting the Garden Wall.” Landscape Architecture. May 1994. 

7. Meier, Lauren. “Notes on Restoring the Woody Plants at Fairsted.” Arnoldia. 

Volume 56, Number 2. 1996. 

8. McQuaid, Cate. “’Witness Project’ bears witness to history through art.” 

Boston Globe. August 2012. 

9. O’Connell, Kim A. “Care of Character: Fairsted -- the Home and Ofce of 

Frederick Law Olmsted and his Successors -- is Restored to all its Picturesque 

Glory.” Landscape Architecture. June 2000. 

213 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

214 
Appendix G

APPENDIX G: SPECIFICATIONS AND 

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 

The following appendix details various specifcations and construction 

documents for treatment work undertaken at both Fairsted and Green Hill 

between 1987 and 2019. 

FAIRSTED 

1. “Installation of New Drain Line, Curbing, and Drainage Structure”, 

Construction Documents, Sheets 1-6. NPS. 1987. 

2. “Scope of Work – Nonhistoric Tree Removal.” National Park Service, Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Tree Specialists, Inc. 1994. From: Box 6, 

Folder 5, Landscape Restoration Records, Series A: Administrative Project 

Records. 

3. “Fairsted, Landscape Restoration Phase II: Technical Specifcations.” National 

Park Service, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Carol Johnson 

and Associates, D&D Enterprises. July 1996. From: Box 6, Folder 10, 

Landscape Restoration Records, Series A: Administrative Project Records. 

4. “Climate Control System Upgrades: The Vault at Fairsted,” Specifcations. 

Landmark Facilities Group, Inc. August 16, 1999. 

5. “Archeological Impacts, Life/Safety Systems Upgrade and Historic Structures 

Rehabilitation,” Construction Drawings. NPS. May 2007. 

6. “Site Utility Plans, Life/Safety Systems Upgrade and Historic Structures 

Rehabilitation,” Construction Drawings, Sheets 1-5. NPS. May 2007. 

7. “Scope of Work, Archeological Overview and Assessment.” NPS, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site. 2008. 

8. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Sign Location Plan and Design 

Intent Drawings.” NPS, Ofce of NPS Identity. October 2016. 

GREEN HILL PARCEL 

1. “Drawing 10, Schematic Detail, Spruce Pole Fence,” Construction Drawing. 

NPS, Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. 2017. 

215 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

2. “Scope of Work, Green Hill Parcel Masonry Wall Rehabilitation.” NPS, 

Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. February 2019. 

216 
Appendix H

APPENDIX H: COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS 

This appendix details various compliance documents for treatment work 

undertaken at both Fairsted and the Green Hill parcel between 1987 and 2019. 

These documents can be found in the archives at the Frederick Law Olmsted 

National Historic Site as well as in the Planning, Environment, and Public 

Comment (PEPC) and the Project Management Information System (PMIS) 

databases. All transmittal letters listed include “Assessment of Actions Having an 

Efect on Cultural Resources” forms as well as memoranda detailing project work 

to be completed. 

FAIRSTED 

1. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Removal and Replacement 

of Spruce Pole Fence,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to Associate Regional 

Director, Planning and Resource Preservation, North Atlantic Region. April 

17, 1984. 

2. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Removal of Nonhistoric 

swimming pool and patio,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to Associate 

Regional Director, Planning and Resource Preservation, North Atlantic 

Region. August 13, 1984. 

3. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Drainage Repairs and 

Installation of Curbing on Warren and Dudley Streets,” Section 106 

Compliance Letter to Chief, Engineering and Maintenance, North Atlantic 

Region. December 15, 1986. 

4. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Removal of Storm Damaged 

Trees,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to Associate Regional Director, 

Planning and Resource Preservation, North Atlantic Region. February 24, 

1992. 

5. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Removal of Hazardous 

Canadian Hemlock,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to Associate Regional 

Director, Resources Management and Research, North Atlantic Region. May 

11, 1993. 

6. Timothy Baugh, Ricardo Elia, and Thomas F. Tartaron. “Geophysical Remote 

Sensing Survey at Fairsted, the Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic 

Site in Brookline, Massachusetts.” Ofce of Public Archeology Report of 

Investigations No. 116. Boston University. Boston, MA. May 1993. 

217 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

7. “Compliance Documentation for Accessibility Modifcations to Fairsted.” 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation. March 1994. 

8. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Phase I Landscape Restoration: 

Nonhistoric Tree and Shrub Removal,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to 

Massachusetts Historical Commission. June 29, 1994. 

9. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Phase 2 Landscape 

Restoration,” Section 106 Compliance Letter to Massachusetts Historical 

Commission. August 8, 1995. 

10. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Accessibility Improvements 

to Interior and Exterior of Fairsted Building Complex,” Section 106 Letter to 

Massachusetts Historical Commission. September 11, 1996. 

11. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Drainage Issues, Olmsted 

NHS Landscape Treatment.” Letter to Nancy Tansino, Contracting Ofcer, 

BOST. October 15, 1997. Includes “Specifcations for Drainage Repair” 

memorandum, drawings prepared by Carol Johnson and Associates, and 

Assessment of Action form prepared April 7, 1997. 

12. “Assessment of Actions Having an Efect on Cultural Resources, Installation of 

Granite Curbing on Fairmont Street.” Prepared by Wendy Gogel, Frederick 

Law Olmsted National Historic Site Section 106 Coordinator. July 28, 1998. 

13. “Assessment of Actions Having an Efect on Cultural Resources, Upgrade Life/ 

Safety Systems and Rehabilitate Historic Structures.” NPS, Frederick Law 

Olmsted National Historic Site. March 2005. 

14. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Upgrade of Life/Safety 

Systems and rehabilitate Historic Structures Project,” Section 106 Letter to 

Massachusetts Historical Commission. June 7, 2007 

15. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Removal and Replacement of 

Hazardous Spruce Pole Fence,” Section 106 Letter to Massachusetts Historical 

Commission. July 21, 2009. 

16. Heitert, Kristen and Ora Elquist. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site 

Archeological Overview and Assessment,” Technical Report. Public Archaeology 

Laboratory, Inc. July 2012. 

218 
Appendix H

GREEN HILL PARCEL 

1. “Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Green Hill Parcel, Phase 1 

Masonry Wall and Spruce Pole Fence Assessment.” Section 106 Compliance 

Letter to Brona Simon, Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Ofcer, 

Massachusetts Historical Commission. April 15, 2019. 

2. Jamison, Thomas R. “Phase I Archeological Investigations in Support of the 

Green Hill Landscape Rehabilitation Project, Frederick Law Olmsted National 

Historic Site.” Hartgen Archeological Associates, Inc. December 2019. 

219 
Cultural Landscape Report for Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site

220 

National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

OLMSTED CENTER FOR LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION 

National Park Service 

The Easton Building 

15 State Street, Boston, MA 02109 

web: www.nps.gov/oclp/