UNIVERSITYy
PENNSYLVANIA.
UBKARIE5
THE GILDED AGE ESTATES
OF LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP, PENNSYLVANIA:
A HISTORY AND PRESERVATION PLAN
Stephanie Hetos Cocke
A THESIS
in
The Graduate Program in Historic Preservation
Presented to the faculties of the University of Pennsylvania
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
1987
George Eti Thomas , Lectur
Lecturer, Historic Preservation, Advisor
n C. Keene, Professor, City and Regional Planning, Reader
F^NE
ARTs/AJ/^/:);i/if^7/c 6^6
UNIVERSITY
OF
PENNSYLVANIA
LIBRARIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii
INTRODUCTION 1
Chapter
I. THE GILDED AGE IN AMERICA 5
II. THE COUNTRY ESTATES OF LOWER MERION
TOWNSHIP 14
III. SUBURBANIZATION ENCROACHES: THE BREAK-UP OF
THE ESTATES IN LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP .... 32
IV. DEALING WITH CHANGE: INSTITUTIONS AND
SUBDIVISIONS 45
V. PRESERVATION POLICY IN LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP. . 57
CONCLUSION: PRESERVATION STRATEGIES TO GUIDE FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT 66
ILLUSTRATIONS 74
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 93
111
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
1. Map of Lower Merion Township, 1851 75
2. Pennsylvania Railroad Officials, 1901 75
3. "Cheswold," Haverford, PA., 1901 76
4. "Dolobran," Haverford, PA., 1901 76
5. "Tyn-y-coed," Ardmore, PA., 1901 77
6. "Restrover," Haverford, PA., 1886 77
7. "Ingeborg," Wynnewood, PA., 1886 78
8. "Redstone," Rosemont, PA., 1901 78
9. "La Ronda," Gladwyne, PA., 1987 79
10. "Waverly Heights," Gladwyne, PA., 1987 79
11. "Maybrook," Wynnewood, PA., 1886 80
12. Atlas View of "Maybrook," Wynnewood, PA., 1946 . . 80
13. "Briar Crest," Villanova, PA., 1901 81
14. "Rathalla," Rosemont, PA., 1987 81
15. "Woodmont," Gladwyne, PA., 1987 82
16. Atlas View of "Penshurst," Penn Valley, PA., 1946. 82
17. "Pencoyd," Bala Cynwyd, PA., 1878 83
18. "Pencoyd," 1915 83
19. "Clairemont Farm," Rosemont, PA., 1987 84
20. "Ballytore," Wynnewood, PA., 1886 84
21. "Ballytore," 1987 85
22. William Joyce residence, Rosemont, PA., 1987 ... 85
23. Subdivision in Villanova, PA., 1987 86
IV
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS, continued
24. "La Ronda," Gladwyne, PA., Franklin's Atlas
of 1946 86
25. "The Hermitage" Planned Residential Development,
1987 87
26. "Framar," Gladwyne, PA., 1987 87
27. "Wrenfield" Planned Residential Development,
1987 88
28. "Wrenfield" Planned Residential Development,
1987 88
29. "Waverly Heights" Life-care Community, 1987 ... 89
30. "Waverly Heights" Life-care Community, 1987 ... 89
31. "Beauinont ," Bryn Mawr, PA., Franklin' s
Atlas of 1948 90
32. Model of "Beauinont" Life-care Community,
1987 90
33. "Beaumont" Life-care Community, 1987 91
34. Aerial View of "Beaumont" Before Development ... 91
35. "Harriton," Bryn Mawr, PA., 1987 92
LIST OF TABLES
1. Lower Merion Township Residential Projects
of Five Philadelphia Architects Between
1880 and 1915 li
2. Patterns of Change in Estates of 100 Acres
or More in 1908 35
3. Location and Number of Privately-owned Tracts
in Lower Merion Township of Five Acres or
More in 1984 36
4. Privately-owned Estates of Five Acres or More
in Lower Merion Township in 1984 37
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am most grateful to David G. De Long, Graduate Group
Chairman, for his enthusiastic and continuing support of my
work. Many thanks to Jean Wolf for her vital suggestions
and assistance. George Thomas and John Keene offered care-
ful guidance in helping me reach my goals for this paper.
Robert De Silets and Sandra Handford graciously pro-
vided time to answer my many questions and share their
materials with me. I also thank the staff of the Lower
Merion Historical Society, which was always helpful and
encouraging. Robert Schwartz generously allowed me to
reproduce many of his historic photographs for this paper.
I thank my grandmother, Chrysanthe Galanos, my parents,
Nicholas and Maria Hetos, and my sister, Catherine Skefos,
for their love of learning that they have instilled in me.
This paper is for my husband, Reagan, whose constant
suggestions, patience, and support were invaluable. I look
forward to a lifetime of architectural discovery with him.
vii
INTRODUCTION
As he strolled along Newport's Cliff Walk in 1905, the
author Henry James was shocked at the opulence of the
mansions that had been built since his last visit to Ameri-
ca several years before. He described the country houses
he saw as "white elephants," pitying "their averted owners
[who], roused from a witless dream, [would] wonder what in
the world is to be done with them."-^ James' remarks were
prophetic, for a major problem facing preservation profes-
sionals today is the ultimate fate of the large estates
built throughout the country during the exuberant, confi-
dent, period in American civilization between 1865 and
1905. It was a time first referred to by Mark Twain as "the
Gilded Age. "2
According to a paper released in 1982 by the National
Trust for Historic Preservation,
The large estates built throughout America
during the nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries are an important part of the
cultural legacy of their communities. .. [They]
reflect an era of prosperity as well as the
skill of local craftsmen and builders. In
addition, many properties cover large areas
of land, which have an environmental and
economic importance to communities.-^
As William C. Shopsin has pointed out in Saving Large
Estates, the properties amassed during America's Gilded Age
should no longer be viewed as merely anachronistic class
symbols of an aristocratic lifestyle unworthy of acknowledg-
rnent or preservation.'^ Instead, these estates are often
extensive tracts of unspoiled open space having important
land use implications, while at the same time serving as
examples of the work of important local architects and
landscape designers.
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the plight of
the estates in one township. Lower Merion, which will in
1988 celebrate the 275th anniversary of its founding. This
community, a part of a string of suburbs just west of
Philadelphia commonly referred to as the "Main Line," was
the subject of Philip Berry's play The Philadelphia Story.
My intent is to consider the rise of the great estates in
Lower Merion Township, to analyze the increasing suburbani-
zation in this century that greatly reduced their numbers,
to identify those estates that still remain, and finally,
to analyze existing planning and preservation controls in
the township and propose solutions that should be implemen-
ted to ensure their future preservation.
Preservation of these properties involves many com-
plexities, including zoning, subdivision controls, preser-
vation-enabling legislation, taxation, and community
response. These elements interact in crucial ways and, if
not coordinated, can cause considerable uncertainty in
efforts to preserve the character of estates. To help
reduce some of these uncertainties, careful long range
consideration of land use policies and comprehensive plan-
ning policies is essential. First, however, the period
known as the Gilded Age must be examined so that the es-
tates' great cultural significance may be understood in its
proper context.
NOTES TO INTRODUCTION
1. Henry James, The American Scene (New York, 1967),
224-25, 161-62.
2. Twain used this term as the title of a satirical
novel written with Charles Dudley Warner in 1873.
3. Christopher W. Closs, "Preserving Large Estates,"
Information Series, National Trust for Historic
Preservation (Washington, D.C., 1982), 1.
4. William C. Shopsin and Crania Bolton Marcus, Saving
Large Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977), 3.
CHAPTER I
THE GILDED AGE IN AMERICA
In 1853, landscape architect A. J. Downing- -whose wri-
tings and designs dominated mid-century attitudes toward
American domestic architecture--cautioned in his Architec-
ture of Country Houses that great estates were appropriate
to a monarchy rather than to a republic like the United
States. Scarcely a generation later, however, it was clear
that his warnings would not be heeded.-^ The four decades
following the Civil War were years of astounding economic
growth. Vast empires in oil, shipping, mining, banking,
lumber, transportation, and related industries formed between
approximately 1865 and 1905. ^ C. Wright Mills explains in
The Power Elite;
Before the Civil War, only a handful of
wealthy men, notably Astor and Vanderbilt,
were multimillionaires on a truly American
scale.... The word "millionaire," in fact,
was coined only in 1843, when, upon the
death of Peter Lorillard [snuff, banking,
real estate], the newspapers needed a term
to denote great affluence.-^
The Civil War dramatically altered the composition and
characteristics of the upper class. Throughout the North,
the war brought about a period of substantial money-making
and lavish spending. As in all wars, military supplies
were in great demand and the small industrial enterprises
of the North were in an excellent position to expand and
supply them; many small industrialists grew exceedingly
wealthy before the war's end.'^ Stimulated by war produc-
tion, after the war, the American industrial revolution
launched even greater fortunes in railroads, banking, oil,
mining, and other fields. In this era, fortunes were made
and lost quickly, almost easily. In 1865, there were only
three millionaires--William Vanderbilt, William Astor, and
merchant A. T. Stewart--but by 1900, there were suddenly
more than four thousand millionaires, twenty of whom were
worth more than seventy-five million dollars each.^
The new value system encouraged--nearly demanded--the
public display of this newly acquired wealth, power and
prestige. The established upper class of the period rea-
lized that their ranks were being infiltrated by the new
rich. One upper-class member wrote that "all at once
Society [was] being assailed from every side by persons who
seek to climb boldly over the walls of social exclusive-
ness. "°
It was during these turbulent years that a new varia-
tion on an old type of domestic architecture first appeared
on the American landscape. Called the "country estate,"
these houses and surrounding grounds were grandiose in
scale. Most estates were originally established as part of
a fashion for life as a "country gentleman," derived from
British models and fostered by considerable contact with
the British and European aristocracies,"^ As Barr Feree
explained in 1904:
Country houses we have always had, and
large ones too; but the great country
house as it is now understood is a
new type of dwelling, a sumptuous house
built at large expense, often palatial
in its dimensions, furnished in the
richest manner, and placed on an estate,
perhaps large enough to admit of
independent farming operations, and in
most cases with a garden which is an
integral part of the architectural scheme. °
Here Feree provides us with a useful definition of the
Gilded Age country estate: the scale of its main house was
huge, its furnishings, sumptuous, and the surrounding land
holdings were substantial, usually formally landscaped, and
dotted with various outbuildings to serve the needs of
estate living.
Historian Kenneth Jackson has written that the men who
built these homes were acutely aware of the tenuous nature
of their achievements and of the rapid intellectual, eth-
nic, social, and political changes that were undermining
previous beliefs and values. Therefore, in order to justi-
fy the risks, the long hours at the office, the sacrifices
for family and posterity, and in order to gain a larger
measure of social acceptance, "the robber baron sought
security in a country estate, an impressive physical edi-
face that would represent more stability than any urban
residence . "°
In Philadelphia, especially, often the houses were
anachronistic in mode, resembling medieval castles. In his
new text which accompanies George William Sheldon's Artis
tic Country-Seats of 1886, Arnold Lewis writes:
New wealth did not mind old containers, a
truism demonstrated on European soil centuries
before the idea crossed the Atlantic. On the
other hand, they were not old containers, for
repeating the past would have been impractical, a
criticism a successful businessman would not
have appreciated. [These houses] were unusually
creative marriages of forms inspired by the past
with materials and purposes conditioned by the
present. ^^
The country houses generally bore imposing facades comple-
mented by manicured gardens, with exceptionally large recep-
tion rooms, halls, parlors, dining rooms, and other public
areas.
The mansion itself was usually placed in the center of
the property. The extended setback served two purposes.
First, it allowed for an impressively long driveway to be
built from the estate entrance to the main dwelling. Se-
cond, the setback minimized the possibility of unwanted
contact with outsiders. The other structures on the estate
were centrally located around the main entrance to the
property; having all facilities in one section of an estate
was considered the most convenient arrangement. Among the
various buildings that were commonly included on the es-
tates were servants' cottages, guest houses, greenhouses,
and garages. -^^
These country seats were the product of the optimism
and self-confidence of both clients and architects, of
available land usually obtainable at reasonable rates, of
the possibility and desire for leisure time, of the growing
reaction to the city as a place for raising families and,
above all, of an expanding economy that made quick fortunes
easy and their public demonstrations irresistible. ■'■^
What was the intended message of this kind of domestic
architecture? Possibly its scale expressed the abundant
resources within, its skyline conveyed pride and vigor, and
its historical references demonstrated knowledge, good
taste, and a desired association with the proven past
rather than the unpredictable present--even though the
present made the house possible in the first place. -'■^
In the Theory of the Leisure Class, the often
satirical social critique of 1899, Thorstein Veblen cites
such residences as examples of "conspicuous consumption," a
phrase he invented. As he explains of the phenomenon, "In
order to gain and to hold the esteem of men it is not
sufficient merely to possess wealth or power. The wealth
or power must be put in evidence, for esteem is awarded
only on evidence. "•^'^
Dwellings on this scale prompted the Senate Committee
on Education and Labor, in 1885, to consider legislation
putting a cap on the amount a millionaire could spend on
his house. -'-^ In the 1890s, a period of severe economic
hardship and social turmoil, a torrent of condemnation
found its way into the periodicals. E. L. Godkin's 1896
article "The Expenditure of Rich Men" held that affluent
Americans faced a problem unknown to their European counter-
parts: how to spend their money. Here the wealthy had to
decide for themselves what abroad was dictated largely by
tradition and descent. ■'■° Godkin writes.
That, under these circumstances, they should,
in somewhat slavish imitation of Europe, choose
the most conspicuous European mode of asserting
social supremacy, the building of great houses,
is not surprising. They want the principle
reasons for European houses. One is that great
houses are in Europe either signs of great
territorial possessions or the practice of
hospitality on a scale unknown among us.-^'
The other reason, said Godkin, and the most serious argu-
ment against the building of great houses in America, was
that dwellings "should be in some sort of accord with
national manners and palatial residences were not."-'-^
Until recently, a critical view toward the great
houses of this period persisted. As David Chase writes of
Richard Morris Hunt, a favorite society architect of
Gilded Age New York and Newport, "[His later houses] are so
grand, so palatial, that they are judged to be alien to
American culture, and for this they are condemned. Few
critics since Montgomery Schuyler's day have been able
to overcome this bias and evaluate these dwellings dispas-
10
sionately . "^^
In this decade, fortunately, a new appreciation of the
Gilded Age has begun to emerge. Instead of a source of
embarrassment, today this era is increasingly viewed as a
period of profound cultural significance to the history of
American civilization. It was a time of selfish pleasure,
to be sure, but also a time in which prosperity and values
enabled a few to build magnificent structures as symbols of
their achievement. Though often not architecturally inno-
vative, these mansions were usually laden with rich perso-
nal detail and of the finest craftsmanship and technology
available at the time. One hundred years later, and pre-
cisely 275 years after the founding of Lower Merion Town-
ship, it is appropriate to study with renewed interest the
rise and fall of the grand houses of this region so that
our local achievement can be understood, and in appropriate
instances, be preserved.
11
NOTES TO CHAPTER I
1. Andrew Jackson Downing, The Architecture of Country
Houses (New York, 1853).
2. Arnold Lewis, American Country Houses of the Gilded
(Mineola, NY, 1982) .
3. C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite (New York, 1956),
101.
4. Dennis P. Sobin, Dynamics of Community Change: the
Case of Long Island's Declining "Gold Coast" (New York,
1968), 10.
5. Mary Cable, Top Drawer: American High Society from
the Gilded Age to the Roaring Twenties (New York, 1984).
6. Mrs. John King Van Rensselaer, The Social Ladder
(New York, 1924), p. 5, quoted in David Chase, "Superb
Privacies" in Architecture of Richard Morris Hunt. Susan
R, Stein, ed. (Chicago, 1986).
7. William C. Shopsin and Grania Bolton Marcus, Saving
Large Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY), 6.
8. Barr Feree, American Estates and Gardens (New York,
1904) .
9. Kenneth T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The
Suburbanization of the United States (New York, 1985).
10. Arnold Lewis, Amercan Country Houses of the Gilded
Age (Mineola, NY, 1982), 20. Reprint of pictorial material
from Artistic Country-Seats: Types of Recent American Villa
and Cottage Architecture with Instances of Country Club-
Houses, by George William Sheldon (New York, 1886-87).
11. Sobin 45.
12. Lewis, X.
13. Ibid, 20.
12
NOTES TO CHAPTER I, continued
14. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class
(1899), reprint ed. (New York, 1967).
15. David Chase, "Superb Privacies" in Architecture of
Richard Morris Hunt. Susan R. Stein, ed. (Chicago, 1986), 167,
16. E. L. Godkin, "The Expenditure of Rich Men,"
Scribners Magazine 20, no. 4 (October 1896), 497-500, as
quoted in Chase.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
13
CHAPTER II
THE COUNTRY ESTATES OF LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP
The Pennsylvania township of Lower Merion, originally
part of William Penn's "Liberty Lands" in his 1682 plan for
Philadelphia, is bounded by the Schuylkill River, the bo-
rough of West Conshohocken, Upper Merion, Radnor, and Haver-
ford Townships, and the city of Philadelphia. (Illustration
1). The present size is 23.34 square miles, having been
slightly reduced twice, when West Conshohocken and then
Narberth became separate boroughs in the last quarter of
the nineteenth century. ■'■
The history of Lower Merion, like that of many of the
surrounding townships, began in England in the late seven-
teenth century. It was there that a number of Welshmen,
with hopes of founding a settlement for their countrymen in
the new world, purchased land, sight unseen, from William
Penn. Among the early settlers in Lower Merion, Rowland
Ellis, Edward Jones, Robert Owen, Hugh Roberts, and John
Thomas were all from Merioneth, a county in Wales later
remembered in the choice of the new settlement's name.^
The popular term "Main Line" arose in the 1860s when
the Pennsylvania Railroad decided to straighten the meander-
ing track along the primary route to Pittsburgh. Rather
than fight the farmers along the way, the Railroad bought
them out. After shifting the right-of-way, it then went
14
into the real estate business, selling large tracts to
individual purchasers and large developers.^ The earliest
residential development in Lower Merion Township was along
or near Lancaster, Montgomery, and City Line Avenues, today
locations of high-density populations."^ Near the present
Bryn Mawr station on Montgomery Avenue, for example, the
Railroad bought a large tract of land, marked off streets,
planted trees, and set up private zoning regulations which
included minimiim set-back and house value limits.-'
The construction of the Railroad's "Main Line" encour-
aged many wealthy city residents, some of them railroad
officials, to build large houses in this area, and it was
during the 1870s that Lower Merlon's first large houses
were amassed. (Illustration 2). In 1872, for example. Dr.
Edmund Cadwallader Evans — the father of architect Allen
Evans, Frank Furness' partner--bought a hundred acres in
Haverford and built a house off Montgomery Avenue at the
end of what is now called Evans Lane. The house is no
longer standing. The following year, Pennsylvania Railroad
president Alexander J. Cassatt bought from him fifty-six of
these acres, which stretched from the railroad down Gray's
Lane and over to the present Cheswold Lane.^ There he
engaged Furness and Evans to design a huge mansion, which
he called "Cheswold," for him and his growing family.
(Illustration 3). Today, only the gatehouse still stands,
15
the land having been absorbed into the property of the
Merion Cricket Club."^
Another prominent Philadelphian who settled in Haver-
ford was Clement A. Griscom, a shipbuilder who became
president of the International Navigation Company. Griscom
bought sixty-two acres across Gray's Lane from Evans and
Cassatt and named his estate "Dolobran," the name of a
family seat in Wales. ^ "Dolobran" began as an old farm
house which Furness and Evans altered and extended in 1881
and again in 1894. (Illustration 4). It featured the
widely-varied wall surfaces and floral ornament for which
Furness is known. ^ The estate, which is still located on a
small tract on Laurel Lane, comprised nearly 150 acres in
1908.
These three houses , though large and surrounded by
great tracts of land, were only precursors to the more
opulent Gilded Age estates which came in the 1880s and
1890s. As with the Gold Coast of Long Island and such
towns as Brookline, Massachusetts, wealthy Lower Merion
Township founders gradually chose to build increasingly
formal, sumptious country estates that gave the area a new
flavor. Philadelphia's most talented and prominent archi-
tects rose to the occasion. Between 1880 and 1915, dozens
of estates were amassed, dotting the Lower Merion landscape
with a degree of scale and expenditure that has never
16
existed before or since. Table 1 shows the residential
commissions of five prominent Philadelphia architects whom
Main Line Philadelphia gentlemen often sought to design
their country houses.
17
TABLE l--Lower Merion Township Residential Projects of
Five Philadelphia Architects Between 1880 and 1915
THEOPHILUS PARSONS CHANDLER, JR. (1845-1928)
YEAR CLIENT LOCATION
1881
1882
1884
1885
1890
1891
1902
1906
Rudolph Ellis
George S. Gerhard
Wayne McVeagh
Samuel B. Brown
William Simpson, Jr,
Joseph B. Townsend
Eugene Delano
William Joyce
Silas Pettit
A. F. Kelly
Bryn Mawr
Ardmore
Bryn Mawr
Haverf ord
Wynnewood
Merion
Rosemont
Bryn Mawr
Bryn Mawr
YEAR
1888
1889
1891
1905
1910
1911
WILSON EYRE (1858-1944)
CLIENT
J. Rulon Miller
Sidney A. Biddle
Rev. Dr. Robins
J. B. Ladd
F. G. Thompson
William S. Ellis
Horatio G. Lloyd
J. Stanley Reeves
LOCATION
Haverford
Ardmore
Merion
Ardmore
Merion
Bryn Mawr
Haverford
Haverford
1914
P. W. Roberts
Villanova
TABLE 1- -continued
YEAR
1878
1881
1886
1887
1889
1890
1897
1906
FRANK FURNESS (1839-1912)
CLIENT
Allan Evans
Rowland Evans
Clement Griscom
William P. Henszley
I. Layton Register
Henry C. Register
William Winsor
Frank Thompson
George Gerhard
R. C. Griscom
J. Ogden Hoffman
Marriott Smith
LOCATION
Haverford
Haverf ord
Haverford
Wynnewood
Ardmore
Ardmore
Bala Cynwyd
Ardmore
Haverford
Villanova
Wynnewood
YEAR
GEORGE HEWITT (1841-1916)
CLIENT
LOCATION
1877
William H. Maule
Villanova
1881
Henry Gibson
Wynnewood
1886
W. T. Harris
Bala Cynwyd
Andrew Wheeler
Bryn Mawr
no date
William Harris
Bala Cynwyd
D. F. La Lanne
Bryn Mawr
John Marston
Merion
George H. McFadden
Villanova
J. Rulon Miller
Haverford
George Philler
Haverford
Richard Rushton
Wynnewood
19
TABLE l--continued
ADDISON HUTTON (1834-1916)
YEAR
CLIENT
LOCATION
1880-81
George S. Lovell
Bryn Mawr
E. T, Townsend
Bryn Mawr
1882
George Vaux
Bryn Mawr
1883
John Garrett
Rosemont
1884
Charles Hartshorne
Merion
1885
Isaac H. Clothier
Wynnewood
1886
Effingham Morris
Ardmore
1887
Samuel L. Fox
Bryn Mawr
1890
Theodore Morris
Villanova
1891
Henry S. Drinker
HORACE TRUMBAUER (1868-1938)
Haverford
1892
A. J. Young
Ardmore
1903
J. C. Alteraus
Ardmore
1905
W. P. Herbert
Bala Cynwyd
W. H. Steigerwalt
Merion
1909
Thomas P. Hunter
Haverford
1910
Theo Cramp
Bryn Mawr
1911
H. S. Darlington
Villanova
1913
Geraldine E. Mitchell
Haverford
1917-18
Morris Clothier
Villanova
1922
William J. Cooper
Haverford
Thomas J. Sinclair
Bala Cynwyd
J. Clayton Strawbridge
Merion
1922-23
Pam H. Dole
Wynnewood
20
It is important to emphasize that despite the new,
conspiciously-consumptive values of this period, the level
of opulence reflected in the local estates was strongly
influenced by Quaker roots firmly established by the found-
ing fathers of the township. Generally, therefore, the
houses designed by these and other architects were of a
lesser scale and extravagance than the estates built by
such architects as Richard Morris Hunt and George W. Post
in Newport and New York. The local estates are often tamed
by both the Quaker-influenced tendency toward the less
pretentious, and the more modest fortunes of, the Main Line
Philadelphia gentry.
Nevertheless, these local estates are highly signifi-
cant cultural resources, serving as important local exam-
ples of a new type of architecture, the country estate, and
of the work of Philadelphia's most prominent architects of
this era. Furthermore, the most important local mansions
have certain common characteristics that create a distinc-
tive regional expression of Gilded Age architectural
tastes. For example, many of the estates in the Township
were built of gray stone, as the schist from the nearby
Wissahickon area was a readily available building material.
(Illustration 5). In addition, many of the residences are
castle-like and nearly brutalistic in appearance, with
21
thick stone walls and a profusion of towers. (Illustra-
tions 6, 7, 8). There are notable exceptions to these
characteristics, such as hacienda-like "La Ronda" and Geor-
gian-inspired "Waverly Heights," two Gladwyne mansions,
(illustrations 9, 10) but the medieval-castle mode was by
far the most popular choice.
Three of the most significant surviving estates most
greatly typify those built during this period. One of
those that employs crenelated towers and bartizans is "May-
brook." (Illustration 11). A part of the seventeenth-
century tract of Edward Jones, "Maybrook" still comprises
twenty-six acres near the present Wynnewood train station
on Penn Road. (Illustration 12).
It was built in 1881 by Henry C. Gibson, a prominent
whiskey distiller and real estate developer, whose home at
the time was a five-story mansion at 1612 Walnut Street.
As his daughter Mary explained in an interview in 1956, "My
father wanted to have a summer house in the country and my
mother agreed to it, providing it was a very simple little
cottage. One of my father's intimate friends was Mr.
George W. Hewitt... and he and my father started making
plans for the country house. My father had always admired
the castles in Normandy and to my mother's dismay, she
discovered that the little cottage was turning into a
castle. "
10
22
The "castle" was actually designed by George W. Hewitt
with his brother, W. D. Hewitt. George Hewitt studied in
the office of John Notman, and later worked in partnership
with Frank Furness. By 1884, George Hewitt would complete
other residences for Gibson in the 3200 block of Powelton
Avenue and on St. Marks Square in West Philadelphia. In
1886, Gibson again called upon Hewitt to design three
stores at the corner of Thirteenth and Market Streets in
central Philadelphia. •^■'■
George Hewitt's other country house commissions in-
cluded the William Henry Maule residence, "Briar Crest," an
early Shingle-Style residence built in 1877 at the corner
of Spring Mill and Old Gulph Roads in Villanova, (illustra-
tion 13) and the H. H. Houston house, "Drum Moir," designed
in 1886 in Chestnut Hill, Pennsylvania.
Architectural historian Arnold Lewis describes "May-
brook" as "expensive, large, high [its tower rising seven-
ty-two feet], asymmetrical and picturesque in skyline, and
artistically inspired by earlier periods that were often
highly romanticized. ... "^2 xn this house, like so many
others of the period, the architects chose to emulate such
British architects as William Burges, who in turn derived
their inspiration from the original medieval castles.
Thus, the purposefully eclectic, unauthentic interpretation
created by local architects for such Lower Merion mansions
23
as "Maybrook" can be attributed to the fact that the final
products were a full two steps removed from their original
source.
"Maybrook" is constructed of buff sandstone and covered
with red Vermont slate. It is a long house, as even its
stable is covered by the main roof. At one time the
grounds at "Maybrook" were magnif icantly landscaped; two
trees of every variety that would grow in the Philadelphia
climate were planted. ■'■■^ Six gardeners in the winter and as
many as twenty-five in the summer maintained the grounds.
Inside the main house, the quality of the finish is excep-
tional. All of the floors are oak except that of the hall,
which is laid in German tile. The woodwork of the hall is
oak, of the parlor, walnut, the library, butternut, and the
dining room, mahogany. Lejambre, a fashionable Philadel-
phia craftsman, hand-carved the furniture throughout. To
add to these richly-finished rooms, "Maybrook" was deco-
rated with many works from Henry Gibson's noted art collec-
tion.
Its major rooms are not exceptionally large when com-
pared with some of the other country estates which will be
discussed later. Yet, overall, the scale is grand, as the
architects later designed a number of additions to the
house, including a library in 1889 that reportedly cost
$125,000.-'-'^ The house also contains a music room, added in
24
1906 by then-owner Mary Gibson. When the house first
opened, the basement contained two hot-air furnaces and the
attic two lead water tanks, filled by steam pumps to con-
trol the sanitary system of the house.
A second of the finest estates which still stands, off
Montgomery Avenue in Rosemont, is "Rathalla," a thirty-two
room medieval chateau designed in 1889 for Joseph Frances
Sinnott, another Philadelphia distiller. (Illustration 14).
In that year he took full control of the Moore & Sinnott
Distillers, leaving behind his once-fashionable West Phila-
delphia address for a more prestigious Main Line loca-
tion. ■'■^
Designed by the Philadelphia firm of Hazelhurst and
Huckel, "Rathalla" is an excellent example of the estates
of the period in its evocation of the chateaux of the Loire
Valley of France. Edmund Hazelhurst and Samuel Huckel, Jr.
had established their Philadelphia firm in 1881, soon after
focusing their practice on residential design. On a smal-
ler scale, it is reminiscent of the houses Richard Morris
Hunt was building for his wealthy New York and Newport
clients, the Vanderbilts and the Astors, in the same de-
cade. Like "Biltmore," the George Washington Vanderbilt
mansion in North Carolina and "Ochre Court" in Newport,
"Rathalla" draws from features of several Loire Valley
chateaux in an eclectic, non-specific manner.
25
"Rathalla" possesses similar detailing to that seen in
local architect T. P. Chandler's designs. Like several of
Chandler's works, "Rathalla" features a battlemented
entrance porch flanked by paired towers with conical roofs.
The interior contains a three-story light well directly
above the central hall fireplace that provides both light
for the lower stories and a sense of extravagant spacious-
ness above. ■'-°
A third estate still in existence in Gladwyne, where
the steel-making Wood family once owned over four hundred
acres, is Alan Wood, Jr.'s "Woodmont," which comprised
ninety-five acres. (Illustration 15). Frank and William L.
Price, two architect brothers, designed the French Gothic
mansion house, which was built in 1891 on high land over-
looking the Schuylkill River and Conshohocken. ■'■ ' William
Price had entered the office of Quaker architect Addison
Hutton in 1878, but left three years later to form a part-
nership with brother Frank, who had been working with Frank
Furness. "Woodmont" is one of the brothers' greatest
achievements .
Wood was a steel baron, possessing a huge fortune and
more than 500 acres on the Schuylkill River. As George E.
Thomas explained in his Ph.D. dissertation on William
Price, Wood's house "was to be built at the very highest
point, of the local granite, on foundations blasted out of
26
the hill, a direct statement of wealth, power, influence,
control, and ownership. The result was a lordly and impo-
sing mansion directed towards the public. .. "■'■° "Woodmont"
features a giant porte cochere, which projects out from the
front of the house and opens into a vestibule connected to
a living hall. To the side are parlors, and behind, a
carved wood-panelled dining room and study opening into a
conservatory with a view to the Wood steel mills. (This
view was not accidental--it was achieved through the care-
ful trimming of the forests below) .
The massive living hall centers on an immense carved
limestone fireplace with a chimney breast which rises to
intersect a balcony encircling the inner half of the hall.
This room rises more than fifty feet, creating a pyramidal
volume on the houses 's roof that dominates the exterior of
the house. Additionally, a 1908 atlas indicates that the
grounds included two lakes, a stream, formal and terraced
gardens, aviaries, greenhouses, a pool, a power station,
and even an "Indian cave."-^^
Of the countless estates that have been demolished, one
in particular warrants mention. "Penshurst", the 539-acre
estate of Percival Roberts, Jr., was the largest privately-
owned property in Lower Merion in its time. Located on
both sides of the present Hagy's Ford Road, it extended to
27
the Schuylkill River. (Illustration 16). Roberts, presi-
dent of the Pencoyd Iron Works, built "Penshurst" in
1903. 2*^ The estate included a seventy-five room mansion,
in the Jacobean mode, and a chapel. There were typical
English gardens, and a special rock garden on Conshohocken
State Road was a show place with its ornamented fountains,
fish pond, balustrades, and terraced stairways. Specimens
of every variety of tree that survives in the climate
surrounded the main house. ^-'-
"Penshurst Farm" had a prize herd of imported Ayrshire
cattle, as well as pedigreed Berkshire hogs, chickens, and
sheep. The barns and dairy were immaculate, and the natu-
ral milk was bottled and sold through local distributors.
The farmers were considered pioneers in growing fine alfal-
fa for their cattle. A pump carried water from nearby
springs to a water tower near the main house from which the
water flowed through the estate's pumping system. A pri-
vate electrical system lighted the mansion. ^^
In 1939, the township made plans to build a trash
disposal plant adjacent to his property. Roberts himself
then applied for a permit to demolish the mansion, which
was sold to a wrecking crew for $1,000. The contents of
the house were sold at auction. When Roberts died in 194 3
at the age of eighty-six, the Home Life Insurance Company
bought the property and subdivided it for the building of
28
private homes. ^3 sadly, this scenario became the rule
rather than the exception during this century.
29
NOTES TO CHAPTER II
1. Phyllis C. Maier, Montgomery County: The Second
Hundred Years, volume 7 (Norristown, PA, 1983), 306.
2. Carl E. Doebley, Lower Merlon: A Portrait
(Montgomery County, 1976), 1.
3. Kenneth T. Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The
Suburbanization of the United States (New York, 1985).
4. Maier, 309.
5. E. Digby Baltzell, Philadelphia Gentlemen: The
Making of a National Upper Class (New York, 1958), 203.
6. Maier, 320.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Doebley, 6.
10. Betty Floyd, "Story of Maybrook Part 1" in Main
Line Chronicle. 23 February 1956.
11. Sandra L. Tatman and Roger W. Moss, Biographical
Dictionary of Philadelphia Architects (Boston, 1985).
12. Arnold Lewis, American Country Houses of the Gilded
Age (Mineola, NY, 1982), 20.
13.
Maier, 328.
14.
Lewis, 20.
15.
Maier, 326.
16.
Doebley, p. 6.
17.
Maier, 318.
18.
George E. Tho
George E. Thomas, "William Price: Builder of Men
and Buildings." (Ph.D. dissertation. University of
Pennsylvania, 1975), 94.
19. Franklin's Atlas of 1908.
30
NOTES TO CHAPTER 2, continued
20. Maier, 308.
21. Ibid., 323.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
31
CHAPTER III
SUBURBANIZATION ENCROACHES:
THE BREAK-UP OF THE ESTATES IN LOWER MERION
After World War I, estate-building slowed although
many properties were still assembled in the 1920s. The
imposition of an income tax in 1916 and the onset of the
Depression combined to end effectively the age of the great
estate, and the process of abandoning, selling or demolish-
ing the houses and developing their former grounds commenced.^
Meanwhile, as local train and trolley systems increased
their services and roads improved, the middle class exodus
from Philadelphia to the suburbs began. This, of course,
created a demand for new housing.
The variety of choices available to prospective home-
buyers in Lower Merion is seen in the Main Line Residential
and Business Directory for 1911-1912 in which a real estate
development near the Bala Cynwyd train station offered
thirty new houses ranging in price from $10,000 to
$80,000.2 jn 1908 and again in 1911, the Lower Merion
Realty Company commissioned Walter Mellor and Arthur Meigs
to design several modest homes in Bala Cynwyd.
The growing suburbanization and waning exclusiveness of
the township is reflected in the fact that in 1936, even
the Lower Merion Planning Commission issued a booklet enti-
tled "The Development of Real Estate in Lower Merion Town-
32
ship" to acquaint those interested in land subdivision with
principles that were proving successful at the tirae.^
In Wynnewood, for example, by 1920, developers such as
Mcllvain and Company owned many lots and built and sold
homes in the $10,000 range to middle class buyers. This
trend in home building persisted, slackening only during
the Depression and World War II, when labor and materials
were lacking.'^ Just before the Second War, one of the last
open areas in Wynnewood was the Shortridge tract, a 160-
acre property. When the war ended there was a building
explosion occured; for instance, 360 single homes were
built on the Shortridge tract in the span of a few years. ^
According to Charles G. Roach, Jr., managing partner of
Roach Brothers Realtors, a firm active in residential deve-
lopment in Lower Merion, the sale and development of estates
have happened "in a rather steady fashion since World War
II, and there may have been more of it going on in the last
twenty years. "^ Former Montgomery County planner Jeroldine
Hallberg agrees. Today, "very few [residents] fall into
the category of what you would call landed gentry." Most
of the large tracts were split in the 1950s and 1960s, and
now, according to Hallberg, "we're seeing the subdivision
of parcels divided then."'
Indeed, by 1970, less than four percent of the town-
ship's land was unused or in agricultural use. Neverthe-
33
less, there were still major undeveloped land holdings in
the northeastern portion comprising Villanova, Gladwyne,
and Bryn Mawr.^ In 1880, 5,287 people lived in the town-
ship; in 1980 about nine times that number. The population
density in 1884 was 266 persons per square mile; by 1980,
it was 2 , 556 . ^
Table 2 shows quite clearly that while twenty-two estates
comprised 100 or more acres in 1908, the peak of the estate-
building era, only six remained by 1937, and only three by
1948. Today, there are no 100-acre estates in Lower Merion
Township and only three estates (those of Anna Shinn Maier
of Bryn Mawr, and John Dorrance Jr. and Walter C. Pew of
Gladwyne) of more than fifty acres.
34
TABLE 2. --Patterns of Change in Estates
of 100 Acres or More in 1908 ^^
Number of Acres by Year
1908
1937
1948
"Bellevue Farm"
100
subdivided
---
"Brookfield Farm"
255
subdivided
"Brynntyddyn"
115
15
15
"Camp Discharge"
184
128
100
"Clairemont"
156
158
158
"Clover Hill"
173
171
subdivided
"Dolobran"
146
4
4
"Dipple"
100
subdivided
"Green Hill Farm"
170
subdivided
"Harriton"
145
175
174
"Highland Farm"
100
80
subdivided
"Idylwild Farm"
167
70
70
"Northwick"
164
32
32
"Pembroke Farm"
109
8
subdivided
"Pencoyd Farm"
111
31 under subdivision
"Penshurst"
564
539
subdivided
"Pleasant View Farm"
135
14
14
"Soaps tone Farm"
130
6
14
"The Red Rose"
243
194
subdivided
"Waverly Heights"
103
93
55
"Woodmont Park"
100
74
74
35
Today, houses and lots still remain large in Gladwyne,
Bryn Mawr, and Villanova, although estates are constantly
being subdivided. A study of a 1984 atlas reveals that
only twenty-seven properties of ten or more acres and
twenty-nine properties between five and ten acres survive.
Table 3 shows the location of these Lower Merion proper-
ties
11
TABLE 3. --Location and Number of Privately Owned Tracts
in Lower Merion Township of Five Acres or More in 1984 -^^
Gladwyne
18
Bryn Mawr
12
Villanova
10
Wynnewood
7
Penn Valley
5
Ardmore
2
Bala Cynwyd
1
Haverford
1
Table 4 suinmarizes the name of the owner, name of the
estate if one exists, town in which it is located, and
amount of acreage of the estates of five acres or more in
Lower Merion Township. As the information is based on a
1984 atlas, some estates may have been subdivided since
then.
36
TABLE 4--Privately Owned Estates of Five Acres
or More in Lower Merion Township in 1984 ^^
OWNER
ESTATE
1.
Pew, Walter
"Rolling Hil
2.
Dorrance, John C.
3.
Maier, Anna Shinn
"Harriton"
4.
Johnson, E. R. F.
5.
Edwards, Mrs. Arthur
"Afterall"
6.
Elliott, William
7.
Merriam, Jack
"Maybrook"
8.
Saunders, Dorothy
"Idlewild"
9.
Friedman, Milton
10.
Madeira, Louis
11.
Philler, Eleanor
12.
Davis, Mary
13.
McLean, E. B.
14.
Allen, Charles
15.
Read, R. B.
"Bryntyddyn"
16.
Winsor, William
" Hedge ly"
17.
Breyer, Henry
18.
Dietrich, William
"Sander ling"
19.
Perkins, Emily
20.
Tyson, John
21.
McNeely, George
ACREAGE
104
59
55
41
33
31
26
26
23
21
21
20
20
20
18
18
18
18
16
15
14
37
TABLE 4--continued
OWNER
ESTATE
ACREAGE
22. Vanderbilt, 0. De Gray
23. Pew, Alberta
24. Goodfarb, Louis
25. Tredennick, William
26. Macintosh, W. J.
27. Elliott, William
28. Rosengarten, A. H.
29. Fuller, Mae
30. Henry, Josephine
31. Annenberg, Walter
32. Denison, J. Morga
33. Satinsky, Robin
34. Ott, J. R.
35. Lewis, S. H.
36. Wood, John
37. Pew, Walter
38. Butcher, Howard
39. Mcllvain, E. L.
40. Tartarian, Araxy
41. Fitler, William
42. Harper, J. M.
43. Reuss, Katherine
"Rockycrest"
"Deanewood"
"Inwood"
"Briar Hill"
"Donglomur"
"Woodley"
"Meadowbank"
"Dove Mill House"
"Peny Bryn"
14
13
13
13
12
12
11
11
10
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
38
TABLE 4 — continued
OWNER
ESTATE
ACREAGE
44. Kuback, Richard
45. Rauch, F. B.
46. Spiesraan, Marjorie
47. Lownsbury, Elizabeth
48. Clarke, Rhoda
49. Reichel, Frank
50. Mitchell, J. Kearsley
51. Sharpies, Lawrence
52. De Sherbinin, Albert
53. Dimson, Irving
54. Scheetz, William
55. Archer, John Hoffman
56. Smoger, B. and M.
"Wooded Hill"
"Windswept"
"Framar"
"Hampton House"
"Kimberlea"
6
6
. 5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
39
Thus, of the dozens of estates that existed at the peak
of the estate-building era at the turn of the century, only
56 remain, more than half of which comprise less than ten
acres. These estates total 857 acres, have an average size
of 17,14 acres and a median size of thirteen acres.
There are several reasons for this dramatic transforma-
tion in land use in the township. First, most estates were
labor-intensive with large indoor and outdoor staffs de-
voted to the care and maintenance of the main house, con-
tents, grounds, and outbuildings. With the sharp decline
in immigration after World War II, the changing attitudes
of American labor toward service employment and the increa-
sing unionization of labor have risen while willingness to
work on estates in paternalistic relationships has diminished. ■^'^
Second, rising costs of maintenance have matched rising
labor costs. Residences meant to be expensive even in a
day of inexpensive materials have become almost prohibitive
to operate and repair. -^^
Third, taxes--income, estate and inheritance, and pro-
perty--have also caused financial drains on the estate
owner. It is increasingly difficult to pay inheritance
taxes, satisfy the demands of growing numbers of heirs and
simultaneously maintain a large property intact. The land
is often taxed on its best use--its potential for residen-
tial subdivision under local zoning ordinances--raising its
40
value to unsupportable levels and forcing the owner to
divide and sell, especially after a death. ^^
Finally, lifestyles and social attitudes have also
changed. The large upper class family unit with several
generations living together has become the exception, and
the retinue of servants and retainers that accompany it has
almost passed. Family members in recent generations often
scatter across the country, rejecting the patrician surroun-
dings of their grandparents and resenting the time and
responsibility it takes to administer an estate on
which they have no desire to reside. ■'■''' Huyler C. Held,
President of the Society for the Preservation of Long
Island Antiquities, explains:
The owners are often old and yearn for a
smaller and more compact establishment.
The children are dispersed, have their own
places and for one reason or another reject
the whole concept of maintaining a monument
to an out-of-date lifestyle, particularly
where this causes problems in meeting family
needs . ■^°
Charles Roach emphasizes, "It is the ability to main-
tain a 100-acre property that's more and more difficult
when combined with its increasing value over the last
twenty years." Roach said that the area, long a popular
residential retreat, has made gains in recent years because
of the arrival of "world-class office space" to the nearby
boom areas of King of Prussia and Great Valley.-'-^ Partly
because of this, local government planners and real estate
41
officials estimate that vacant land in Lower Merion is
worth between $200,000 and $250,000 an acre, depending on
improvements.^*^ Obviously, there is great incentive to
sell. 21
The gradual but steady progression of change can be
seen in the history of "Pencoyd," a Bala Cynwyd estate of
150 acres first settled by John Roberts in 1683 but exten-
sively altered and expanded by Frank Furness. (Illustra-
tions 17, 18). Pencoyd remained a working farm until 1929
and retained its rural setting through World War II. But
by the close of the 1950s, all of the land descended to
heirs or was sold, leaving only about twenty acres, bor-
dered by City Line Avenue, actually belonging to the es-
tate. The mansion was finally demolished in 1967 to make
way for the Decker Square shopping center. ^ 2
Continued use of a building for its original purpose is
frequently the most desirable and successful means of pre-
servation, but it is obvious that this is becoming increa-
singly unfeasible with large estates because of economic
pressures and societal changes. As a result of the inabi-
lity of their owners to maintain them in light of steadily
rising costs and development pressures, the role of the
estates of Lower Merion has been forced to change out of
necessity.
42
NOTES TO CHAPTER III
1. Phyllis C. Maier, Montgomery County: The Second
Hundred Years (Montgomery County, PA, 1976), 308.
2. Ibid.
3. Plan for Lower Merion Township (Montgomery County,
PA, 1937).
4. Maier, 327.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. "Fading Glory: Fewer Great Estates Able to Pay Price
of Greatness," Philadelphia Inquirer, 23 January 1986,
Neighbors Section, 3.
8. Ibid, 2.
9. Guidelines for Residential Development: An Element
of the Montgomery Comprehensive Plan (Montgomery County,
PA, 1978), A-52.
10. Ibid.
11. These figures were compiled from Franklin's Atlas
of 1984.
12. Ibid.
13. Ibid.
14. William C. Shopsin and Grania Bolton Marcus,
Saving Large Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977), 6.
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid., 6-7.
43
NOTES TO CHAPTER III, continued
19. Huyler Held in William C. Shopsin and Grania
Bolton Marcus, Saving Large Estates: Conservation, Historic
Preservation, Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977).
20. "Fading Glory: Fewer Great Estates Able to Pay
Price of Greatness," Philadelphia Inguirer. 23 January
1986, Neighbors Section, 4.
21. Ibid.
22. Interview with Sandra Handford, Director of the
Lower Merion Planning Department, 1 October 1986.
44
CHAPTER IV
DEALING WITH CHANGE: INSTITUTIONS AND SUBDIVISION
"Maybrook," the Wynnewood estate described in Chapter
II, is one of the most significant Lower Merion estates to
have survived to this day as a single-family home. Even at
"Maybrook," however, adaptations have been made. When
owner Henry Gibson died, it was left to his daughter who
was then only twenty-two. In the 1930s, part of the land
surrounding the house was given to the township to create a
parking lot for the nearby Wynnewood train station.
During the housing shortage of World War II, Mary
Gibson moved into the estate's carriage house and allowed
six GIs and their families to live in the main house. Ten
acres, and then another seventeen, were sold to Jack
Merriam, who then built the adjacent Thomas Wynne Apart-
ments. Miss Gibson, who continued to live in the carriage
house, finally sold "Maybrook" to Merriam in 1956 when she
was eighty-one. Merriam still owns the mansion and twenty-
six acres that remain, but has closed off the first floor
and resides above.
The situation at "Maybrook," in which the mansion re-
mains in private hands, well-preserved and still surrounded
by a large tract of land, is very unusual. More tradition-
ally, owners have solved the problem of how to dispose of
their estates in two different ways. One approach has been
45
to donate the estate to a worthy institution such as a
religious or private school, usually with an endowment for
support. This method serves to remove the property from
the tax rolls. ■'■ The Lower Main Line YMCA, for instance, is
currently investigating the possibility of relocating to
"Maybrook" because of its shortage of space and the obvious
desirability the estate's twenty-six acres provide.
The Northeastern Christian Junior College in Rosemont
uses a mansion designed by Horace Trumbauer as its central
building, Boone Hall. "Clairemont Farm," once surrounded
by 250 acres, was designed by Trumbauer in 1910 for Joseph
Gillingham, (Illustration 19). Morris L. Clothier, head of
the Strawbridge and Clothier department store chain, owned
the estate from 1922 to 1947. ^ Now on a twenty-four acre
tract, "Clairemont Farm" was purchased in 1957 by members
of the Churches of Christ, a group which maintains it
adequately and has made few changes, except adding a ramp
for the handicapped, to its exterior.
Isaac Clothier, a member of the same family, built
"Ballytore" in Wynnewood in 1881. (Illustration 20). It
remained his home until 1933, when it was sold to the Agnes
Irwin School for Girls. -^ In 1962, the building became the
Armenian Church of St. Sahag and St. Mesrob and a poorly-
designed annex was added. Most recently, the house's ori-
ginal porte cochere was demolished. (Illustration 21).
46
The examples of institutional conversions in Lower
Merion Township are numerous. The Wistar Morris mansion,
"Green Hills," was adapted to serve as the campus of the
Friends Central School. A hotel. Green Hill Farms, now the
Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary, occupied a portion of
the land. "Rathalla," the Joseph Sinnott house discussed
previously, since 1924 has thrived as the centerpiece of
the Rosemont College campus. Two neighboring mansions are
used for the school and convent of the Sisters of the Holy
Child Jesus. One of these, on Montgomery Avenue, was
formerly the William Joyce residence, designed in 1891 by
T. P. Chandler. (Illustration 22).
"Woodmont, " the William Price-designed estate in Glad-
wyne, was purchased in 1929 by J. Hector McNeal, a corpora-
tion lawyer and noted horseman, who modernized it. By
1953, the house was vacant and the land reduced to seventy-
three acres. It was sold for $75,000 to Father Divine's
Palace Mission Movement, renamed "Mount of the House of the
Lord," and designated world headguarters of the movement.'*
Mother Divine, who lives at "Woodmont," and a small number
of followers of her late husband anticipate that the "Se-
cond Coming" will take place at the estate. Happily, the
house is superbly maintained and appears much as it did
during McNeal 's ownership.
47
However, difficulties with the conversion from private
home to institutional headquarters can arise. First, the
structure may undergo changes to both the interior and
exterior which allow it to adapt to the institution's needs
but threaten its architectural integrity. Second, the
concept of appropriate use is nebulous. For example, even
though a proposed institutional adaptation may require no
major structural changes and may best preserve the archi-
tectural character of the property and its landscaped sur-
roundings, the neighbors may find it totally unacceptable--
a potential threat to their property values and an unfortu-
nate precedent in the community.^
This conflict occurred on the ninety-acre Foerderer
tract in Gladwyne, part of the former 250-acre estate of
leather tycoon Percival Foerderer, who in the 1920s built
his hacienda-like mansion, "La Ronda." It was left to
nearby Villanova University with the intention that the
house be used as a conference center. The plans were
abandoned, however, because of overwhelming neighborhood
objection to the increased traffic and activity that would
have resulted. ° In this situation, what may have been
appropriate in preservation terms was not appropriate in a
social sense.
More problematic is the fact that institutional use is
clearly not a feasible solution for every remaining estate;
48
there are more estates than there are institutions able to
assume the exorbitant cost of their upkeep. Local govern-
ments can no longer rely on schools, religious groups, and
other institutions to assume the burden of sustaining these
properties. Furthermore, the institutionalization of an
estate is only a temporary solution. The Palace Mission
movement which uses "Woodmont" as its headquarters, for
instance, faces a steady decline in its membership. What
plans now exist for the inevitable vacancy of this house
and grounds? The answer, alarmingly, is none.
The second common method of breaking up estates involves
selling off the acreage surrounding the house for residen-
tial subdivision or commercial use, while retaining the
main residence on a reduced plot. (Illustration 23). The
conventional subdivision into parcels suitable for single-
family homes, described in the previous chapter, was, in
the past, the only option to those interested in this
method.
Selling the land for subdivision, however, often
threatens the character of both the community and the house
itself. As William Shopsin explains, "succumbing to the
temptation to consider the mansion a white elephant and
carving out the surrounding acreage often leaves the main
house stranded on a plot of land too small to do its size
any justice."' Piecemeal subdivision without adequate
49
consideration given to design controls, site placement,
choice of materials and quality of construction can often
result in exploitive tract housing or an odd assortment of
new structures encroaching on the original mansion to the
detriment of the entire ensemble. ^
In 1973, Lower Merion Township enacted a Planned Resi-
dential Development (P.R.D) amendment to its zoning code in
an effort to prevent the sprawl that can result from con-
ventional subdivision and instead encourage well-planned
developments on tracts of fifty acres or more. In 1980,
the township approved plans by the Realty Engineering Com-
pany to build the first P.R.D. , a cluster of 107 town-
houses, each to cost about $275,000, adjacent to "La Ron-
da," the Foerderer house off Mount Pleasant Road in Glad-
wyne. (Illustration 24).
Though in principle, planned development is preferable
to conventional, haphazard subdivision, serious problems
still arose. Because the condominiums are clustered toge-
ther, large portions of the land remain as open space. Yet
the development that resulted, the "Hermitage," is disap-
pointing in its integration of the new townhouses with the
existing Foerderer house. Architecturally, no attempt is
made to create either a successful cohesion or dialogue
between old and new. The new homes are stylistically
nondescript where they might have ref erred--through mate-
50
rials, scale, and architectural details--to "La Ronda."
More alarming, however, was the disregard for the exis-
ting landscape which allowed virtually all of the estate's
trees to be cut down. In their place, giant boulders were
substituted, and the essential character of the estate's
natural landscape was lost. (Illustration 25). When dri-
ving through this area, one has the curious sensation of
being in a misplaced suburban neighborhood in the Southwest
rather than in Main Line Philadelphia. Somewhat ironical-
ly, Hal Davis of Realty Engineering Company describes the
Hermitage as offering "the quality, amenities and privacy
of a Main Line mansion on a smaller scale. "^
Another recently completed P.R.D. is "Wrenfield" on
Spring Mill Road in Bryn Mawr . The site is one on which
Dr. and Mrs. Frank Ryckel reside in "Framar," a Jacobean-
mode home which was originally the estate of the Luden
(cough drop) family. (Illustration 26). Here, the overall
scheme, again with clustered luxury houses, is far more
effective in its integration of new construction adjacent
to the existing mansion. There are several reasons for its
success .
First, the Ryckel family took an active role in preser-
ving the integrity of their property by collaberating with
the architect, landscape architect and developer, the Li-
shon Construction Company. The Ryckels' arrangement in-
51
eluded provisions that they would retain "Framar" on a
five-acre tract and that few trees and other natural fea-
tures of the landscape would be destroyed to construct the
new homes. ■'■'^ (Illustration 27).
Additionally, the homes closest to the Ryckel house are
attached so that their overall scale is consistent with the
great scale of the house; the smaller, single-family de-
tached homes are further removed from "Framar." Finally,
the homes, which are priced at $500,000 and up, are designed
with materials and a general form which complement the
Ryckel home. The roof pitch, fenestration and other archi-
tectural treatments allow the new homes to coexist in an
arrangement that flatters both the old and the new. (Illus-
tration 28 ) .
An alternate provision that Lower Merion Township has
added to its zoning code is the option for developers to
construct what is known as a life-care community. Life-
care communities for the elderly, which require substantial
entry fees and additional monthly fees, provide housing,
meals, activities, and, if the resident becomes ill, long-
term nursing care at no extra charge. There are about 7 00
such communities around the country, but the largest con-
centration--thirty-six--is in the Philadelphia region. ^^
Two of these facilities are located in Lower Merion
Township and both utilize estates as their development
52
site. The older of the two, "Waver ly Heights," takes its
name from the estate on which it was built, the 103-acre
Gladwyne property of Pennsylvania Railroad president Samuel
Rea. In 1982, then-owner Ruth Junkin sold the entire
estate to the developers of the life-care facility.
The developers of "Waverly Heights" have very effec-
tively used the mansion as a community center for the
residents. Because of the placement of the new buildings,
to the side and rear of the house, and the house's loca-
tion--the first building one encounters when arriving by
car--the house maintains a prominent role by serving as a
center and a symbolic home for the facility as a whole.
(Illustration 29). Further, the house remains essentially
unchanged on the exterior with the new facilities discreet-
ly attached, using similar materials and scale. Like
"Wrenfield," the new buildings were designed in a manner
sympathetic to the house with many of the existing trees
retained. (Illustration 30).
Another life-care complex currently under construction,
on the other hand, exploits unnecessarily the estate on
which it is located. "Beaumont" in Bryn Mawr was the 1912
mansion of another Pennsylvania Railroad president, William
L. Austin. (Illustration 31). Conveying stability and
masssiveness in its stony exterior, it is a quintessential
Gilded Age mansion. The magnificent interior still fea-
53
tures built-in carved furniture, original light fixtures,
and frescoed walls and ceilings which are in dire need of
restoration. The music room contains a pipe organ.
Inexplicably, the developer, Arthur Wheeler, has en-
dorsed a design for his complex which will irrevocably
destroy rather than enhance the Austin mansion. Where he
could have created a meaningful center for the facility by
capitalizing on the existing house, as achieved at "Waverly
Heights," the Austin house is instead surrounded on all
sides by new construction, and all but invisible from the
exterior. (Illustration 32). Unsympathetic additions and a
non-hierarchical layout of the new housing units have obli-
terated the original integrity and siting of the once-grand
home. {Illustration 33).
Construction at the site, which was heavily wooded,
(illustration 34) began in 1986 and is scheduled for com-
pletion in the fall of 1987. The thick forest that once
covered the property has been almost completely cut down;
according to Wheeler, thirty acres of trees were removed to
clear the site for construction. ^^ Li]^e "Waverly
Heights," the house itself will become a community center
for the residents. What remains to be seen is to what
extent the interior spaces will be restored. Currently,
many of the rooms are serving as storage areas for the
construction supplies, a use which has seriously damaged
54
many of the wood floors. Clearly, this development is not
being executed with sensitivity and respect to the Austin
estate.
55
NOTES FOR CHAPTER IV
1. William C. Shopsin and Grania Bolton Marcus, Saving
Large Estates; Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977), 7.
2. Phyllis C. Maier, Montgomery County: The Next Two
Hundred Years (Montgomery County, PA, 1977), 327.
3. Ibid., 328.
4. Ibid., 318.
5. Shopsin and Marcus, 32.
6. Maier, 319.
7. Shopsin and Marcus, 7.
8. Ibid.
9. Philadelphia Inquirer, 17 October 1986, 15.
10. Interview with Sandra Handford, Director of the
Lower Merion Township Planning Department, 1 October 1986.
11. "A Growing Role for Life-care Communities,"
Philadelphia Inquirer, 15 January 1987, 2.
12. Interview with Arthur Wheeler, October 1986.
56
CHAPTER V
PRESERVATION POLICY IN LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP
In 1939, the Lower Merion Planning Conunission wrote,
"The charm of the township is in its open character. Wise
planning will help to retain this charm even though the
density of population is considerably increased."-^ The
solutions described in the preceding chapter indicate that
the land use planning and preservation techniques currently
available do not adequately protect the few properties
which remain. An analysis of the solutions which have been
employed in the past--institutionalization as with "Wood-
mont", allowing the free marketplace to control develop-
ment, as with "Pencoyd" , or imposing limited restrictions
on development, as at "Beaumont" --can only lead to the
conclusion that they are not consistently adequate in
ensuring the welfare of the estates.
What is needed is the implementation by the township
of creative but focused solutions which relieve the owners
of the burden of the estate while simultaneously preserving
the character, architectural integrity and local traditions
of their properties. It is important to examine the tools
currently available to Lower Merion Township in greater
detail in order to understand their inadequacy in protec-
ting the local Gilded Age estates.
57
In general, local government's role in historic pre-
servation takes one of two forms. It can be a direct
exercise of the government's police powers, as with an
historic district ordinance, or it can provide incentives
for historic preservation, such as through special zoning
provisions. Historic district laws have been the most
visible form of local regulation in recent years. ^ Penn-
sylvania enacted a statewide historic district enabling act
in 1961. Act 167 authorizes all municipalities to create
historic districts within their boundaries and to appoint
boards of historical architectural review to oversee "the
erection, reconstruction, alteration, restoration, demoli-
tion, or razing" of buildings within the districts.^
Lower Merion currently has three historic districts--
Harriton in Bryn Mawr and Mill Creek and Merion Square in
Gladwyne. Its Board of Historical Architectural Review
(BOHAR) , a seven-member board appointed in 19 8 0 by the
township's Board of Commissioners, is responsible for re-
viewing exterior change, signage, and new construction to
structures within the districts. Recommendations of the
Board are considered by the township's Building and Plan-
ning Commission.
The Board of Historical Architectural Review is
presently compiling an inventory of historic structures
within the township, using the same criteria adopted by the
58
National Register of Historic Places.'^ Surveys such as this
can act as a crucial historic preservation tool by dis-
covering and promoting public awareness of overlooked estates
and by aiding the Planning Commission in establishing its
comprehensive planning and zoning. A community that has
both surveyed and established priorities for its resources
is better equipped to make intelligent decisions about
public expenditures to preserve these resources. Yet Lower
Merion Review Board Chairman Robert De Silets admits that
because of a lack of manpower, the township's resources are
not yet exhaustively surveyed.^ The result is that many of
the Gilded Age estates are not listed, although clearly,
many would qualify based on the National Register criteria.
The estates listed on neither the local nor National
Registers include "Afterall," the Arthur Edwards house
surrounded by thirty-two acres in Rosemont, "La Ronda," the
Foerderer mansion in Gladwyne, "Framar," the Reichel house
in Bryn Mawr , and "Bryntydden, " a house near "Woodmont" in
Gladwyne built by another member of the Wood family. The
omission of these and other mansions allows them to exist
unrecognized both by the public and by legislators.
Another serious shortcoming with the existing legisla-
tion is that most architecturally significant buildings do
not lie within geographically-defined historic districts.
Gilded Age estates are scattered throughout Lower Merion,
59
yet enabling legislation does not allow the municipality to
protect individual landmarks. Until the necessary legisla-
tion is enacted, no township agency has the authorization
to designate individual landmarks to control their preser-
vation. °
Furthermore, the establishment of historic district
controls allows a municipality like Lower Merion to over-
look a fundamental item: the appropriateness of its under-
lying zoning code to the achievement of historic preserva-
tion objectives. As stated in the Brandywine Conservancy's
Protecting Historic Properties,
Historic preservation has rarely been addressed
in suburban areas in the zoning code revision
process. As a consequence, municipal officials
are often reluctant to allow changes to accomodate
a particular property owner when there is
inadequate time to consider long-term
ramifications . '
If a thorough historic survey were reviewed during the
updating of comprehensive plans and of zoning codes, appro-
priate zoning regulations could then be drafted.
Zoning, of course, is the tool most widely used in
suburban communities to regulate land use. Lower Merion' s
zoning ordinance, originally written in 1927, was compre-
hensively revised in 1979. It provides for ten residential
zones, ranging in density from .4 units per acre (R-AA) to
17.4 units per acre (R-7). Nearly all of the remaining
estates of five acres or more are in zones of R-A or R-AA,
60
the two highest categories. °
Lower Merion planners restrict development through
zoning ordinances which confine commercial buildings to
Lancaster Avenue and City Line Avenue, while devoting Mont-
gomery Avenue west of Narberth to apartment houses and
townhouses. To allow for the reuse of mansions which are
too large for single-family use, the township does allow,
by special exception, division of a dwelling into more than
one dwelling unit--even in an area that only permits con-
struction of single-family detached dwellings. For the
same reason, institutions are also permitted by special
exception in residential areas.
But because this provision is allowed by special
exception, rather than by right, the burden of proof is on
the developer to prove that the conversion is not contrary
to public interest.^ Obviously, developers are dissuaded
from attempting such a conversion if each time they are
forced to challenge the neighbors, often hostile and in
great numbers, who fear that the conversion will lower
their property values, create traffic problems, and encou-
rage habitation by college students from nearby universi-
ties.
Planned residential development, discussed in the last
chapter, allows for cluster development on parcels of land
with a minimum of twenty-five acres. It usually serves as
61
a means of preserving more open space and natural amenities
than would single-family developments. In February of
1987, however, a special ad hoc zoning committee of the
Lower Merion Township Board of Commissioners approved chan-
ges to the zoning codes that will reduce the density for
planned residential developments.
Under prior density rules, developers who built mul-
tifamily projects were permitted 1.25 units per acre in
both the R-A and R-AA zones. For single-family houses, the
R-A zones allowed one unit per acre; in the R-AA zone two
acres per house were required. It was felt that as a
result, developers were encouraged to build pockets of
dense multifamily housing in areas, particularly in Glad-
wyne, characterized by single-family houses on large
tracts.-'-'^ Under the new regulations, the density will
remain the same in the R-A district, but will be reduced by
nearly half in the R-AA zones. In adopting a new formula
to determine the density of multifamily developments, the
board reduced the number of units permitted in the large
open areas of the township. The new formula does, however,
include a twenty-five percent density bonus for multifamily
construction over what would be permitted for single-family
homes .
Those on the Board cited stopping the development of
estates in ways consistent with the zoning, but uncharac-
62
teristic of the neighborhood, as a motivating factor in
changing the ordinance, -^^ but curiously, the Board of His-
torical Architectural Review played no part, even in an
advisory capacity, in the zoning change process. At no
time was its historic structures inventory ever eva-
luated. ■'-^ Additionally, several developers say that the
new density reductions will only serve to discourage
developers from creating multifamily houses.
Peter Simone, a land planner representing Walter Pew,
whose 104-acre Gladwyne estate is the township's largest
privately-owned undeveloped tract, said that the multifami-
ly provisions are now overly restrictive. ■'■^ Overly re-
strictive zoning may prevent the creative reuse of large
estates or the innovative development of the property. A
one-acre subdivision designed without regard to the origi-
nal landscaping features and the natural contours of the
property may be much more destructive of the character of
the original estate and community than a well-planned, but
denser, cluster development . ■'■^
Thus, while historic neighborhoods in cities often
have problems relating to permissive zoning codes which
allow overly intensive use of buildings, it is ironic that
quite the opposite problem arises in suburban communities
such as Lower Merion, where the zoning is overly restric-
tive. A nonresidential use that would permit rehabilita-
63
tion of the buildings and grounds with only minimal impact
on the neighborhood is not permitted by right in the zoning
code. Similarly, where the only economically feasible
means of restoring a "white elephant" mansion is by split-
ting it into several dwelling units, zoning regulations
discourage conversions of this type.
64
NOTES FOR CHAPTER V
1. Plan for Lower Merion Township (Montgomery County,
PA, April 1937) .
2 . Protecting Historic Properties: A Guide to
Research and Preservation ( Chadds Ford, PA, 1984), 80.
3. Ibid.
4. Historical and Architectural Inventory: List of
Accepted Resources (Lower Merion Township, 1987).
5. Interview with Robert De Silets, Chairman, Lower
Merion Township Board of Historical Architectural Review,
2 March 1987.
6. House Bill 1308, enabling municipalities to
designate individual landmarks, was defeated in 1985.
Lower Merion Township's HAARB could, however, propose the
creation of a thematic historic district, the theme being
"Gilded Age Estates."
7 . Protecting Historic Properties: A Guide to Research
and Preservation.
8. Zoning and Zoning Hearing Board (Code of the
Township of Lower Merion, 1986), chaps. 155 and A 172.
9. Ibid.
10. "Changes to Zoning Code Could Limit Development,"
Philadelphia Inguirer, February 1986.
11. "Ad Hoc Zoning Committee Sets Goals," Main Line
Times, 25 September 19 86, 3.
12. Interview with Robert De Silets, 2 March 1987.
13. Philadelphia Inguirer, February 1987.
14. William C. Shopsin and Grania Bolton Marcus,
Saving Large Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977).
65
CONCLUSION:
PRESERVATION STRATEGIES TO GUIDE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
It is clear that many of the few remaining Gilded Age
estates are highly significant elements of the architectu-
ral and historical heritage of Lower Merion Township.
Their preservation is of critical and immediate importance
as their numbers rapidly dwindle. Yet as William C. Shop-
sin explains in his Saving Large Estates,
Sophisticated urban planning concepts and
complex design control mechanisms are often
anathema to suburban and rural communites.
Yet the residents of such communities may
also express considerable alarm at the urban
sprawl and speculation afflicting the once
bucolic and sparsely populated countryside.
Many fiercely independent suburban residents
cling to the conviction that the rights of
property are inviolate. .. and may not
understand that unfettered privatisra and
lack of regulation have contributed to
the result they deplore. If we are to
achieve any success in saving large estates,
much of the traditional antipathy of small
communities to planning and controls will
have to be modified. •'■
The existing zoning and historic preservation mechanisms in
Lower Merion Township are plagued by the problems he de-
scribes. The various local controls are not coordinated to
the common goal of safeguarding the welfare of some of
Lower Merlon's most valuable resources, its country es-
tates. What is needed is a provision in the existing
zoning code which directly confronts the problem of what to
do with the few remaining large properties.
66
An examination of the different methods of reuse leads
to the conclusion that the best hope for these grand homes,
which have outlived their use as single-family residences,
is to convert them into multi-family dwellings. As indi-
cated in the last chapter, conversion of estates for insti-
tutional use, such as schools and life-care facilities, is
not a realistic solution for the plight of every large
estate.
Instead, condominium conversions must be promoted. In
order to illustrate the potential of this method, the third
largest privately-owned tract in the township serves as an
excellent example. The parents-in-law of architectural
historian George E. Thomas live with their siblings at
"Harriton" (illustration 35), a fifty-five acre Bryn Mawr
estate off Old Gulph Road (of no connection to the "Harri-
ton Historic District", also in Bryn Mawr). All those now
living at "Harriton" are approaching old age, and Dr.
Thomas says that none of the next generation has a desire
to bear the burden of maintaining the estate. He believes
that the main house, which has eighteen rooms, might lend
itself to being divided into three condominiums, each with
two or three bedrooms. Other units could be added away
from the main house, and the existing outbuildings, inclu-
ding a barn, could be converted into facilities shared in
common by the residents.
67
Conversions of this type have been successfully
achieved in many communities, including Chestnut Hill in
northwest Philadelphia, where a 1883 Wilson Eyre-designed
house, "Anglecot," the Charles Potter residence, was di-
vided into condominiums by developer Richard Snowden. From
the exterior, the house remains essentially unaltered from
its appearance as a single-family dwelling. Attached ga-
rages added behind complement the Shingle Style mode of the
house. Only on its interior does one discover that the
house, because of a well-planned and well-executed conver-
sion, has a renewed purpose for the future.
One of the first mansions where this type of conversion
was successfully treated is "Guernsey Hall," a Princeton,
New Jersey mansion designed by John Notman. "Guernsey
Hall" came up for sale in 1970 after the death of its last
private owner. Architect William Short believed that a
multiple dwelling would be the most feasible way to save
the landinark, and he formed a corporation with eight other
investors called Guernsey Hall, Inc., with the intent of
purchasing the property for conversion to a multifamily
dwelling under a condominium form of ownership.
The mansion is located in an area of Princeton zoned
for single-family detached houses on large lots, and there
were complaints that the condominiums would be the catalyst
for turning other large and historic houses into apart-
68
ments--a precedent which some neighbors felt would begin
the area's decline. Nevertheless, Short was able to con-
vince the local zoning board that his development plan for
the mansion merited a zoning variance, and Guernsey Hall,
Inc. took possession in 1972.^
The two overriding design objectives of Short, who
served as architect for his own project, were to save the
residence and keep as many of the original details as
possible.-^ Interior reconstruction consisted of dividing
the forty-two rooms into six apartments. The last unit was
occupied in July 1974. With the exception of improved main
entrance security, an elevator and two new garages, the
mansion looks much as it did at the turn of the century.
Situated on an extensively landscaped site, the mansion
contains parking for residents and guests and a formal
garden. The garden, which is held in common by the resi-
dents, is maintained by a caretaker. No trees were re-
moved, so the site remains heavily wooded.
By all accounts the conversion has been a success.
Even taxes collected at "Guernsey Hall" exceed the taxes
that would be levied if five single-family houses had
instead been built. In addition, the reuse plan created
less of a burden on city services, such as roads and se-
wars, than would have five single-family dwellings.'^
In order to encourage and facilitate conversions of
69
this type in Lower Merion, there could be a clear-cut
provision incorporated into the code, perhaps called an
"Historic Structure Planned Residential Development Ordi-
nance," which provides for special subdivision of certain
historically-significant houses and their grounds of five
acres or more. The determination as to which estates are
worthy of this treatment could be based on the National
Register criteria which are already used by the local Board
of Historical Architectural Review.
Once this designation has been made, the zoning code
could allow, by right, the dividing up of the mansions into
multiple dwellings, each with independent mechanical sy-
stems and proper f ireproof ing, and the carefully controlled
development of the surrounding grounds. General criteria
followed by the legislative body charged with overseeing
the development could comprise these points: the changes to
the estate must be as invisible as possible, the design of
new units should be compatible with the old, and new mate-
rials should blend sympathetically with the old.^
There could also be strictly controlled requirements as
to the density of the new units and their placement in
relation to the main house, to ensure that enough space
remains to preserve the house's character. The ordinance
must encourage the reuse of as many of the estate's out-
buildings as possible and the placement of any new housing
70
near the perimeter of the tract. The extent to which trees
are allowed to be razed to contract the new units could
also be stipulated.
Part of the income derived from the development could
be designated toward endowing the house, and the condomi-
nium owners could share an interest in the land surrounding
it. The value of the new units can be required to be
comparable to the value of adjacent houses so that neigh-
boring property values would not be adversely affected.
Additionally, facade and open space easements could be
arranged with such easement-holding organizations as the
Brandywine Conservancy and the Natural Lands Trust.
In summary, then. Lower Merion Township must:
1. recognize significant estates by adding them to its
Historic Structures Inventory and possibly creating a
thematic "Gilded Age Estate Historic District;"
2. evaluate the solutions outlined above for the reuse of
those estates that are succeptible to development
pressures, and propose these solutions to estate-owners
and developers;
3. prepare an amendment to its zoning ordinance; and
4. educate the community about the cultural significance of
its mansions and open spaces.
71
The time has come for Lower Merion Township, like a
rising number of municipalities faced with similar situa-
tions, to recognize the value of one of one of its chief
cultural resources: its Gilded Age estates. These mansions
and great tracts of open space gave "Main Line" Lower
Merion its distinctive character and reputation--a reputa-
tion which has encouraged its appeal and current develop-
ment pressures. The Gilded Age estates endow their land-
scape with great richness; they must not be allowed to be
swallowed up by suburbanization.
72
NOTES TO CONCLUSION
1. William C. Shopsin and Crania Bolton Marcus, Saving
Large Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation,
Adaptive Reuse (Setauket, NY, 1977), 32.
2. "Economic Analyses of Adaptive Use Projects:
Guernsey Hall." Information pamphlet. National Trust for
Historic Preservation. Washington, D.C., 1976.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. Shopsin and Marcus, 32.
73
ILLUSTRATIONS
74
JLOWER MERION
fVli-'Tiii 'fi— iTlf hr t-'"-^--^-fa--< "- — t-ijc^— itJ
1. JOHN LEVERING 'S 1851 MAP OF LOWER MERION TOWNSHIP.
The boundary dividing Lower Merion from Philadelphia is at extreme right.
2. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD OFFICIALS, 1901.
Top left: Alexander Cassatt of "Cheswold." Bottom left: Samuel Rea of "Waverly Heights.
75
3. CHESWOLD, Alexander Cassatt residence, Haverford, Pa. Demolished.
4. DOLOBRAN, Clement Grlscom residence, Haverford, Pa.
76
5. TY'N-Y-COED, Effingham Morris residence, Arditiore, Pa.
6. RESTROVER, Samuel B. Brown residence, Haverford, Pa. Demolished.
77
7. INGEBORG, Williaiti Simpson Jr. residence, Wynnewood, Pa. Demolished.
8. REDSTONE, Rosemont, Pa., 1901. Demolished.
9. LA RONDA, Percival Foerderer residence, Gladwyne, Pa.
10. WAVERLY HEIGHTS, Samuel Rea residence, Gladwyne, Pa.
79
11. MAYBROOK, Henry Gibson residence, Wynnewood, Pa., 1886.
12. 1946 ATLAS VIEW OF MAYBROOK, Wynnewood, Pa.
80
13. BRIAR CREST, William Henry Maule residence, Villanova, PA., 1901. Demolished.
14. RATHALLA, Joseph Sinnott residence, Rosemont, Pa.
81
i
"J
HP
mtHmtlk^
IRhH
. .flJ^ij
'■^11^.
15. WOODMONT, Alan Wood Jr. residence, Gladwyne, Pa.
16. 1908 ATLAS VIEW OF PENSHURST, Perm Valley, Pa. Demolished.
17. PENCOYD, John Roberts residence, Bala Cynwyd, Pa., 1878. Demolished.
*>. _.
18. PENCOYD, 1915, after alterations by Frank Fumess
83
19. CLAIREMONT FARM, Villanova, Pa., now Northeastern Christian Junior College.
0. 1 -W^W&t
,iJ''*^
0§§
-.»^
"^"^i
20. BALLYTORE, Isaac Clothier residence, Wynnewood, Pa., 1886.
84
21. BALLYTORE, now the Armenian Church of St. Sahag and St. Mesrob.
22. WILLIAM JOYCE RESIDENCE, Rosemont, Pa., now Convent of the Sisters of the Holy Child Jesus.
23. SUBDIVISION, Villanova, Pa., 1987.
24. 1946 ATLAS VIEW OF LA RONDA, Gladwyne, Pa.
86
25. THE HERMITAGE, Gladwyne, Pa. Boulders were substituted for the trees that were cut
down.
•r*«^V#t~?: -r t.'
■**^^fi*S&^^jpfsg^«^
26. FRAMAR, Frank Ryckel residence, Gladwyne) Pa.
87
27. WRENFIELD, Gladwyne, Pa. Ryckel estate is in background.
'^%^
28. WRENFIELD. New attached dwellings.
29. WAVERLY HEIGHTS, Gladwyne, Pa. Original mansion on right; new units on left.
30. WAVERLY HEIGHTS. New life-care facilities.
89
m// ,
Zf^'K-
31. 1946 ATLAS VIEW OF BEAUMONT, William Austin estate, Bryn Mawr, Pa.
32. BEAUMONT. Model showing Austin mansion in the center of new complex.
90
33. BEAUMONT. Life-care faciities under construction in October, 1986.
34. AERIAL VIEW OF BEAUMONT BEFORE DEVELOPMENT. Grounds were once densely wooded.
91
35. HARRITON, Anna Shinn Maier estate, Bryn Mawr, Pa.
92
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andrews, Wayne. Architecture, Ambition and Americans. New
York, 1947.
Baker, Paul R. Richard Morris Hunt. Cambridge, MA, 1980.
Baltzell, E. Digby. Puritan Boston and Quaker Philadelphia,
New York, 1979.
Becker, Gloria 0. Gladwyne Historic Preservation Study.
Privately printed, 1980.
Cable, Mary. Top Drawer: American High Society from the
Gilded Age to the Roaring Twenties. New York, 1984.
Chase, David. "Superb Privacies" in Architecture of
Richard Morris Hunt. Susan R. Stein, ed. Chicago,
1985.
Closs, Christopher W. Preserving Large Estates.
Information Series: National Trust for Historic
Preservation. Washington, D.C.: Preservation Press,
1982.
De Silets, Robert. Lower Merion Township Board of '
Historical Architectural Review, Ardmore, PA.
Interview, 2 March 1987.
Doebley, Carl E. Lower Merion--A Portrait. Montgomery
County: Lower Merion Historical Society, 1976.
Feree, Barr. American Estates and Gardens. New York,
1904.
Fitch, James Marston. American Building I: The Historical
Forces that Shaped It. Boston, 1966.
"Guernsey Hall: Economic Analysis of Adaptive Use
Projects," Information Series: National Trust for
Historic Preservation, 1975.
Godkin, E.L. "The Expenditure of Rich Men" in Scribner ' s
Magazine 20, no. 4, October 1895.
Guidelines for Residential Development: An Element of the
Montgomery County Comprehensive Plan. Montgomery
County: Montgomery County Planning Commission, 1978.
93
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY, continued
Hanford, Sandra. Lower Merion Township Planning
Department, Ardmore, PA. Interview, 1 October 1985.
Jackson, Kenneth T. Crabgrass Frontier: The
Suburbanization of the United States. New York,
1985.
James, Henry. The American Scene. New York, 1907.
King, Moses. Philadelphia and Notable Philadelphians. New
York, 1901.
Lee, Joseph. "Expensive Living, the Blight on America" in
New England Magazine 18, March 1890,
Lewis, Arnold. American Country Houses of the Gilded Age.
Mineola, NY, 1982. (Republication of pictorial
material from Artistic Country-Seats : Types of
Recent American Villa and Cottage Architecture with
Instances of Country Club-Houses, by George William
Sheldon (New York, 1886- 87).
Maher, James T. Twilight of Splendor. -Boston, 1975.
Longstreth, Richard W. A Survey of Architecture in
Philadelphia. Privately printed, 1968.
"Lower Merion Planning Commission Developable Land Survey."
Ardmore, PA, 1986.
Lower Merion Township, PA. Zoning and Hearing Board, from
the Code (1986), chapters 155 and A 172.
"Lower Merion Land Use Survey," Montgomery County Planning
Commission, February, 1987.
Maier, Phyllis in Montgomery County: The Second Hundred
Years. Volume 7. Norristown, PA: Montgomery County
Federation of Historical Societies, 1983.
"Montgomery County Planning Commission Inventory of
Historic and Cultural Resources," 1975.
Plan for Lower Merion Township. Montgomery County, PA:
Planning Commission, April 1937.
94
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY, continued
Randall, Monica. The Mansions of Long Island's Gold Coast.
New York, 1979.
Roth, Leland M. McKim, Mead and White, Architects. New
York, 1983.
Scully, Vincent J. Jr. The Architectural Heritage of
Newport. New York, 1967.
Shingle Style and the Stick Style. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1955
Shopsin, William C. and Grania Bolton Marcus. Saving Large
Estates: Conservation, Historic Preservation, Adaptive
Reuse. Setauket, N.Y.: Society for the Preservation
for Long Island Antiquities, 1977.
Sobin, Dennis P. Dynamics of Community Change: the Case of
Long Island's Declining "Gold Coast." New York, 1968.
Tatman, Sandra L. and Roger W. Moss. Biographical
Dictionary of Philadelphia Architects. Boston, 1985.
Thomas, George E. "Architectural Patronage and Social
Stratification in Philadelphia Between 1840 and 1920" in
The Divided Metropolis. William Cutler and Howard
Gillette, eds . Westport, CN. , 1980.
"William Price: Builder of Men and
Buildings." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Pennsylvania, 1975.
Van Rensselaer, Mrs. John King. The Social Ladder. New
York: Henry Holt & Co., 1924,
95
'fine arts ubrarv
FURNtSS BLDG.
OCT IW
UN«V OF PENNA.
3 1198 04975 3648
N/lnfl/D^^7s/3b^flx
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11