Shack Mountain Final Report

SHACK MOUNTAIN
A Landscape Study
Cover, adapted from Photograph, ca. 1955 (Courtesy of Osborne Mackie)
Prepared for The Garden Club of Virginia

Prepared by Kelly Halpin
2012 William D. Rieley Fellow
shack mountain
Copyright 2012 By the Garden Club of Virginia

All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction
All material contained herein is the intellectual property of the
Garden Club of Virginia except where noted. Permission for reproduction,
except for personal use, must be obtained from:
The Fellowship Committee, Chair
The Garden Club of Virginia
The Kent-Valentine House
12 East Franklin Street
Richmond,VA 23219
http://gcvirginia.org
*Unless noted, illustrations and photographs are by the author
shack mountain
DEFINING THE PROJECT

The Garden Club of Virginias William
D. Rieley Fellowship is a program that
identifies and documents historic gardens
within the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The 2012 Fellowship records the historic
landscape of Shack Mountain. The final
report is composed of measured drawings,
photographs, and illustrations, which support
the written document, adding to the
comprehensive record of Virginias historic
landscapes. Shack Mountain: A Landscape
Study, was produced using extensive
archival research, site visits, interviews,
meetings, and journal entries integrating
the disciplines of landscape architecture and
historic preservation as a discourse for the
investigation, analysis, and interpretation.
While there are several authors who have
examined Sidney Fiske Kimball1 as an
architect, preservationist, restorationist,
museum director and author, the findings of
this study suggest that Kimballs scholarship
also includes landscape design, theory and
practice. Kimballs wife, Marie Kimball,
somewhat overshadowed by her husband,
was a respected author and scholar in
her own right. This endeavor attempts to
document the historic cultural landscape
Shack Mountain, while furthering the
recognition and accomplishments of Sidney
Fiske Kimball2 and his wife Marie Kimball.
While the period of significance for

this study is associated with the lives of
the Kimballs from 1935-1955, a significant
portion of this document will discuss
Jane Tarleton-Smith and Walter Bedford
Moore III, the owners and stewards of
Shack Mountain from 1956-2010. The
Moores played a significant role in the
history of Shack Mountain through the
care and maintenance of the property
and establishment of the sites historical
significance. The narrative includes the
evolution of the landscape during the
Moores occupancy while addressing current
conditions. The Moores were key figures in
furthering recognition of the Kimballs work
by preserving the legacy of Shack Mountain
through The National Historic Landmark
Program (NHL) and the placement of a
conservation easement on the property,
securing it from future development. The
current landscape, mostly constructed
and designed by the Moores, has design
elements from Kimballs conceptual 1937
plan, respecting the built landscape already
in place. Shack Mountain is currently for
sale and held in trust with the proceeds to
be dispersed to several causes. The Moores
legacy validates the Kimballs place in
history by honoring the contributions and
achievements of this dynamic couple.
shack mountain
shack mountain
Part 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1:
THE HISTORY & DEVELOPMENT OF SHACK MOUNTAIN

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Profile of Marie Goebel and Sidney Fiske Kimball
1.3 Kimballs Restoration of Lemon Hill, Philadelphia
1.4 A Second Home in Charlottesville,VA
PART 2:
KIMBALL THE ARCHITECT AND LANDSCAPE DESIGNER

2.1 Synopsis: The Construction of Shack Mountain

2.2 The Five Schemes of Shack Mountain
2.3 Kimballs Landscape Design for Shack Mountain
PART 3:
THE END OF AN ERA: THE PASSING OF THE KIMBALLS

3.1 Shack Mountain, the Kimballs Retreat

3.2 The Kimballs Final Years at Shack Mountain
3.3 New Life: Jane Tarleton-Smith and Walter Bedford Moore III
3.4 Pictorial History the Gardens at Shack Mountain
PART 4:
THE PHYSICAL LANDSCAPE

4.1 Evolution of the Landscape 1955-2010

4.2 Spatial Organization: Character and Description of the
Current Landscape

4.3 Then & Now
BIBLIOGRAPHY

shack mountain
shack mountain
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my deepest
I would especially like to thank the
gratitude to all of those who made this
following people, who enriched the paper
report possible by contributing their time
by sharing their personal stories of Jane
and effort, and by sharing information,
and Bedford Moore, filling a void with
research, and memories.
information about the Moores and the
The Garden Club of Virginia Fellowship
gardens of Shack Mountain including:
Committee for allowing me the opportunity Melinda Frierson, Jane Moores longtime
to work on this project with special thanks
housekeeper and companion Catherine
to the office of Rieley and Associates
Burton, and the groundskeeper of Shack
including William D. Rieley, Roxanne
Mountain, Nelson Peanuts Gipson.
Brouse, and Karen Kennedy, for their time,

editing help, guidance and patience.
The Thomas Jefferson Foundation at
Lastly I would like to acknowledge the

two members of the Moore family for their
time and effort: Eleanor Kuhl in helping to
Monticello for the valuable information on
fill in details about the gardens, and Osborne
both the Kimballs and Moores, with special
Mackie for photographs and animated
thanks to Bill Beiswanger, Jack Robertson,
stories of Jane Moore.
Leah Sterns and Anna Berkes.

Susan K. Anderson, archivist for the
Philadelphia Museum of Art, for allowing
me time and her expertise while researching
the Kimballs.
The Fairmount Park Historic Resource
Archive (FPHRA) and their information on
Lemon Hill.
William Menke from Menke & Menke,
LLC Landscape Architects & Planners, for
sharing research on Kimball and Lemon Hill.
shack mountain
shack mountain part
PART 1
THE HISTORY & DEvELOPMENT OF SHACK MOUNTAIN
Figure 1.1. Location of Shack Mountain, property boundary in yellow, not to scale, 2012.
shack mountain part
1.1 Introduction
The Historic Places Nomination for the
property considers Shack Mountain to be
one of the finest examples of Jeffersonian
Classicism in the United States, inspired
by Jeffersons plan of Farmington (VHLC
1976, 4).
Using his skills as an architect,
restorationist and preservationist, Fiske
Kimball designed it as a retreat and
retirement home. His last project as an
architect, the house and grounds reflected
his lifes work by employing a classical
design based on the work of Thomas
Jefferson1 while incorporating modern ideas
of construction.
Joseph Dye Lahendro, architect and
Kimball historian, states in his masters thesis
Fiske Kimball American Renaissance
Historian, Kimball pays homage to
Jefferson and classicism during the 1930s
when this movement had given way to
modern architectural styles.2 Indeed,
Kimball referred to Shack Mountain as
an unexecuted design of Jefferson.2 He
also improved on the livability of the
past by addressing the needs of twentieth
century life such as air conditioning and a
modern kitchen.3 He creates authenticity
in his design using architectural elements
from Jeffersons drawings and local
12
shack mountain
materials along with advanced construction

techniques of the mid-1930s.
Lahendro points out that Kimballs
architectural style was defined early in his
career, as seen in an unpublished letter from
Kimball to a client dated 1922, that could be
used as a description of Shack Mountain:
The effort has been to achieve the
greatest beauty of form, without
sacrificing convenience. Thus, for
instance, I have endeavored to give
the rooms themselves beauty and
variety of shape. So, too, I have sought
to make every room and every wall
regular and symmetrical, so that
wherever you look everything will
balance and harmonize it is hopeless
to achieve the finest results in interior
decoration without such balance in
the openings of wall spaces. (1995)
Having failed to find a suitable house
to restore, he set out to build a Jeffersonian
style home by using Jeffersons architectural
drawings as a template, his own Beaux-Arts
architectural training for the composition,
and his preservation mindset for guidance.
He built a house based on historic principles
incorporating balance, proportion, harmony
and rhythm as the central elements.
Kimball developed five schemes for
Shack Mountain over the course of two
years prior to its completion in 1937. He
carefully considered the composition of
section
Figure 1.1.1. Farmington: house (study plan), 1802 or earlier, by Thomas Jefferson. N15; K184 [electronic edition].
Thomas Jefferson Papers: An Electronic Archive. Boston, Mass.:
Massachusetts Historical Society, 2003. http://www.thomasjeffersonpapers.org.
1.1
Figure 1.1.2. Shack Mountain Site and Floor Plans by Building

Analysts, 1990 (#5232-b, University of Virginia Library,
Charlottesville,VA).
rooms, the addition of modern features such

The first floor is 1,870 sq. ft. and
as air-conditioning and the secondary entry comprises the central living area and a
that is level with the road for his wife who
basement of the same size. Kimball integrates
was having early symptoms of heart disease. features found in his Lemon Hill residence
Based on the footprint of Jeffersons
such as the curved doors and Palladian
plan for Farmington, the Historic Places
windows, with components of Jeffersons
Nomination (which ultimately gained
architectural style, developing the efficacy of
National Landmark status for the property)
historic design.4
describes Shack Mountain as a single floor
Kimball takes the same approach to the
T-shaped footprint with elongated octagonal grounds as he takes on the role of landscape
rooms forming the top of the T the house designer. As with the architecture, his
is brick cladded with triple sash framed
historicism shows in the landscape design
windows, characteristic of Jeffersons work
as he reinterprets the past while reflecting
(1990).
present day conditions. He moves away from
shack mountain
13
shack mountain part
Figure 1.1.3. Photograph of Shack Mountain displayed next to Monticello (see Figure 1.1.4) revealing Kimballs use of Jeffersons
architectural style as seen in the triple sash windows, brick cladding, portico, and geometric form, 2012.
Jeffersons interpretation of the Picturesque,

towards the Colonial Revival style
associated with historic restorations during
this period,5 and makes a commanding
statement of Jeffersonian Classicism. The
house blends into the vernacular landscape
because of Kimballs use of local materials,
and the attentive siting and placement of the
house which was built into the hillside on
the edge of the forested landscape. Kimball
optimized views and reduced the heat effect
by using trees for shade.
14
shack mountain
Shack Mountain represented Kimballs

nationalist sentiment for the American
style, by building a Jefferson style house
which reflects simplicity of the ideal classic
form (Kimball 1966, 146). He integrates
architecture and landscape by siting the
house on a secluded Virginia mountaintop,
resonating Jeffersons sentiment of mans
desire for natures majesty:
And our own dear Monticello, where
has nature spread so rich a mantle
under the eye? Mountains, forests,
section
1.1
Figure 1.1.4. Photograph of Monticello, 2012.
rocks, riverswith what majesty

do [sic] we ride above the storms!
How sublime to look down into the
workhouse of nature, to see her clouds,
hail, snow, thunder, all fabricated
at our feet! And glorious sun when
rising as if out of distant water, just
gliding the tops of the mountains and
giving life to all nature. (Kimball 1944,
106; Jefferson et al. 1905, 436-437)
has claimed a romantic act unparalleled

in contemporary Europe (106). Shack
Mountain may be regarded as Kimballs
embodiment of quintessential twentieth
century romantic classicism reminiscent
of Jefferson, by claiming his own Virginian
mountaintop.
Kimball theorizes that Jefferson, by choosing

the summit as the location of Monticello,
shack mountain
15
shack mountain part
Figure 1.2.1. Fiske Kimball at his desk, ca. 1913, Print Department Records, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Archives.
section
1.2 PROFILE OF MARIE GOEBEL

KIMBALL AND SIDNEY FISKE
KIMBALL
Kimball was born in 1888 in the suburb
of West Newton, Massachusetts, west of
Boston, the younger brother of Theodora
Kimball and the son of Ellen Leora Ripley
and Edwin Fiske Kimball. According to
Kimball, he and his sister were raised in a
middle class family by parents who put their
childrens needs first, joining their life, their
love, their courage, their intelligence, and
their effort for their children.6 Kimballs
father was a Headmaster in the Boston
Schools and taught at the Gilbert Stuart
School in Dorchester from 1909 until his
death in 1924.7 Edwin Kimball relocated
the family within Massachusetts from West
Newton to Milton, a small New England
town south of Boston. Kimballs memoirs
reflect upon the sacrifices of his father who
risk(ed) his small means to build and to
live where he thought the environment
most favorable for us.8 Kimballs memoir
reminisces about his fathers affinity for the
landscape, conveyed during their walks and
climbs as his father patiently answered the
many questions of a curious child.9 Edwin
Kimball had a devotion to American
History, institutions and strong belief in the
democracy of public schools10 which he
imparted to his children with an emphasis
on higher learning. The siblings maintained
1.2
their close relationship, which extended

beyond familial ties and manifested itself in
mutual respect and admiration reflective of
the environment created by Kimballs father.
He fostered curiosity while encouraging
achievement and, within this context, the
Kimball siblings both attended top colleges,
excelling in their studies and professional
lives.
Kimball first enrolled in the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
1905 but soon transferred to the Lawrence
Scientific School of Harvard University to
study engineering. He changed schools
one last time entering the Harvard College
School of Arts and Sciences before earning
his bachelors degree in 1909. Kimball
graduated summa cum laude, then enrolled
in the masters program at the Harvard
School of Architecture. Instituted in 1895,
the program was modeled after the Ecole
des Beaux-Arts, the French national school
of architecture based on the Beaux-Arts
Tradition.11 Lahendro states that Kimballs
classes while at Harvard were standard for
architecture students, studying history of
Architecture, and the general history of the
arts in civilization while simultaneously
taking classes on freehand drawing,
architectural design and deconstruction,
and aesthetics.12 According to Kimballs
memoirs, for the first two years (he)
thought of little else but drawing and
architecture, but later in his education
shack mountain
17
shack mountain part
credits his roommates, the young history

men, for the conveyance of the principles
of historical research at Harvard. It is during
this time that he became acquainted with
the book Introduction to the study of History,
1912 by Langlois and Seignobos, which had
a profound effect on Kimballs keen intellect
because it challenged traditional conventions
towards historic research. Lauren Bricker
Weiss, in the article The Writings of Fiske
Kimball: A Synthesis of Architectural History
and Practice, discussed this further by
stating:
Kimball developed a historical
method that merged scientific
investigation of the material remains
of structureswith dependence on
architectural documents. Kimballs
utilization of historic architectural
drawings had limited precedent in
American Architectural History.
(1990, 35:218)
Langlois and Seignobos (1912) asserted that
the study of history is a scientific pursuit
and outlined a detailed, comprehensive, and
practical system for a historical method
based on the examination of original
documents and manuscripts. Kimballs
success as an author and historian is in part
due to learning these principles of historical
research, writing in his memoir it is in this
indirect way, that I am forever grateful to
Harvard.
18
shack mountain
Lahendro credits Kimballs Harvard

education for his allegiance to classicism
because of the Beaux-Arts architectural
model taught by the university.13 Classical
architecture is based on order, proportion
and balance, with classical design arising
from understanding that the composition
is based on a hierarchical formal system
seeing parts as wholes and wholes as parts
(Gromort 2001, 16). Denmin Ross, a lecturer
on the theory of design at the Harvard
Architectural School, instilled in Kimball the
belief that all art could be analyzed on the
basis of harmony, balance, and rhythm,14
which in turn becomes the basis for
Kimballs architectural designs.
Kimball excelled in school earning
numerous honors, awards, scholarships, and
assistantships that helped to finance his
education.15 While working towards his
masters degree in architecture, Kimball
received the Sheldon Scholarship funding six
months of travel abroad.16 This was Kimballs
first opportunity to travel internationally
visiting Paris, Italy, Austria, Hungary, and
Germany.17 Kimballs assistantship at
the Harvard library needed to be filled
during his absence, so he worked out an
arrangement for his sister to unofficially take
his position during his absence. This meant
that Theodora Kimball performed the work,
while her brother maintained his title and
salary while on leave until he finished his
section
masters in Architecture (Hohmann

2006, 29:170).18 Theodora
Kimball withdrew her pay from
Kimballs account as she was not
acknowledged by Harvard as an
official employee (170). She turned
out to be well suited for the task,
having earned a degree in library
science from Simmons College in
1904. In order to prepare for the
position, Theodora Kimball read
many of her brothers books and
course notes, corresponding with
him in Europe about the study
of landscape design, theory, and
practice. According to Hohmann,
Theodora Kimball was particularly
fascinated with the biography of
Charles Eliot; as it had for many
practitioners of the time, Charles
Eliot greatly influenced Theodora
Kimballs understanding of the
profession (170).19
1.2
Figure 1.2.2. Theodora Kimball, ca. 1913, Print Department Records,

Philadelphia Museum of Art, Archives.
Kimball returned to Harvard after

six months but rather than fulfilling his
obligation to the library, accepted an offer
as the assistant to professor George Chase of
the Architecture Department, thus allowing
Theodora Kimball to retain her status as
interim librarian. Chase was so impressed
by his assistant that he commissioned
Kimball to write a book about the history
of architecture while still a masters degree
candidate (Lahendro 1982, 8). Kimball
graduated from Harvard in 1912 with a

master of architecture degree and accepted
the position of instructor at the University
of Illinois. This was a fortuitous move on
Kimballs part, not only because of his
appointment but also for the chance
meeting of his future wife.20
Marie Kimball began her university
studies at Radcliffe College in Cambridge,21
MA, but before finishing relocated with her
family to Illinois when her father accepted
shack mountain
19
shack mountain part
the position of professor of Germanic

(leading) Kimball to the original
drawings of Thomas Jefferson at the
Studies at the University of Illinois (Howard
Massachusetts Historical Society
2006b, Loc 98 of 5339). She received her
giving him the materials necessary
B.A. from the University of Illinois in
for his articles on Jefferson, his
1911, reared in a close family who, like the
dissertation, Thomas Jefferson and
the First Monument of the Classic
Kimballs, valued education above all else.22
Revival in America and for the
The couple was enamored with each other,
publication of his book, Thomas
marrying in June of 1913, shortly after they
Jefferson Architect, 1916.24
met. The Kimballs traveled to Boston the
Kimballs Ph.D. was conferred in June 1915
summer after they were married, staying in
Massachusetts when the teaching contract at from the University of Michigan and his
status was advanced to assistant professor.
the University of Illinois was not renewed.
In that same year, he also completed his
They spent the following fall at
first major commission of the residential
Cambridge researching Kimballs book on
development of Scottswood in Ann Arbor,
the history of architecture, commissioned
Michigan.25
by Chase while Kimball was a graduate
Kimballs next project, the writing of
student at Harvard. The findings during
this research, along with his wifes curiosity Thomas Jefferson Architect, not only defined
his early career but also demonstrated his
and scholarship, introduced the Kimballs
wifes aptitude for research and skill as
to the life and work of Thomas Jefferson.
26
Marie Kimball aided her husbands research, an editor. The idea for Thomas Jefferson
Architect, while originating with Kimball,
devoting herself to the study of Jeffersons
was kept alive by his wife who commenced
correspondence and papers.23 In the fall of
the research (Howard 2006a, loc 138).
1913, Kimball entered the Ph. D. Program
The Kimballs analyzed Jeffersons original
in Architecture and accepted a teaching
drawings, employing scientific methodology
position with the University of Michigan,
but this did not hinder their investigation of in historical research. Their method included
the research and analysis of drawings by
Jefferson. The massive amount of research
arranging and dating 300 undated drawings
he and his wife collected over the course
in chronological sequence with his ordering
of two years was not only the foundation
(of the drawings) surviving, nearly intact for
for his dissertation while at the University
seventy-five years (Wilson 1993, 55). Their
of Michigan, but according to Lahendro,
analysis and research provided the evidence
also used for Kimballs book, A History of
to support Jefferson, not only as an architect,
Architecture, 1918:
20
shack mountain
section
1.2
but also as the father of national

architecture.
Marie Kimball reinforced her
husbands early career by assisting
with the research and editing
of his books and articles while
also taking on the traditional
role as hostess and head of
household. Kimball viewed his
wife as a partner, respectful of
her dedication and intelligence,
conveying this sentiment in
the opening of Thomas Jefferson
Architect:
A special acknowledgment
I owe to my wife, Marie
Goebel, who first suggested
taking up in earnest
the study of Jeffersons
architectural work, and
who has given the
assistance of her editorial
experience, especially in the Figure 1.2.3. Marie Kimball ca. 1913, Print Department Records,
Philadelphia Museum of Art, Archives.
examination of the Jefferson
manuscripts of the Massachusetts
Two years after taking over her brothers
Historical Society and in the
assistantship, Theodora Kimball was officially
description and comparison of the
named the first librarian for the Harvard
papers employed. Her
School of Landscape Architecture. While
self-sacrificing collaboration
is a debt I can never repay. (1916, 1)
nepotism may have helped get her in
the door, her credentials, work ethic, and
In his wife, Kimball found the intellectual
aptitude kept her there. She was driven
and support system that he had with his
like Kimball and became one of the first
sister.27 Marriage did not undermine
women to earn a Masters Degree in Science
his relationship with his sister but
from Simmons College in 1917. As part of
rather provided Theodora Kimball the
her degree, she wrote a thesis on English
opportunity to define her own path.28
shack mountain
21
shack mountain part
landscape gardening, a mutual topic of

interest between her and her brother. While
working at Harvard, Theodora Kimball
befriended a colleague from the Harvard
Landscape Architecture Department,
Henry Vincent Hubbard. They eventually
married, changing both Theodora Kimballs
professional and personal life.
Theodora Kimball was an early theorist
in the fields of landscape architecture and
city planning. She was both distinguished
in the fields of landscape architecture and
city planning, writing along with Hubbard
Introduction to the Study of Landscape Design,
1917, one of the most influential books
about landscape design and theory during
the early to mid-1900s in part because it
allowed for flexibility within the design
by balancing aesthetics, site and monetary
constraints.
Kimball and his sister ran in many of the
same academic circles and collaborated on
several projects. Theodora Kimball began
writing book reviews for the publication
Landscape Architecture Journal, founded by
Hubbard in 1910. In this capacity she wrote
the review of her brothers book, Thomas
Jefferson Architect, for the 1917 edition of
the journal, publishing it after Kimballs
edits.29 In the review, she makes the explicit
connection between Thomas Jefferson Architect
and landscape architecture:
22
shack mountain
There are several passages of particular

interest to landscape architects, which
show evidence of almost the earliest
interest in landscape design as such
in the American colonies, and the
influence of the English Landscape
School. (1917/1931, 201-2)
Kimballs subsequent article, Thomas
Jefferson as Architect and Landscape Designer,
also published in Landscape Architecture
Journal, reinforces the idea of Jefferson as
landscape designer after Theodora Kimballs
prompting in the review of Thomas Jefferson
Architect. Kimball, using the same proven
research techniques, looking at original
documents, drawings and manuscripts in
order to support his findings, concluded
that landscape gardening in America
may claim its father the father of American
independence itself, a worthy forerunner
of Downing, Olmsted and Eliot, (1917,
7:187) the notable early practitioners of the
landscape architecture profession.30 Kimball
references Jefferson throughout his career,
not only as an architect, but also as an artist
and landscape designer, strengthening this
idea in articles through the mid-1940s.
By 1919, Kimball was nationally
recognized as a scholar and author after
the rave reviews of his second book,
History of Architecture, 1918 coauthored
by George Harold Edgell. Looking for
advancement opportunities, he was
section
approached by the University of Virginia

(UVA) in Charlottesville with an offer for
a teaching position. Unsure, Kimball wrote
to his sister asking her advice; in response,
she writes a letter outlining the reasons
he should accept the offer, namely his
interests, goals, future salary increases, and
the possibility for advancement to a larger
university.31 Heeding the advice, Kimball
left the University of Michigan, accepting
the position from UVA as head of the
Department of Architecture and Fine Arts
for the new McIntire School of Fine Arts.
The couple moved to Virginia, inaugurating
a lifelong attachment with Virginia and
Charlottesville.
While at UVA, Kimball contributed
to many building projects including the
Memorial Gymnasium, faculty apartments,
and the amphitheater.32 Kimball also
1.2
Philadelphia Architect Erling H. Peterson

as (embodying) the characteristic modest
approach of a preservation-restoration
architect which according to Kimball
are quite different from an architect: not
imagination but historical knowledge, not
originality, but self-abnegation (1990,
35:229). The Kimballs lived in Charlottesville
until 1923, when Kimball took the position
of director of the Department of Fine
Arts and Morse Professor of Literature of
Arts of Design at New York University.
Two years later Kimball left his academic
life, ambitiously accepting the position of
Director of the Pennsylvania Museum of
Art, later to be known as the Philadelphia
Museum of Art (PMA) and the Kimballs
relocated to Philadelphia, beginning a next
chapter of their lives.
maintained a small architectural firm in

Charlottesville, working on varied residential,
commercial and historic restoration
projects. According to Bricker, each project
presented Kimball and his small staff with
the challenge of adapting new works to the
established Jeffersonian vocabulary (1990,
217:219). In the early 1920s, Kimball began
to define himself as a restoration architect;
preservation theory and practice was still in
its infancy with no formal policy in terms
of historic restoration and preservation
of buildings. Bricker described Kimballs
architectural practice and collaborations with
shack mountain
23
shack mountain part
Figure 1.3.1. Lemon Hill, front (north) elevation, Historic American Buildings Survey [HABS PA-51], Jack E. Boucher,
photographer, 1995, memory.loc.gov, accessed June, 2012.
section
1.3
1.3 Kimballs Restoration of

Lemon Hill, Philadelphia
In 1925, the couple moved to
Philadelphia and began their new lives
within the social culture of the Pennsylvania
Art Museum: Kimball as director and Marie
Kimball as his counterpart. Kimballs position
included housing, and he persuaded the
museum board to restore the historic Lemon
Hill Mansion (located near the museum and
owned by the City of Philadelphia) into
their residence. The Kimballs immediately
began the renovation of the house and
garden. Kimball had undertaken several
historic house renovations but never a
garden, especially one as significant as
Lemon Hill.

Built in 1799-1800, Lemon Hill was
the summer home of Henry Pratt, a senior
partner in the mercantile firm of Pratt &
Kintzing and son of painter Mathew Pratt
(Ali 1984a, 5). Pratt purchased the property
in a sheriff s sale from the former owner
William Morris.33 The Morris estate, then
known as The Hills, was surrounded by an
extensive garden with fruit trees and a large
and elegant green house which was widely
acclaimed and the focal point of the gardens
(Haavik 2004, 56). Under Pratts direction,
the home-site was extended, expanding
the greenhouse scheme to include pleasure
gardens (24). Pratt was a merchant with
access to many exotic plants, augmenting
shack mountain
25
shack mountain part
the plant species of the grounds and

greenhouse (Ali 1984a, 23).
Lemon Hill, while well known for
the landscape, is also one of the best early
examples of Federal Style Architecture
(Ali 1984b, 2). Pratt sold Lemon Hill in
1836, and it changed hands several times
until it was purchased by the City of
Philadelphia in 1844.34 Lemon Hill, with
the once magnificent mansion, gardens and
greenhouse known worldwide, had been
reduced to a sad state of disrepair and neglect
by the late 1800s. Andrew Jackson Downing
mournfully mentioned Lemon Hill in
Treatise on Landscape Gardening, Lemon
Hill, was, twenty years ago, the most perfect
specimen of the geometric mode in America,
and since its destruction by the extension of
the city, there is nothing comparable with
it (Ali 1984a, 5; Downing 1844, 27). The
property had been leased to several vendors
over the years including a beer concession,
but the most damaging occurrence changed
the grounds permanently in 1888 when,
according to Haavik the construction of the
Music Pavilion over top of the old parterre,
effectively turned the once celebrated garden
into a lawn (2004, 26).
Restoring the Lemon Hill Mansion
and gardens back to their once magnificent
splendor represented a unique opportunity
for the Kimballs, already well versed on
historic research methods and renovations.
Lemon Hill allowed them to put
26
shack mountain
Figure 1.3.2. Interior view, First Floor, North Central Hall

from south, HABS PA, 51-Phila, 234-23, http://www.loc.gov/
pictures (accessed June 2012).
Figure 1.3.3. Interior view, First Floor, South Oval Room from
east, HABS PA, 51-PHILA, 234-27, http://www.loc.gov/pictures (accessed June 2012).
section
1.3
preservation theory to practice while still

reflecting their desire for livability in the
modern world as seen in this description by
Ali of the changes made to the house:
Figure 1.3.4. Interior view, First Floor, Northwest Room from

Southwest, HABS PA, 51-Phila, 234-PHILA, 23425,
http://www.loc.gov/pictures (accessed June 2012).
The exterior restoration was based

off an early illustration replacing the
Victorian cornices, and stairs with
what we see today. The internal
changes had to do with historic, as
well as personal tastes including:
reopening several fire places, shifting
the location of doorways and mantel
pieces, the installation of bathrooms,
converting the west porch into a
garage and the later installation of an
elevator,36 which was later removed by
the current stewards of the property
the Colonial Dames. (1984a, 3-4)
Lemon Hill features a series of three oval
rooms, one stacked on top of each other
with curved mahogany doors and fireplace
mantels. The mansion has double-hung
Palladian windows, which gives access to
the exterior, light and views of the river
valley (2). The high style, neoclassical rooms
were unique in America in the 1800s.35 Well
known examples of Federal style architecture
that exist from the same period are The
White House designed by James Hoban,
and the Joseph Barrell House designed by
Charles Bullfinch.
shack mountain
27
shack mountain part
Figure 1.3.5. Aerial view, looking north, 1956, HABS PA,51-PHILA, 234-32,
http://www.loc.gov/pictures (accessed June 2012).
Kimballs Colonial Revival Landscape Design of

Lemon Hill
The restoration of Lemon Hill included
a Colonial Revival style garden. According
to Norman Tyler in Historic Preservation:
An Introduction to Its History, Principles, and
Practice, the Colonial Revival was the
most common residential style between
1880-1950 combining historicism with
modern conveniences while expressing
nationalistic sentiment by reaffirming the
American style in architecture and landscape
architecture(2000, 83). Elizabeth Barlow
Rogers in Landscape Design: A Cultural and
Architectual History, defines the elements
of this garden style as a combination of
arts and crafts planting principles with
geometric layout of old-fashioned American
28
shack mountain
gardens (2001, 379). She

further discusses how the
garden is an extension of
the architecture, understood
as a single entity, employing
plants as paint to be applied
to the landscape canvas (379).
Colonial Revival landscape
design adapts elements from
the historical period, using
Beaux-Arts principles of
axial planning, symmetry
and balance in a geometric
garden layout. Kimballs
Beaux-Arts training, proclivity
towards sequencing geometry,
Figure 1.3.6. Detailed view of Lemon Hill form a 1938 Works

Progress Administration (WPA) topographic map. (Courtesy of
the Fairmount Park Archives).
section
Part
1.31
and allegiance to classicism provided

the foundation for his Colonial Revival
landscape design of Lemon Hill.
In 2002, a Cultural Landscape Study
for Lemon Hill by Menke & Menke and
Associates, recommended the restoration
treatment of the site be based on the time
period between 1926-1929, identifying
Kimball as the person of historical
significance. This was due to Kimballs 1927
Colonial Revival landscape design, which
was used as a template for the restoration
of the gardens of Lemon Hill (Menke &
Menke 2002). This project specifies long
and short-term recommendations for the
preservation, management and interpretation
of the Lemon Hill, proposing restoration
treatment for the land surrounding the house.
The decision was based on several factors
including:
restoration of the interior and exterior

spaces as viewed by Kimball.

Kimballs restoration of the Lemon
Hill gardens coincided with the mansion
restoration and included a plot and planting
plan. The study concluded, after comparing
dated images with the planting plan, that
the concept of the design, a perennial border
with some shrubs and trees, likely came
from Kimball, who applied Colonial Revival
style to this and other Fairmount Park
Mansions (3.14). Kimballs interpretation
also included the oval drive, fencing and
planting beds flanking the south path (2.5).
Kimball worked with landscape designer
Amy Cogswell36 on a landscape planting
plan in Mt. Pleasant prior to the Lemon Hill

planting, and according to Menke & Menke,
it is probable that Kimball used Cogswells
planting recommendations from Mt. Pleasant
The importance of Fiske Kimball in
for the planting plan for Lemon Hill (B1).
Philadelphia history as a person of
The report also indicates that Kimball may
significance,
have had help from Samuel N. Baxter, a
Fairmount Park Commission landscape
The Colonial Revival designs he
gardener and possibly Thomas Adams Sears,
installed at Lemon Hill,
a Philadelphia landscape architect. Kimballs
The photographic evidence of the landscape design for Lemon Hill was
installed designs by Kimball,
appropriate for the site and consistent with
the Colonial Revival style during the 1920s,
The extant historic landscape elements,
demonstrating his ability as a landscape
The availability of Kimballs plans on
designer though he consulted with other
which to base restoration,
professionals within the field.
And the integration of the 1925-1926
shack mountain
29
shack mountain part
The newly renovated Lemon Hill

mansion was a suburban residence, with a
vehicular drive and privacy fence. Kimballs
design included a solid wood fence to
surround the property, which offered privacy
from the nearby music pavilion while
providing a sense of enclosure. The fence
segregated the property into four rooms
including; a forecourt with an oval drive
leading to a garage and visitor drop off on
the north side of the house, two smaller
service areas along the east and west sides
of the house, and the south garden which
was the former entrance. The new formal
entry was established by the south gate, now
centered on the house (Menke & Menke
2002, 3.9). Kimballs 1927 plot plan reveals a
geometric pattern with lineal planting beds

on both sides of the entry walk, reinforcing
the strong central axis and reestablishing the
southern pedestrian gate as the formal entry.
He maintained the existing trees along
the oval drive and interspersed lilac,
philodendron and vines along the north
garden fence. The eastern side garden, or
drying yard, contained the cutting garden
while the western garden was boxed with
fragrant roses and honeysuckles.
Figure 1.3.7.
Enlargement
of the Fence
Detail by Fiske
Kimball, 1925,
(Courtesy of
the Fairmount
Park Archives).
Figure 1.3.8. Plot Plan for Lemon Hill by Fiske Kimball, 1925, (Courtesy of the Fairmount Park Archives).
30
shack mountain
section
Part
1.31
Figure 1.3.9. Planting Plan for Lemon Hill, by Fiske Kimball, 1927, (Courtesy of the Fairmount Park Archives).
The lineal planting beds featured rows of

perennials bordering the grass. Trees filled
the corners of the south garden while roses
and hollyhocks were planted along the
fence. According to Menke & Menke, the
plant list from Amy Cogswells design of
the perennial border for Kimballs 1926
restoration project, Mt. Pleasant, is similar
to the garden he laid out for Lemon Hill
(2002, A14).
Kimball completed the narrative of
Lemon Hill by including the grounds with
the house restoration plans. He used the
Colonial Revival style as a departure for
design, working within the context of the
site, and reinterpreted the garden for the

twenty-first century. Kimballs Colonial
Revival landscape design set the precedent
for the garden design of Shack Mountain.
The Kimballs moved into Lemon Hill
during the spring of 1926, after a year of
extensive renovations; it remained their
primary residence until 1955. Lemon Hill
served as an extension of the Philadelphia
Museum of Art, and was used for social
gatherings and entertaining in matters
relating to the Museum. Marie Kimball
was the consummate hostess, as seen in this
acknowledgment from the minutes of the
Board of Governors meeting in 1955:
shack mountain
31
shack mountain part
We desire to say a word of the

contribution of Mrs. Kimball to the
growth and the life of the museum.
Under her hand of distinguished
hospitality (Lemon Hill) through
the years, has been a focal point
contributing strength to the
development of the Museum. Scholars,

collectors and Museum Directors,
as well as trustees and donors,
always found there Mrs. Kimballs
sympathetic and stimulating approach,
aiding and abetting the work of her
husband.37
Figure 1.3.10. Aerial view of the Philadelphia Art Museum taken 1966, HABS PA, 51-Phila, 335-2,
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/pa1065.photos.138253p/ (accessed August 2012).
32
shack mountain
section
1.3
shack mountain
33
shack mountain part
Figure 1.4.1. Group Portrait, West Lawn, Monticello, standing on the west lawn are from left to right: Milton Grigg, Fiske
Kimball, and Board members Frank Houston, Henry Johnston, and William S. Hildreth, (courtesy of the Thomas Jefferson
Foundation at Monticello).
section
1.4 A SECOND Home in

Charlottesville,vA
The Kimballs now had a place to call
home, but even so Marie Kimball longed
for Virginia, often traveling there during the
cooler fall season to visit friends.38 While in
Virginia, she did research for her biographical
series on Jefferson publishing five books
and numerous articles during her lifetime.39
Kimball also traveled to Virginia, serving on
several boards and committees including:
Chairman of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Foundations Restoration Committee (19241955), the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Foundation Board (1939-1955), as a member
of the Architectural Advisory Board for the
Colonial Williamsburg Foundation (19281948), and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Commission (1935-1943).
The museum construction was underway
and the Kimballs were settling into their
new lives when the United States entered
the Great Depression. There was vast
unemployment and growing poverty with
nearly one in every four Americans out
of work (Alter 2007, 2). Newly elected
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
worked with Congress to enact more
legislation than in any previous time in
Americas history creating the New Deal
programs for unemployed workers (275).
The nation was in crisis, but the focus of
the government was on the American
1.4
people, recovery, and getting the masses

back to work with programs like the Works
Progress Administration (WPA) and the
Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), which
supported projects of national interest
(Hosmer 1981). With the resurgence
of nationalism, historic preservation was
prevalent in the United States under
Roosevelts administration (Hosmer 1980).
The onset of the Great Depression
led to deflation, which in turn created
opportunities to purchase investment
property at reasonable prices. After the
passing of Marie Kimballs father in the
spring of 1931, her mother moved in with
them at Lemon Hill, thus eliminating the
need to travel during holidays to visit them.
These combined factors may have influenced
the Kimballs decision to purchase a second
home. The timing was right to look for
a second home in Charlottesville. They
began the search for a house as early as
1931, with an inquiry into the J.R. Johnson
farm, Intermont.40 H.T. Van Nostrand, a
Charlottesville realtor, responded to the letter
and the Kimballs enlisted his services to find
them such a property.
During the Great Depression, Kimballs
position at the museum was tenuous due to
constant budget cuts; the museum was only
open three days per week and half a day on
Sundays and by 1933 his salary was cut from
$13,500 in 1935 to $8,700 (Robert and
Robert 1959, 128). In order to stimulate the
shack mountain
35
shack mountain part
economy, Congress passed the 1934 National

Housing Act creating the Federal Housing
Administration (FHA), offering mortgages
at lower interest rates. The United States
economy was in slow recovery by 1935, with
things beginning to look up for the PMA,
and for Kimball. It was his tenth anniversary
as the director of the PMA and the museum
was now open full time. Kimballs job was
once again secure (148) and by that spring,
the search for a property escalated. The
Kimballs visited sites around Charlottesville
including Edgemont, Kenwood, and
Stillhouse Mountain. Unable to find what
they were looking for, they abandoned
the idea of renovating a historic house and

instead looked for land on which to build.
Kimball evaluated their needs and shared
them with Van Nostrand:
As we analyze our desires, they are to
get some wooded summit to the west
of the University, as close in as possible,
and not along a railroadThe reason
we would like wooded land is to
get out of any need of farming the
property, which would otherwise be
a burden. Mrs. Kimball would like a
considerable area of land, if it could
be without burden. As we know, there
is not property of this kind. Just in
the right location, which also has a
house on it, I incline to buying a tract
Shack Mountain
Charlottesville VA
Figure 1.4.2. Google Earth imagery showing the location of Shack Mountain relative to Charlottesville,VA, 2012.
36
shack mountain
section
1.4
without a house. I am
pretty good at faking
an old house myself.41
Shack Mountain
With the decision
made to build, the search
for a site was narrowed
to mountaintop locations
around Charlottesville and
near UVA.42 Unfortunately
for the Kimballs, this area
was also popular with other
UVA professionals looking to
purchase property near the
Figure 1.4.3. Google Earth topographic map of Shack Mountain, 2012.
university.43 Time was of the
Marie Kimball worked tirelessly over the
essence as desperate landowners who were
next month and a half, handling the details
deeply mortgaged had to sell family lands
of finding a site, negotiating the price, and
that otherwise would have not been on the
finalizing the contract. The story of Shack
market. Land was being purchased quickly
Mountain unfolds in lines of correspondence
due to the drop in land value attributed
between the Kimballs during the spring of
to the depressed economy, the increase of
properties for sale, and improved accessibility 1935. It becomes evident that Marie Kimball
is not only the force behind choosing
due to the advent of the automobile
Charlottesville, but it is also her desire to
(Hosmer 1980, 12:20-1).
retire to the area. Kimball is aware of his
The Kimballs recognized the need to act
wifes ambition, reproaching her in a letter
quickly and to maintain their anonymity
because he feels that she is lingering in
in order to keep the prices down.44 Many
Virginia when she should be Philadelphia.47
desirable locations went under contract
In response she writes that, as much as I
as soon as they became available and the
love my Virginia, I love you more and soon
Kimballs realized it would be necessary to
hoped to be on her way to Philadelphia.48
stay in Charlottesville until they closed on
Marie Kimball wrote letters daily to her
a property.45 Kimball was called back to
work in mid-April 1935, leaving his wife to husband, describing the details of her
continued search and eventual success in
continue the search alone while he advised
locating their mountaintop retreat.
her from Philadelphia.46
shack mountain
37
shack mountain part
Figure 1.4.4. Photograph of the entry road to Shack Mountain, June 2013.
Marie Kimball: Finding the Site and Negotiating

the Purchase
One early spring morning on April
30, 1935, Marie Kimball and Van Nostrand
visited the C. C. Greer property. In her letter
to Kimball that evening, she described the
beauty of the surrounding landscape, there
is a splendid sunset of [sic] the mountains
the sun was already setting through one of
the trees at the early hour and I also have
found the ideal site location for our home.49
The property was two separate sites; 40-acres
owned by C.C. Greer and 84-acres owned
by J.R. Wingfield.50 In order to acquire
the mountaintop, unobstructed views and
the right of way, the Kimballs needed to
acquire the Wingfield property. Kimball was
sent a map with the two tracts of land, the
proposed house site (located on the Greer
tract) and the current woodland road access
from Lambs gate.
38
shack mountain
Marie Kimball was enamored with the

site and revisited the property with her
friend, Isabelle. She wrote to Kimball and
once more described the view, comparing
it to the Stillhouse property her husband
coveted:
While the view (from Stillhouse
Mountain) was lovely, of course it is
not as good as the other place (Shack
Mountain). Isabel and I went there
yesterday and as we stepped into
the clearing she said, there is Blue
HeavensIsabel was entranced.51
Kimball desired to please his wife and
knowing how much she loved Virginia he
gave her his approval, go little one-you have
my blanket ok.52
Marie Kimball figured the cost of the
two parcels to be $2,250. The taxes were
low and there was potential to sell off pieces
of the acreage, therefore; it was a good
section
1.4
shack mountain property lines and features 1935
Right of Way for

Gas Line
Ivy Creek
Existing Drive
Old Barracks Road
Figure 1.4.5. Overlay of Shack Mountain boundary and 1937 aerial survey adapted from [boundary information is courtesy of
PMA Archives; Aerial survey, Charlottesville & Albemarle Orthophotography, 1937, from the University of Virginia, Geospatial
and Statistical Data Center: http://fisher.lib.Virginia.edu/collections/maps/aerials/aerialindex (accessed August 5, 2012)].
shack mountain
39
shack mountain part
Figure 1.4.6. View of the Blue Ridge Mountains taken from the north patio of Shack Mountain, June 2013.
investment for the future.53 By May 2, 1935,

Kimball had produced his first plan for
the site which included his lot and house
site, and a 95-acre proposed subdivision.54
Kimball assumed that the property had
a sufficient water supply to support the
subdivision and planned on selling water to
the future development.55
Marie Kimball was enamored with the
property and Kimball deferred judgment
to his wife, approving of her decisions
and advising her when necessary. While
Kimballs letters to his wife were brief,
attending to business details with words
of encouragement, Marie Kimballs letters
to her husband were often contemplative
narratives of the landscape. In one of the last
letters on file during this time period, Marie
Kimball described the sunset to her husband
who had yet to see it, everyone who has
40
shack mountain
been there says we have the most beautiful

site in Albemarle, we were there toward
sunset last evening and it was so supremely
beautiful it took your breath away.56
The Greer and Wingfield properties were
exactly what Marie Kimball was looking for,
and her husband abided by her decision even
though they would have to purchase more
land than they needed for the securement of
the house-site. The purchase price was nearly
double the original estimate, complicated
by the fact that Wingfield was deeply
mortgaged with the bank requiring $30 an
acre minimum for the whole parcel.57 The
purchase was also complicated by Greers
wife who tried to back out at the last minute,
reluctant to sell their land.58 Kimball agreed
to the purchase in part because he believed
he could make up the $844.74 difference
by subdividing the property and because he
section
knew how much it meant to his wife.

A deal was struck on May 6, 1935, and
in letter to her husband Marie Kimball
exclaimed, we are the potential owners of
ninety acresI am sitting on the top of the
world since yesterday afternoon. Life has
taken on a different color with something
to be interested in and to work for.59
Later that day she wrote to Kimball, still
elated about the acquisition, with a nice
solid piece of land, I feel someday we should
really get back.60 Kimball was delighted as
can be seen in his response, I am so happy
we are ground breaking in VirginiaI do
realize the great amount of work it has
involved, we will jubilate together.61

Negotiating the purchase took much
longer than expected, but Marie Kimball
was undeterred, writing to her husband, our
1.4
place is divine and its worth any little bit

of bother getting everything straightened
out.62 The details of the sale took nearly six
months. The Kimballs officially closed on
the 113-acre property in early November of
1935, for the sum of $4,234.74.63
shack mountain
41
shack mountain part
Kimballs intimate knowledge of Jeffersons architecDEFINING THE PROJECT

tural drawings influence the
1 Philadelphia Museum of, design of Shack Mountain.
Art, and Merle Chamberlain.
2 Joseph Dye Lahendro,
1982. A Guide to the Fiske
Fiske Kimball, American
Kimball Papers. Philadelphia,
Renaissance Historian (masPa.: Archives, Philadelphia
ters thesis, M. Arch. Hist.,
Museum of Art. Sidney Fiske
University of Virginia, 1982),
Kimball changed his name
61.
from Sidney to Fiske in 1915,
around the same time his
3 During the 1930s,
Ph. D. was conferred.
new materials and building techniques combined
2 In order to alleviate
with modern interpretations
confusion, from this point
on in the text Fiske Kimball and solutions initiated new
will be referred to as Kimball design solutions based on
historic design principles.
and Marie Goebel Kimball
David Gebhard, The Amerwill be referred to as Marie
ican Colonial Revival in the
Kimball.
1930s, Winterthur Portfolio no.
22 (1987): 110.
NOTES
NOTES
PART 1
1 A Brief Biography of
Thomas Jefferson, accessed
August 8, 2012, http://www.
monticello.org/. Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) was born
in Albemarle County,Virginia. Jefferson was a lawyer,
statesman and delegate to the
Continental Congress, governor of VA, associate envoy
to France,Vice President of
the United States (17961801), and President of the
United States (1801-1809).
Kimball provides evidence to
support that Jefferson was an
architect in his book Thomas
Jefferson Architect, 1916 and
42
shack mountain
4 The Kimballs were well

versed in Federal Period architecture having been involved in the restoration of
Lemon Hill in 1925. They
were also involved with the
development and restoration
of Philadelphias House Museums called the Colonial
Chain. Kimball inaugurated
a program to restore furnish,
and landscape a selection of
houses that would be opened
to the public. Lauren Bricker Weiss, The Writings of
Fiske Kimball: A Synthesis
of Architectural History and
Practice Architectural Historian in America no. 217 (1990):
224n57.
5 Elizabeth Barlow Rogers, Landscape Design: a Cultural and Architectural History

(New York: Harry N. Abrams,
2001), 267-72. Barlow discusses Jefferson as an early
practitioner of the picturesque in America.
6 Fiske Kimball, Memoirs: Harvard in Transition
(unpublished manuscript,
1933-1955), Series I, Subseries I, Fiske Kimball Papers
(FKP), Philadelphia Museum of Art (PMA), Archives.
(hereafter will be cited as
Memoirs, FKP, PMA).
7 Obituary of Edwin
Fiske Kimball, 1924, Series II,
Subseries C, FKP, PMA.
8
Memoirs, FKP, PMA.
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11 According to Carlhian,
the Ecole des Beaux Arts
style atelier (studio) teaching system was introduced
into the United States in the
late 1800s. Classical proportions, scale, balance, beauty,
and a deep understanding
of architecture from the ancient world down through
the Renaissance was stressed.
Students took classes on
aesthetics, history, technical
and studio courses, rounding their education. Jean
Paul Carlhian, The Ecole
Pnotes
art 1
Frederick Law Olmsted Jr.

des Beaux-Arts: Modes and
Manners. JAE no. 33 (1979): and Charles Law Olmsted.
Eliot was considered a dis7-10.
tinguished landscape archi12 Lahendro, Fiske Kim- tect and landscape historian,
ball, American Renaissance
advocate for regional planHistorian 8.
ning and pioneer in land13 Lahendro, Fiske Kim- scape conservation as well as
writer on landscape topics.
ball, American Renaissance
Birnbaum, Charles A., Lisa
Historian 42.
E. Crowder, Sally Boazberg,
14 Memoirs, FKP, PMA.
States Catalog of Landscape
15 Lahendro, Fiske Kim- Records in the United, and
Initiative Historic Landscape.
ball, 8.
1993. Pioneers of American
16 The Sheldon FellowLandscape Design: an Annotatship began in 1909, and aled Bibliography. Washington,
lows the recipient to travel
DC: U.S. Department of
abroad at ones own devices. the Interior, National Park
Fiske Kimball, Thomas JefService, Cultural Resources:
ferson Architect, in (Boston: Preservation Assistance DiRiverside Press) last modified vision, Historic Landscape
August 14, 1997, accessed 10 Initiative. 107.
July 2013, http://www2.iath.
Virginia.edu/wilson/TJA/tja. 20 Marie Goebel Kimball had six siblings: Julius Jr.,
home.html
Louise,Irma, Anne,Walther,
17 George Robert and
and Eunice.
Mary Robert, Triumph on
21 The New York Times
Fairmount: Fiske Kimball and
the Philadelphia Museum of Art online; Radcliffe College,
(Philadelphia: J.P. Lippencott article written January 14,
1894. Radcliffe was founded
Company, 1957), 30.
in 1879 as a womens liberal
18 T. Kimball to F. Kimball, arts college in Cambridge
22 July 1911, Series II, Sub- Massachusetts and the coseries A, FKP, PMA.
ordinate college of Harvard
University. Harvard Universi19 Eliot interned with
ty professors taught the classFrederick Law Olmsted in
es at the college.
1883, established his own
practice in 1886, and in 1893 22 Funeral Program for
formed a partnership with
Marie Kimball, 9 April 1952,
Series II, Subseries C, FKP,

PMA.
23 Marie Kimball commenced an examination of
the Jefferson correspondence
at the MA Historical Society
and the Thomas Jefferson Papers the Library of Congress
1913-1914 Marie Goebel
Kimball, accessed July 20,
2012, http://www.monticello.org
24 Lahendro, Fiske Kimball, American Renaissance
Historian 114.
25 Ibid., 57-8. Scottswood
Subdivision in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, is a suburban residential development for
which Kimball designed the
as well as the architecture.
26 Kimball and Marie
Kimball shared similar interests, and at times their work
overlapped, suggesting they
collaborated on projects.
Upon the examination of
two articles, Philadelphias Colonial Chain written by Kimball in 1926 and The Revival
of the Colonial; Philadelphia
Restores its Old Houses on the
Schuylkill written by Marie
Kimball in 1927, similarities
in content, style and phrasing
are unmistakable.
27 Heidi Hohmann,
Theodora Kimball Hubbard
and the Intellectualization
shack mountain
43
shack mountain part
of Landscape Architecture
1911-1935, Landscape Journal,
25(2): 169-186. Contemporary theory has shed light on
certain subjects, redefining
the study and examination of
history. Hohman acknowledges the accomplishments
of Theodora Kimball by
using gender theory as the
device to communicate her
contributions. She discloses the relationship between
siblings extending beyond
the bonds of family into the
realm of their professional
endeavors suggesting the influence they had upon each
other throughout their lives,
both personally and professionally, as documented in
their personal correspondence.
36 Webb-Deane-Stevens Colonial Revival Garden, accessed June 10, 2012,

http://www.webb-deane31 T. Kimball to F. Kimstevens.org/garden_and_
ball, 20 March 1919, Series II, grounds.html. Amy L. CogSubseries A, FKP, PMA.
swell was a 1916 graduate
32 On Kimball as Archi- of the Lowthorpe School
tect and Historian, A Sym- of Landscape Architecture,
posium held at the School of Gardening, and HorticulArchitecture, UVA, accessed ture for Women in Groton,
Massachusetts. She worked
December 5, 2012, http://
www2.lib.Virginia.edu/fin- on several colonial revival
gardens during the 1920s
earts/exhibits/fiske/conferincluding Mount Pleasant.
ence/Lahendro.html.
Menke & Menke, Lemon
33 William Morris was a
Hill Study, B1.
financier of the American
37 Board of Governors
Revolution; he was elected
to the Assembly of Pennsyl- Minutes, 24 October 1955,
vania and signer of the Dec- Series II, Subseries C, FKP,
PMA.
laration of Independence.
Society of Landscape Architects, along with Charles
Eliot.
34 This was a judicious

decision on the part of the
28 Theodora Kimball
Hubbard 1887-1935, (1935), City. Haavick points out that
the City purchased the propSeries II, Subseries C, FKP,
erty in order to control the
PMA
citys water purification by
29 F. Kimball to T. Kimball, not allowing factory devel1917, Series VII, Subseries 2, opment upriver of the water
FKP, PMA. The edited copy works, the primary water
of the review is in Kimballs source for Philadelphia.
hand and matches the pubHaavick, Lemon Hill Invenlished article by Theodora
tory, 6.
Kimball in Landscape Architec35 Fairmount Park 2010
ture.
Holiday House Tour, ac30 Kimball equates
cessed June 8 2012, http://
Jefferson to Frederick Law
www.colonialsense.com/
Olmsted Jr. and Downing,
Architecture/Houses/Fairtwo of the thirteen founding mount_Park/Lemon_Hill.
members of the American
php.
44
shack mountain
38 F. Kimball to T. Waterman, 8 October 1931, Series

I, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
39 Marie Kimball began a
biographical series on Thomas Jefferson, receiving two
Guggenheim Fellowships
for the project, one in 1945
and 1946. She completed
three out of the five books in
the series before she died in
1955 with handwritten notes
for the fourth and possible
fifth book stored in boxes
and filed by chapters located
at the UVA Archives.
notes
40 F. Kimball to H. T.Van
Nostrand, 10 August 1931,
Series III, Subseries I, FKP,
PMA.
50 H. T.Van Nostrand to
F. Kimball, 30 April 1935,
PMA.
41 F. Kimball to H. T.Van
Nostrand, 27 March 1935,
PMA.
51 M. Kimball to F. Kimball, 1 May 1935, Series III,

Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
42
Ibid.
63 B. Chamberlin to
F. Kimball, 19 November
1935, Series III, Subseries I,
FKP, PMA.
52 F. Kimball to M. Kimball, 2 May 1935, Series III,

Subseries I, FKP, PMA
43 B. Chamberlin to M.
Kimball, 16 May 1935, Series 52 F. Kimball to M. Kimball, 30 April 1935, Series III,
III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
44 F. Kimball to H.T.Van
53 M. Kimball to F. KimNostrand, 1 January 1935,
ball, 1 May 1935, Series III,
PMA.
45 H. T.Van Nostrand to F.
Kimball, 5 April 1935, Series
Kimball was very interested in the top of Stillhouse
Mountain but it was already
under contract.
54 F. Kimball to Van Nostrand, 2 May 1935, Series III,

55
Ibid.
56
M. Kimball to F. Kimball, 5 May 1935, Series III,
46 M. Kimball to F. Kimball, 23 April 1935, Series III, 58 M. Kimball to F. KimSubseries I, FKP, PMA.
47 M. Kimball to F. Kim- Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
48
Ibid.
59
Ibid.
60
Ibid.
61 F. Kimball to M. Kim49 M. Kimball to F. Kim- ball, 2 May 1935, Series III,

ball, 29 April 1935, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
62 M. Kimball to F. Kimball, 10 May 1935, Series III,
shack mountain
45
shack mountain part
PART 2
KIMBALL THE ARCHITECT AND LANDSCAPE DESIGNER
Figure 2.1. Rendered SketchUp model of Kimballs landscape plan for Shack Mountain, August 2013.
shack mountain part
2.1 SYNOPSIS: THE CONSTRUCTION
within property and Ivy Creek.2 The
OF SHACK MOUNTAIN
right of way for power and telephone

was on Greers property but while
he assumed he had a water source, it
wasnt confirmed until he drilled a
well 1937.3
The preliminary designs for Shack

Mountain were drawn over the course
of eighteen months with the first scheme,
Bellevue, completed in June just one month
after the land purchase. His deductions about
the site came from descriptions in letters
and telephone conversations from as well
as a topographic map and surveys from Van
Nostrand.1 Kimball was able to construct the
plan quickly because of the following factors:
The site requirements he defined
in March were validated in the land
purchase with the mountaintop
location being the key element. The
terrain dictated the placement of the
house and since the views, aspect,
and climate were fixed, a function of
the design was to adapt to these sitespecific conditions.
Kimball was familiar with the area

having lived in Charlottesville and
because of the couples frequent trips
to Virginia.
The Kimballs decision to pasture and
not cultivate the land.4
Marie Kimballs vivid narratives of
the site, embodying a sense of place.
She had already picked out the house
site and mentioned the possibility of
subdividing and selling plots.
The Kimballs enlisted the services of

Robert E. Lee, owner of Charlottesville
Lumber Company, as the contractor to build
their house. Lee and Kimball were already
The architectural style was previously acquainted, as Kimball had asked Lee in a
letter dated February, 1935, to look over
defined Jeffersonian in Character.
the Edgemont property. Their working
He was conversant in Jeffersons
relationship turned into a lifelong family
designs and he based Bellevue on
friendship. The correspondence between the
the plan he sketched for Stillhouse
Kimballs and Lees over the next two decades
Mountain.
provides a history of Shack Mountains
Documents received from
development.
Van Nostrum included a plat map
Kimballs first set of plans, labeled
indicated property lines, Old Barracks
Bellevue, was given to Lee on June 19,
Road, entry road, topography, house
1935.5 Excluding the landscaping, materials
site, proposed lots, the stonewall
48
shack mountain
section
and contractors fees were estimated at

$17,940.00.6 His ability for research and
interpreting documents gave him confidence
that he had enough information for the
plans but his lack of intimacy with the site
lead to immediate changes to the plan.7
The new plans enlarged Bellevue thereby
increasing costs which Lee estimated at
$22,293.00.8 The construction of Shack
Mountain was put on hold for nearly two
years, as the coming events of Kimballs
personal life most likely delayed the
construction.
Kimballs sister had health problems from
the 1920s onward with a serious decline in
the late 1920s. By 1933, she was working
from her bed, intermittently taking periods
to convalesce (Hohmann 2006, 25:181).
Her health problems included high blood
pressure, heart trouble, and severe migraines
(181) as well as mental instability
(181n27).9 She died in November 1935, a
well-respected author and early theorist of
City Planning and Landscape Architecture.10
Her colleague, Dr. Lefavour, recognized
Theodora Kimballs achievements:
2.1
Dr. Lefavours sentiment, guided Kimball

in the writing of his sisters obituary. He
used part of the Dr.s passage in the opening
paragraph, expanding upon the idea and
broadening the scope of her professional
influence:

She found her vocation in providing

the new professions of landscape
architecture and city planning
with their basic literary toolsshe
developed a sphere of influence which
extendedin fact to every country
where men attempt to make their
surroundings more beautiful and more
livable.12
Her death was difficult on Kimball, made

more so by her rapid deterioration. When
Kimballs wife became ill the following
summer, he was worried enough to compare
his situation to his brother in laws:
Maries illness, which is so similar to
Teds, brings home to me more than
ever all that she had to go through
and all fell on you. I can only hope I
can be such a brick as you are.13
The death of his sister, along with his wifes

poor health, offers a possible explanation for
the gap in archival material relating to Shack
In the death of Theodora Kimball
Mountain.
Hubbard there lies a professional
By August, 1936, Kimball was still
woman of great distinction. Prostrated
reconciling the budget, suspending plans
for several years by a wasting illness,
she has already, before half the span of for his second design and calling for new
like, accomplished a whole lifes work estimates from Lee.14 Marie Kimball began
gratefully recognized by men in many
to recover by February 1937; with the
countries.11
shack mountain
49
shack mountain part
worst of her illness behind her, the project

in Virginia was once again underway with
Kimballs latest design Scheme C.
The square footage of the house had
been reduced and the form began to take
on the familiar elongated T-shape. The
facade resembled Farmington Country
Club, only without the octagonal wings that
Thomas Jefferson had designed as the entry
for the owner, George Divers. The square
footage was smaller than the previous two
designs with more focus on equipment;
Kimball needed air-conditioning for his
wife who had difficulty with the heat. By
the middle of March, the site was cleared
and the excavation almost complete when
Lee received a telegram from Kimball
March 12, 1937 house too expensive for
accommodations suspend construction have
different plan.15 Lee received a letter from
Kimball the next day stating, essentially
we have too much equipment in too little
house. I have sketched a new plan with the
same equipment but enclosing a little more
room.16 The rough sketch for Scheme
Q was drafted on March 12, 1937, taking
on the footprint of Farmington with the
addition of the elongated octagon, adding
square footage by increasing the width
of the house. The final scheme for Shack
Mountain was based on Scheme Q, with
a slight decrease of size and a general
refinement revealing the elongated T-shape
with octagonal ends.
50
shack mountain
The Kimballs mortgage on the house

was for $10,000 with the cost of the land
and improvements totaling $23,861.02.17
14
The Kimballs were bequeathed a total of
$5,000 from Theodora Kimballs estate,18
which most likely went towards the down
payment of Shack Mountain. Kimball still
needed money after the house was built,
refinancing Shack Mountain in 1937, and
increasing his loan by $2,000.19
Kimball defined the architectural style
early on but the site program evolved with
each site design. Kimballs sketches for the
house were drawn within the context of the
built and natural landscape. While some plans
have limited detail, two of his landscape
designs reveal the garden as an extension of
the architecture by using Colonial Revival
garden design elements.
Kimballs landscape ideals were founded
in his New England landscape aesthetics and
reinforced by his Beaux-Arts architectural
education. Most of the literature written
about Kimball does not discuss his
relationship with his sister, their professional
association or common interests in art,
literature and appreciation of the English
Landscape.20 According to Bricker, Kimball
and his sister were nurtured (in) the
intellectual, and aesthetic values associated
with the New England landscape, reflected
by their shared passion for the English
landscape garden which had similar pastoral
qualities (Hubbard and Hubbard 1917/1931,
section
2.1
69-70). Throughout the design process

Kimball maintains his objective to design
an architectural statement of Jeffersonian
classicism suited to modern day living within
the framework of the Virginian landscape.
He articulated this through a house design of
perfect proportion and balance, but without
the designed landscape.
shack mountain
51
2.2 THE FIvE SCHEMES OF SHACK MOUNTAIN
SCHEME A: BELLEVUE
Date: May-June 1935

Estimated Cost: $17,940
The geometric plan of the house features
square rooms with an octagonal salon
forming the main living area, reflective of
Jeffersons use of geometric shapes. The
portico steps lead up to the main floor of the
two-story house. The entry opens up to the
central hallway from which the other rooms
are accessed. The central axis continues
down the hallway into the octagonal
drawing room, which provides views of the
Blue Ridge Mountains. The bedrooms are
located on the ground floor on the west side
of the house with the library, dining room,
and kitchen located on the main floor on
the east side of the house.
There is a notation to reverse the plan so
that the dining room and library would be
on the west side. Based on the time line from
the land purchase and Kimballs first plan,
the scheme was most likely drawn before
Kimball visited the site. While Kimball
accounted for views from within the
drawing room, he did not do the same for
the dining room and library, only receiving
early morning sun and forest views. The
footprint of Bellevue is similar to Kimballs
design for Stillhouse Mountain except for
the addition of a semi-octagonal dining
room and the inside room arrangement.
52
shack mountain
3
4
4
6
7
1 Portico
2 Central Hallway
3 Drawing Room
4 Bedroom
5 Library
6 Dining Room
7 Kitchen
Figure 2.2.1. Key map for Kimballs 1935 plan for Shack
Mountain labelled Bellevue (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA
Archives, with labels by author).
AA
Figure 2.2.2. Bellevue, the first scheme for Shack Mountain (Kimball, 1935, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives).
shack mountain
53
shack mountain part
SCHEME A
House Site
Old Wood Road
House Site
Old Barracks Road
Figure 2.2.4. Location of roads leading to Shack Mountain as

of 1935, with notations by author (see fig. 1.4.5.).
Figure 2.2.3. Location of house site for Shack Mountain.

Adapted from the 1937 aerial survey, with notations by author
(see fig. 1.4.5.).
Location and Orientation

Kimball sited the house on the top of the
hill, offering the best views of the mountains
from the main living area. The front facade
of the house faces south with the central
axis running north/south. With the dining
room and library reversed, the rooms
would receive afternoon sun, and the sun
setting behind the mountains. If the plan
were reversed, one could assume that the
landscape design would remain unchanged
in order to accommodate the entry.
54
shack mountain
Figure 2.2.5. Enlargement of circular drive from Bellevue plan,

1935 (see fig. 2.2.2.).
Circulation
The drive entered the property from Old
Barracks Road at Lambs gate, then followed
the existing Woodland Road, diverging
slightly east to towards the site. The road
terminated with a circular drive at the front
entry of the house.
section
Garden Design
Terraces formed the architectural base of the
house outside of the dining room and living
room (a), extending the living area of the
house. The garden was located on the north
side of the house, accessed by steps from
the drawing room terrace or by one of the
three entrances (b) in the center of each wall,
with the north entrance marked by a trellis
aligned with the central axis of the house. A
stone retaining wall formed the rectangular
platform of the garden with square parterres
(c) used as planting beds flanking the east
and west sides of the grass lawn. A wall
extended from the southeast and southwest
corners of the terrace disappearing into the
woods.
The terrace was below the main floor
of the house so not to obstruct views, but
still providing a protected area to enjoy the
outdoors, safe from the intrusion of animals
in the pasture. The terrace would have been
shaded because of the north facade.
Kimball proposed to keep existing trees
where they did not interfere with the house
plans. He also called for grass on the north
terrace and planting beds. The terrace could
have been viewed from the drawing room
but would have been hidden from the other
parts of the house while the trees were in
bloom. The terrace would have provided
views of the north side of the house and a
panoramic view of the landscape.
2.2
b
b
Figure 2.2.6. Bellevue plan with garden features labelled, 1935,

notations by author (see fig. 2.2.2.).
The garden featured geometric patterns,

an axial arrangement of design elements
and parterres consistent with Colonial
Revival design elements. Kimball did not
further detail this plan, instead changing the
house and garden design in his subsequent
scheme.
shack mountain
55
SCHEME B
Date: July-August 1936
Estimate: 22,293
Scheme B was introduced in 1936 with
the footprint based on Jeffersons Plan for
a City Dwelling. While it shares many of
the same elements as Bellevue (two levels, an
octagonal drawing room and a geometric
shaped plan), the rectangular house now
has octagonal rooms on the east, west
and north sides. The house sits on top of
the ridge with a south facing entrance
level.
The main living area is on the first
floor and the bedrooms are on the
second floor. Both floors of the house
are above ground with a portico outside
the main entrance and a circular stair
just inside the entry. The rooms on
the first floor are accessible through
the entry hall. A large drawing room is
located on the north side of the house with
a high ceilings extending to the second floor.
The library faces east and dining room faces
west. The kitchen is next to dining with
the stair off the hallway in the southeast
corner of the house leading to the upstairs
bedrooms.
1 Portico
2 Circular Stair
3 Entry Hall
4 Library
5 Drawing Room
6 Dining Room
7 Kitchen
* Bedrooms Located on 2nd Floor
Figure 2.2.7. Key map for Scheme B, drawn by Kimball, 1936,
with notions by author (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA
Archives).
56
shack mountain
AA
Figure 2.2.8. Scheme B, first floor plan, 1936 (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives).
Figure 2.2.9. Scheme B, second floor plan, 1936 (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives).
shack mountain
57
shack mountain part
SCHEME B
House Site
Old Wood Road
Old Barracks Road

(see fig. 1.4.5.).
Figure 2.2.11. Site plan with road alignment, Scheme B, ca.

1936 (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives, with north
arrow added by author).

The main axis of the house is north/south
with the large drawing room positioned
north for the mountain view. The house is
sited in the same location as Bellevue, built
on the hilltop with the entry elevation one
foot below that of the house. All but the
north side of the house is built into the
surrounding forest, with the north facade
facing the panoramic view of the mountains.
Vehicular Circulation
A new road replaces Woodland Road slightly
east, with a service road branching towards
the garage on the west side of the house.
The circular drive ends at the front entry
and a service road branches left towards the
kitchen. A path extends from the garage to
the portico.
58
shack mountain
section
Figure 2.2.12. Enlargement of drive from Scheme B (see fig.

2.2.11).
Garden Design
The entry to the house was similar to
Bellevue in that it did not feature formal
landscape elements; rather, the focus was on
the architecture. The landscape plan evolved
from the rectangular Bellevue terrace.
Existing trees were kept where they didnt
interfere with the building and road, and the
garden was on the east and north sides of the
house. A soapstone-paved terrace was located
on the north side of the house, level with
the drawing room, allowing for the
best views.
Kimball surrounded the house with a
semi-circular stone wall with gates; this
may have been intended to keep cattle off
the property or to add additional privacy if
they subdivided the property. Brick steps
spaced at three, six and nine oclock led
down to a second semi-circular grass terrace
encompassing the north side of the house.A
second set of steps mirrored the first, leading
through the embankment, down to the
2.2
Figure 2.2.13. Site plan with terraces and semicircular wall

enlacing the north garden, Scheme B, ca. 1936 (Series III,
Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives, with north arrow added by
author).
pasture replacing the semi-circular stonewall

in the earlier plan. Flowerbeds were located
against the north side of the house on both
sides of the terrace, and an orchard extended
from the east side of the house just below the
library, with the trees evenly spaced in a perfect
grid pattern. The remainder of the landscape
was left untouched. The existing trees were
indicated on the plan.
This garden design was a departure from
Bellevue, which had a very prominent east/
west axial alignment. The parterre was replaced
with beds along the house and the garden
design maximized views but kept to a very
formal design.23 The garden was proportional
with the house, and the axial alignment of the
garden was equal to the primary and secondary
house axes. Scheme B was even more detailed
than A, with Kimball even noting plant names
in the upper right hand corner of a working
sketch; Crepe Myrtle, Rose of Sharon, and
Smoke Bush.
shack mountain
59
SCHEME C
Date: February 1937
Scheme C was proposed six months after
scheme B was suspended. Kimball, concerned
with money, scaled down house size by
introducing an elongated T footprint.
A walkway leads to the portico which
is almost the width of the house. The
main bedroom, bath and kitchen are
on the southwest side of the house
closest to the road. The dining room,
bath and secondary bedroom are on
the northeast side of the house. The
basement houses the servant quarters
and storage.
By 1937, the heat was causing
Marie Kimballs fainting spells,21 and
is most likely the reason for locating
the master bedroom on the main
floor at the same elevation as the
service road. Kimball also added
air conditioning I know, however,
that I can afford the house (it is a
question of what I can afford in the way of
equipment-for instance, you see that I am
considering air conditioning), and I want to
go ahead meanwhile.22 The excavation for
the home was nearly complete when Lee
received a telegram from Kimball to suspend
construction and wait for a revised plan.23
7
4
1
3
5
7
8
7
7
1 Portico
2 Entry Hall
3 Stair
4 Drawing Room
5 Dining Room
6 Kitchen
7 Bedrooms
8 Servants Quarters
Figure 2.2.14. Key map for Scheme C (Kimball, Scheme
C, 1937, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives, with
notations and rotation of plan to current alignment of house
by author).
60
shack mountain
AA
Figure 2.2.15. Scheme C, drawn by Kimball, 1937 (Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA Archives).
shack mountain
61
shack mountain part
SCHEME C
House Site
Old Wood Road
Old Barracks Road

(see fig. 1.4.5.).
Figure 2.2.17. Enlargement of oval drive from Scheme C (see

fig. 2.2.15.).

The front facade of the house is
The drive follows the existing Woodland
shifted slightly northeast, perpendicular to
Road, ending at the main entrance of the
Woodland Road. The main axis is across the house. An oval carriage turn was to be in
contours of the ridge and the secondary axis located in the same place as in the previous
is aligned with the top to the ridge. Kimball schemes (southeast entrance) and at the same
sited the house on a more prominent hilltop elevation as the main bedroom and kitchen.
location. The slight adjustment of the
house allowed for a panoramic view of the
mountains and surrounding landscape.
62
shack mountain
section
2.2
Garden Design
The house and
landscaping had been
reduced dramatically
from the previous two
schemes with budgetary
concerns as the most likely
cause. The landscaped
area consisted of an upper
terrace to the front of
the portico similar in size
to the secondary axis or
upper part of the T-shape.
A lower terrace leading
down to the pasture
extended from the upper
terrace northward; while
Figure 2.2.18. Plot Plan for Shack Mountain, by Kimball, 1937, (Marie Goebel Kimball
Papers, ca. 1920-1955, Accession #5232, Special Collections, University of Virginia
it was the same width as
Library, Charlottesville,VA., north arrow notation by author).
the upper terrace, it was a
ease of maintenance uniting the house and
slightly smaller in length. The garden style
was no longer reflective of the previous two garden as complementary spaces for living,
designs and was instead functional, extending while respecting the native landscape (Treib,
53). This style used patios as an extension
the footprint of the house to include an
of the house, native landscaping, potted
outside paved terrace which does not
appear on axis. This is a modernist landscape planters and small gardens for ease of utility
and maintenance. Kimballs landscape design
approach; a minimalist solution based on
for this plan represented a departure from
budgetary concerns but also reflective of
his earlier ideas, yet reflected a modern and
modern ideas towards landscape design
progressive style for landscape design and
in the 1930s with a concern for space
economy.
rather than pattern, deriving a model from
contemporary architecture (Lockwood and
Garden Club of 2000, 1-9). The movement
began in California and brought forth
simplicity of design, functionality and
shack mountain
63
SCHEME Q
Date: March 1937
Drawing Room: 18 x 43-10
Scheme Q is crossed out on the
tabulation sheet with the only difference
between this and the final plan being the
size of the drawing room.24 The house now
resembles Jeffersons Farmington plan, with
the addition of more space and reintroduces
the octagonal drawing rooms and changes
the design of the front entry. This scheme
was modified to form the current plan of
Shack Mountain.
6
7
3
5
4
1 Portico
2 Entry Hall
3 Stair
2
1
4 Drawing Room
5 Dining Room
6 Kitchen
7 Bedrooms
* Servants Quarters Located in Basement
Figure 2.2.19. Key map for Scheme Q (Kimball, Scheme Q, 1937, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA
Archives, with notations by author).
64
shack mountain
AA
SCHEME D: FINAL
Date: March 1937
Finished Sq. Ft.: 1,870
Baement Fin. Sq. Ft.: 1,156
The revised design for
Shack Mountain is similar
to scheme Q but with
a smaller drawing room
and the elongated T-form
with octagonal ends.25 The
excavation was completed
using the notations from
Scheme C, with Kimball
reducing the footprint from
Scheme Q in order to align
with the excavation.
Figure 2.2.20. Site plan of Shack Mountain, Fiske Kimball, 1937 (Albert and Shirley
Small Special Collections Library, University of Virginia).
Figure 2.2.21. West Elevation of Shack Mountain, Fiske Kimball, 1937 (Albert and Shirley Small Special
Collections Library, University of Virginia).
shack mountain
65
shack mountain part
SCHEME D
House Site

The house was located on a prominent
hilltop location, with views of the woods
and oval entry road. The siting of the house
allowed for better panoramic views of the
mountains and surrounding landscape, sitting
above the pasture but within the treed
woods.
New Drive
Old Wood
Road
The road followed the existing drive and
featured an oval, side entry drive curving to
the north of the portico.

(see fig. 1.4.5.).
Figure 2.2.23. North Elevation of Shack Mountain, Fiske Kimball, 1937 (Albert and Shirley Small Special Collections Library,
University of Virginia).
66
shack mountain
section
2.3 Kimballs Landscape design

for shack mountain
Kimballs final plans for Shack Mountain
did not include a formalized plan but did
contain two conceptual landscape sketches
revisiting Colonial Revival design. The
1937 landscape design, included a simple
soapstone terrace deck surrounding the
western half of the house with steps leading
down to the pasture from the north
terrace. The east side of the house was left
untouched, sloping down to the surrounding
forest with trees in the north view beyond
the field trimmed in order to create the
vistas of the Blue Ridge Mountains of which
Marie Kimball often spoke in her letters.26
2.3
Gillettes with their house plans.29 Kimball

integrated some of Gillettes ideas with his
own, into the unrealized landscape design for
Shack Mountain.
Kimball and Gillette

Gillette was a prominent landscape
architect from Richmond,Virginia, who
by the late 1930s was well known for his
residential designs (Lilly and Rainey 1992,
11:100). Gillettes practice was rooted
in the Country Place Era, described by
Lilly and Rainey as a time when many
landscape architects worked for wealthy
clients designing large residential properties
between the years 1880-1930 (100).
They go on to say that Gillettes design
style was a blend of formal and informal
Kimball had yet to work out the details
design elements bringing an eclecticism
of the landscape design, writing to Lee, I
to his designs which were then codified in
see our specifications said nothing about
sodding the slopes of the terraces, I expected Henry Hubbard and Theodora Kimballs
Introduction to the Study of Landscape Design
to be down and look after the grounds and
one of the few books on design theory in
garden long ago.27 The correspondence
Gillettes library (103). Gillette viewed
between Kimball and T. W. Wood & Sons
the outdoor space as an extension of the
(Seed Growers and Merchants) mentions
house providing a formal transitional
planting plans and estimates to plant the
grounds in 1940 but the documents are not space between the landscape and dwelling;
whereas, the informal landscape was at
in the archive collection.28 Kimballs two
undated landscape sketches, while having
the edge of the site defined by soft lines
similarities, were very different. Upon
and undulating contours, and was treated
further investigation, it was is learned that
in a park-like manner (103). In terms of
he met with landscape architect Charles
historic revival buildings, this would mean
F. Gillette to solicit advice for planting
that formal elements create the transition
suggestions while offering to help a client of from the building to functional outdoor
shack mountain
67
shack mountain part
rooms by using the axial alignment of

the building along with the principles of
balance, symmetry and geometric proportion.
Kimballs landscape designs employed these
principles and with the progression of each
scheme, the Colonial Revival style is more
developed with the exception of Scheme
C. Kimball embraces Colonial Revival with
consciousness now that some of them

are errors, which may lead me to
abandon them in the future.32
Kimball, while respecting Gillette

professionally, was steadfast in his opinions
about the landscape design for Shack
Mountain. One point of dissension between
Kimball and Gillette was in regard to the
enthusiasm developing a plan that supersedes approach. Kimball desired a side approach
that would correspond with the existing
his early compositions in complexity and
road; his research revealed many suitable
planning.
Virginia approaches that matched this
Kimball often sought assistance from
criteria. Gillettes response was cordial,
professionals in the field, as shown with the
suggesting that this side approach was
grounds at Lemon Hill and Mt. Pleasant
acceptable but concluding the conversation
in Philadelphia. While having designed the
with the following response:
gardens, he did not have planting plans for
his properties. Gillette accepted Kimballs
My feeling was that your house and
its setting are so perfect that I dislike
invitation (I) will feel quite honored if you
the interruption in the picture by a
will permit me to suggest planting for your
modern motor car, and feel it would
new home.30 During their first meeting on
be so pleasant for guests and visitors to
September 11, 1937, Kimball and Gillette
approach the house walking thereby
having a better opportunity to see the
walked the property and discussed ideas that
complete picture than to rush by in an
Kimball later put to paper:
automobile.33
The high idea I had already formed,
from the Twyman31 and other places,
of your judgment and skill, was fully
confirmed by the very ingenious
plan you outlined which, indeed I
have already dashed down on paper,
although I know my sketch would
fall far short of the realization you
yourself would give your ideasIn
one or two regards, as I said, I am apt
to prove recalcitrant and to persist
in my own errors although with a
68
shack mountain
Gillette offers a look into the realm of a

designer whose client is faced with the
reality of economics:
Perhaps since you are broke now
time will suggest an entirely different
thing than what either of us has
thought of. Sometimes in my own
experience I am glad that I did not
have the money at a certain time
to do things that later proved to be
mistakes.34
section
Kimball did not complete his landscape

design for Shack Mountain, however
elements from the two final plans, Plan A
& B, both in the UVA Archives, are extant
in the current landscape. At first glance,
the plans appear similar, but when placed
side by side, the subtleties inherent to each
design become apparent. Since they are
neither dated nor signed, there is no way to
determine if either plan is from Kimballs
visit with Gillette, however Plan B is more
consistent with Gillettes style.
Plan A was most likely drawn before
Scheme D since the drawing room
measurement is the same as in scheme Q.
Plan B begins to define the garden planting,
associated costs and water requirements, as
well as the entry drive, and was possibly
derived from Gillettes suggestions. As
Gillette was more of a plants man then
Kimball, it seems possible the some of
his suggestions are in Plan B, yet this also
contains the oval drive, which Gillette was
against. It is difficult to conclusively prove if
Gillettes visit impacted Kimballs final design,
especially since the landscape design was
never realized.
The progression of designs for Shack
Mountain illuminates Kimballs process as an
architect and interpreter of past and current
movements in architectural and landscape
theory and design. Kimball reinterpreted
the landscape with each house design,
2.3
considering aesthetics along with the reality

of economics. The realization of associated
maintenance costs, the Kimballs limited use
of the house, and Marie Kimballs failing
health, all attributed to the understated
landscape. That said, it was the dramatic
views of the Blue Ridge Mountains, glowing
sunsets, forested land, and not the designed
landscape, which appealed to Marie Kimball.
The lack of a formal landscape extending
beyond the immediate house-site does not
limit the impact of the landscape, nor does it
diminish Kimballs intention of designing a
Jeffersonian-style house using past traditions
and techniques adapted to the modern
world. A few minor repairs and boxwoods
added to the corners to the terrace were
made to the landscape while the Kimballs
owned the property, but the house and
landscape remained virtually the same as it
had in 1937.35
shack mountain
69
Plan A
The following is an analysis of the final two conceptual plans for Shack Mountain highlighting the
components of each that makes up the final Kimball landscape.
Plan A is closer in appearance
to the current landscape of Shack
Mountain. The terrace extended
from the middle of the house to the
portico on the north, and out equally
distanced on the east and west sides.
The north terrace slopes down with
steps aligned with the axis off of the
center window of the dining room
and living room, leading to a crossshaped pathway. A semi-circular
hedge encloses the path with an
opening at the northern entrance
leading to the meadow. The steps on
the northeastern side of the patio
extend beyond the back of the house
to a terraced garden area.
The patio on the south side of
the house is level with the road, and
a semicircular hedge extends from
the corners of the patio aligning
with the southernmost window.
There is another semicircular
shape within the first with sharp
edges indicating a different surface.
Stairs lead from the center of the
southeastern side of the patio
descending towards the eastern end
of the house to the terraced garden
area. The terraced gardens feature
parterres with a path. The terrace is
70
shack mountain
enclosed by a wall, which drops off

towards the downslope leading to
the forest.
The entry road follows the Old
Woodland Road adjusting east just
before reaching the house. The entry
road terminates at the southeast
portion of the house with parking
at the eastern end just beyond the
terrace, hence passengers must get
out of the car and walk towards the
main entrance of the house. A path
extends from the road leading to the
first set of steps, the landing then
the last set of steps up to the portico.
The road is highlighted on the plan
but the oval drive is not in view.
This plan is most consistent with the
current landscape with the exception
of the entry road.
Figure 2.3.1. Plot Plan for Shack Mountain drawn by Fiske Kimball, undated, 1937 (Albert and Shirley Small Special Collections
Library, University of Virginia).
shack mountain
71
PLAN A
Kimballs LANDSCAPE Plan OVERLAID ON
THE Current Landscape Plan of Shack
Mountain
* The plan in red represents the current

landscape layout while the plan outlined in black
is a traced copy of Plan A oriented north.
Figure 2.3.2.
72
shack mountain
shack mountain
73
Plan B
Plan B is a much rougher sketch,
drawn with a heavier hand, and not as
precise as Landscape Plan A. The plans
are similar but have a few differences,
the 1st of which is the drive, a major
point of dissension between Kimball
and Gillette. The drive in Plan B still
follows the entry road but branches in
front of the southern garden area with
the eastern road terminating at the
parking area. The main drive leads to the
house in the form of an oval, continuing
around towards the western downslope
with parking adjacent to the front
entrance. The other difference is that
the southern garden area is no longer a
patio but rather a garden with parterres.
The cross axis path is surrounded by a
semi-circular hedge mirroring the north
side. This plan lists plant species along
with water requirements and prices.
Figure 2.3.3. SketchUp model of Oblique view drawn using

Kimballs landscape Plan B, 2012.
Figure 2.3.4. SketchUp model of kitchen entrance, eye level

view drawn using Kimballs landscape Plan B, 2012.
Figure 2.3.5. SketchUp model of the north patio, drawn using

Kimballs landscape Plan B, 2012.
74
shack mountain
AA
Figure 2.3.6. Landscape plan for Shack Mountain drawn by Fiske Kimball, undated (Albert and Shirley Small Special Collections
Library, University of Virginia).
shack mountain
75
PLAN B
Overlay of Kimballs Plan and Current
Landscape Plan of Shack Mountain
* The plan in red represents the current

landscape layout while the plan outlined in black
is a traced copy of Plan B oriented north.
Figure 2.3.7.
76
shack mountain
shack mountain
77
shack mountain part
KIMBALLS UNREALIZED LANDSCAPE
2.3.8. Rendered SketchUp Model of Kimballs landscape Plan B, western view, 2012.
Figure 2.3.9. Clay rendered SketchUp Model of Kimballs landscape Plan B, Oblique view south, 2012.
78
shack mountain
section
2.3
Figure 2.3.10. Rendered SketchUp Model of Kimballs landscape Plan B, Oblique view north, 2012.
shack mountain
79
shack mountain part
NOTES
1 H. T. Van Nostrand to F.
Kimball, 2 May 1935, Series
2 R. E. Lee to F. Kimball, 39 April 1935, Series
III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA; F.
Kimball to R.E. Lee, 2 May
FKP, PMA.
3 R.E. Lee to F. Kimball, 21 June 1937, R.E. Lee
Papers, Special Collections,
UVA
4 M. Kimball to F. Kimball,
5 May 1935, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
5 Plan drawn in pencil labeled Bellevue, Shack
Mountain,VA, 1935, Series
III, Subseries I, FKP,
6 R.E. Lee to F. Kimball,
19 June 1935, Series III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
7 Kimball did not date
or sign most of his drawings,
nor did he indicate site orientation or use a scale for
reference. As Kimball gained
an understanding of the site,
he modified the architectural
design to reflect economy
and site; this is also true for
the landscape.
80
shack mountain
8 R. E. Lee to F. Kimball, 13 F. Kimball to R.T.H.

4 September 1936, Series III, Halsey, Marie has been
ill, 23 January 1937, Series
I, Subseries II, FKP, PMA;
9 F. Brigham to F. Kimball, F. Kimball to V. Hubbard, 6
9 May 1935, Series II, SubNovember 1936, Series II,
series A, FKP, PMA.
Subseries A, FKP, PMA.
10 Theodora Kimballs
14 Detailed Estimate for
achievements include: coShack Mountain, 4 Septemauthor of the Introduction to
ber 1936, R.E. Lee Papers,
the Study of Landscape Design Special Collections, UVA.
with Henry Vincent Hubbard, editor for the Journal
15 F. Kimball to R.E. Lee,
of Landscape Architecture,
Telegram, 12 March 1937,
co-founder of the Journal of R.E. Lee Papers, Special
City Planning and coCollections, UVA.
author of Our Cities Today
and Tomorrow. Hohmann,
13 March 1937, R.E. Lee
Theodora Kimball, 169Papers, Special Collections,
186. Theodora Kimballs
contributions to the fields of UVA.
Landscape Architecture and 17 F. Kimball to H. Frasier
City Planning as author and Esq., 29 November 1937, Secritic, and for the creation of ries I, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
the classification methodology for the two fields (in ac- 18 Will of Theodora
cordance to the new Library Hubbard, 1935, Series II,
of Congress system) are not Subseries C, FKP, PMA.
well publicized.
19 H. Frasier to F. Kim11 Theodora Kimball Hubbard 1887-1935, (1935),
Series II, Subseries C., FKP,
PMA; Dr. Lefavour, In an
Appreciation for Theodora
Hubbard, Boston Transcript,
November 14, 1935.
12 Obituary of Theodora
Kimball Hubbard, 10
November 1935, Series II,
ball, 29 November 1937, Series I, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.

20 Theodora Kimball Hubbard 1887-1935,
(1935?), Series II, Subseries
C, FKP, PMA. Theodora
Kimball wrote her thesis on
the English Landscape Garden. Kimball writes later in
life that the landscape garden was one of Englands
greatest artistic inventions
notes
Fiske Kimball, Romantic

Classicism in Architecture,
Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 97.
For Kimball the most significant instant of the English
influence was the picturesque garden. He saw the
English landscape garden
style as the romantic movements contribution to a tradition that championed artistic creation over academic
imitation Lauren Bricker
Weiss, The Writings of Fiske
Kimball: A Synthesis of Architectural History and Practice. Architectural Historian
in America (1990) 217: 229.
26 M.Van Yahres to Bedford Moore, estimated costs

of pruning the vistas in the
1950s and 1960s, 5 August
1991, Records from the office of Van Yahres.
21 F. Kimball to R.E.
Lee, 15 July 1937, R.E. Lee
UVA.
30

34 F. Kimball to C. Gillette,
27 September 1937, Series
35 The Kimballs added

the brick wall after 1947; M.
27 F. Kimball to R.E.
Kimball to B. Lee, 17 March
Lee, 26 July 1937, R.E. Lee
1947, R.E. Lee Papers, SpePapers, Special Collections,
cial Collections, UVA; reUVA.
placed wood steps up to the
28 G. Wood to F. Kimball, terrace deck in 1952; B. Lee
to F. Kimball, 11 February
1952, R.E. Lee Papers, SpeIII, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
cial Collections, U VA.
29 C. Gillette to F. Kimball, 24 August 1937, Series
Ibid.
31 Edward K. Lay, The

Architecture of Jefferson
Country: Charlottesville and
22 F. Kimball to R.E. Lee, Albemarle County,Virginia
25 February 1937, R.E. Lee (Charlottesville: University
Press of Virginia, 2000), 262.
UVA.
F. W. Tywman built a house
(Bellvoir) in Charlottesville,
VA in 1928, designed by
Telegram, 12 March 1937,
Lynchburg architect StanR.E. Lee Papers, Special
hope Johnson with the garCollections, UVA.
den design by Charles Gil24 Shack Mountain Tab- lette.
ulation Sheet, 1935, Series
32 F. Kimball to C. Gillette,
25 A historic description
of Shack Mountain can be
33 C. Gillette to F. Kimball,
viewed in 1976 National
Register of Historical Places
Nomination and the 1992
National Landmark Nomination for Shack Mountain.
shack mountain
81
shack mountain part
PART 3
THE END OF AN ERA:
THE PASSING OF THE KIMBALLS
Figure 3.1. Photograph of Shack Mountain, ca. 1955 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
shack mountain part
3.1 Shack Mountain the

Kimballs Retreat
Over the next 18 years, the Kimballs
visited Shack Mountain on holidays and
a few weeks each summer (Robert and
Robert 1959, 163-64), spending the most
time in Charlottesville between 1946-1950
(240).1 In 1944, Marie Kimball was named
Walter Bedford Moore III, new transplants

to UVA and the Charlottesville community,
and the future owners of Shack Mountain.
The Moores were a young couple in
their late twenties, living at Piedmont, the
university faculty housing. The following
summary is from a 2005 interview with Jane
Moore at Shack Mountain, describing how
they came to live in Charlottesville:
the first curator of Monticello, and was busy

writing her biographical series of Jefferson,

Jane and Bedford Moore were
receiving two Guggenheim Fellowships for
introduced by a mutual friend while
Moore was at Princeton, waiting to
her work, one in 1945 and again in 1946.
become a Navy pilot during World
Marie Kimballs health continued to decline
War I. Jane Moore was from Mobile,
during this period, and by 1946 she began
Al and Moore was from SC, and they
having heart attacks (240). Negotiating the
married on August 23, 1944. The
couple moved to Cambridge, MA, in
three floors plus the basement of Lemon
order for Bedford to attend Harvard
Hill became too difficult for her so Kimball
for a masters degree in English.
purchased a one-story home on Rose Land
During the summer of 1946, Bedford
in Haverford, PA for them (240). The house
Moore finished with classes and they
were driving from Cambridge, south
was a converted garage, much smaller than
on their way to a wedding. Bedford
the Lemon Hill Mansion and farther way
asked his wife if they could stop while
from the museum, but served as a place for
in Charlottesville to visit a friend who
them to stay until they converted a room on
worked at UVA and Jane said she
didnt mind, waiting in the car for
the first floor of Lemon Hill as a bedroom
quite awhile before Bedford returned.
for Marie Kimball (240). Shack Mountain
He approached the car and, leaning in
was easier for her to navigate as the living
the window, asked Jane if she would
area was all on one floor and the entry was
like to live in Charlottesville. Jane
said that she supposed so and asked
level with the house.
Bedford why. He replied that he had
During the early years of Shack
just been offered a job in the English
Mountain, the Kimballs entertained guests,
Department.2
mainly UVA faculty, at their extravagant
The Moores attended the 1946 Christmas
annual Christmas Eve parties. In 1946, the
Eve party, considered a major event in CharKimballs invited Jane Tarleton-Smith and
84
shack mountain
section
Part
3.1
1
lottesville.3 The following excerpt describes

the Moores first visit to Shack Mountain,
offering a glimpse of the landscape in 1946:
Highway 29 was the size of a
ribbon and there were no lights,
so when we came out here (Shack
Mountain), as I say 29 was a tiny
little thing and Hydraulic Road was
not even paved, and Lambs Road
was certainly not paved. There were
no houses on it, no, one house, two
houses. When Fiske told us how to
get here, it seemed to me that were
going in the middle of nowhere, and
I said to Bedford why in the
world would anybody build a
house in here, in the middle of
nowhere.4
Shack Mountains rural location is
what originally attracted Marie Kimball to
the property. Over the next ten years, the
Moores also came to appreciate the rural
aspect of the site.5 The couples mutually
enjoyed each others company; Kimball
and Moore shared a connection as Harvard
alumni while Marie Kimball and Jane
Moore were both educated, intelligent, and
respected women.6 Jane Moore admired
both of the Kimballs describing Marie
Kimball as, quiet but someone not to be
overlooked, a powerhouse.7 When asked
about Kimball, she responded as someone
who knew some of his less admirable
qualities and liked him more because of
them, well Fiske was always the noisy one,
Figure 3.1.1. Jane and Bedford Moore, 1963 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
Marie was always quietshe was a gentle

sort of person and you would never call
Fiske gentle.8 The Kimballs and Moores
maintained their friendship for almost a
decade. Jane Moore discussed in her 2005
interview how she and her husband attended
the Kimballs Christmas parties, went on
picnics and shared afternoon cocktails with
them. Even though the age difference
between the couples was nearly thirty years,
the generation gap was no hindrance to their
friendship.9
shack mountain
85
shack mountain part
3.2 The Kimballs Final Years at
The couple spent less time at Shack

Mountain after Marie Kimballs heart attack
shack Mountain
in 1951, no longer visiting in the summers.
Shack Mountain was paid in full by1948, In 1953, by then sixty-five, Kimball,
and Kimball, by then sixty, had retirement
expecting forced retirement, contemplated
looming in the near future. However, he
selling the house and retiring to California
had been exhibiting signs of dementia
or Europe.12 He even hired a real-estate
including memory loss, outbursts, and at
agent, George Barkley, to list the property
times, extreme agitation (Robert and Robert (which Kimball valued at $75,000),13 but
1959, 271-72).10 Marie Kimballs health
when the museum kept him on for another
worsened, having had another heart attack
year, Kimball decided not to sell.14 In March
in 1949 (269). The Kimballs moved back
of 1954, Kimball again proposed subdividing
into Lemon Hill in 1950, with a bedroom
Shack Mountain just as he did in 1935. In a
now on the first floor for Marie, but the
letter to Lee, Kimball called the subdivision
stairs were still difficult for her to manage.
Shack Mountain Estates, but after evaluating
In 1951, Kimball received the Philadelphia
the limited water resources, Kimball decided
Award, honoring an outstanding citizen for
to drop the proposal for good.15
his service to the city, with the a $10,000
The Kimballs were in Charlottesville
prize (280-81). This money, along with
during April of 1954; this is most likely the
proceeds from the sale of Rose Lane in 1950, last time the Moores saw them together at
went towards the installation of an elevator
Shack Mountain.16 In the following excerpt
in Lemon Hill (281). During the spring
from her 2005 interview, Jane Moore
of 1951, Marie Kimball suffered another
describes the first time she thought about
heart attack while on a trip to Washington
living at Shack Mountain:
(282). Her failing health was undeniable,
We were having drinks on the terrace
especially to her, and she wrote out her
and I said we are thinking of finding
an old house and doing it over and
funeral instructions entitling them, Now
Fiske said no, no, no, youve got to
That I Have Died A Farewell to My Beloved
build. I can tell you were not going
Ones.11 The stress of Kimballs mental
to do that, I dont think our marriage
health was having a deleterious affect on her
can take it. Fiske was insistent and he
said I would give you twenty acres
(300-01) as was her hectic schedule as the
right down here if youll build your
directors wife and Curator for Monticello,
own house. He died shortly after that
not to mention her authorship of the
and we wondered which twenty acres
biographical series on Jefferson.
he was talking about.
86
shack mountain
section
3.2
Figure 3.2.1. Shack Mountain north view, 1963 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
In January of 1955, Kimball then 67,

wrote to B. Lee, I officially resigned my
position as the Director of the PMAI am
as happy as a kid out of school.17 There is
dissension as to whether Kimball resigned or
was asked to retire but the signs of dementia
were clear, with his violent outbursts
becoming progressively worse (Robert
and Robert 1959, 287). Kimballs letter to
Bobby Lee was lucid, informing him that
they would not be in Charlottesville for the
summer, but would be moving there full
time in 1956 while keeping Lemon Hill. He
mentioned an addition to Shack Mountain,
which would create a five part house with a
new library and servants wing.18 In a letter
dated January of 1954 to B. Lee, Kimball
wrote how his wife can no longer climb
the hill from the low grounds Marie is far

from well.
Marie Kimball died of a massive heart
attack and stroke in Philadelphia on March
2, 1955. The first funeral service was held
at Lemon Hill in accordance with her
instructions. Kimball then brought his wifes
body to her beloved Virginia and Shack
Mountain. The internment at the house
was to be held on March 25, 1955, nearly
three weeks after Marie Kimballs death.
She wanted to be buried at Monticello in
Thomas Jeffersons family cemetery, and it is
suggested that Kimball was waiting to hear
back from Monticello before he buried her
at Shack Mountain (302).19 Kimball was not
himself at this time, overcome with grief and
at the height of his illness, as noted in letters
shack mountain
87
shack mountain part
between his friends regarding

the funeral arrangements.20
Kimballs written
instructions for his wifes
burial at Shack Mountain
were sent to B. Lee, two
graves were to be dug at the
north/west end of the house
and a wall built around the
10 square gravesite with
the hedge encapsulating the
wall.21
The Moores attended
Marie Kimballs funeral
along with twenty or
so guests mainly from
the university.22 Kimball
followed his wifes 1951
instructions- she did not
want a service or prayers,
but instead requested that
Wagner, Wotans Farewell
and Magic Fire from
Die Walkre be played and
afterwards a final farewell
given.23 Jane Moore recalled
that on her way out she
Figure 3.2.2. Map of Kimballs instructions for Marie Kimballs burial in a letter sent
to Lee, March 1955, (Papers of R. E. Lee and Son, Inc..., Accession #7615,-a,-b,
Special Collections Dept., University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville,VA.).
spoke with a neighbor remarking, how it

was the saddest funeral she had ever been
to.24 Kimball finally allowed the burial to
The procession walked along the terrace

toward the north side of the house, down
the slope to the gravesite in the back. There
proceed and, according to the instructions
was no service nor a word spoken; after she
indicated on the map he sent to B. Lee, the
was buried, everyone walked silently to their
casket was carried out through the front door. cars and drove home.25
88
shack mountain
section
3.2
Kimball was unable to manage all

of the details of the burial, and in the
process, Marie Kimballs grave was not
dug deep enough. His friends handled
the disinterment and reburial, waiting
until he left for Europe in April 1955
in order to spare him from the strain
of the decision.26 Kimball planned
to stay in Europe until September
and while in Germany, he received a
letter from someone desiring to look
at Shack Mountain but had already
made his mind up not to sell.27 Marie
Kimball, with foresight, had written a
will stating that Kimball would not be
the benefactor until 180 days after her
death, fearing the state of his mental
health.28 Kimball died in Munich
Figure 3.2.3. Window in the basement of Shack Mountain looking
Germany, August 14, 1955, just five
towards the former location of Marie Kimballs gravesite, June 1012.
months after his wifes death. They
are now buried together at Monticello
I write these reminiscences not on
Memorial Park east of Charlottesville. Their
any idea of having myself played a
will left Shack Mountain, and all items not
part of importance on the great stage
bequeathed elsewhere, to the PMA. The
of the world, but in the hope that
some events which I have at least
Museum sold the property to Henderson
been privy, some observations I have
Heyward in 1955; the remaining contents of
had the opportunities of making,
the house were auctioned the following year.
some men I have had the chance of
knowing and meeting, may be of
wider interest. I certainly am under
The Kimballs Contribution to History
no illusion that the small facts of my
Among Kimballs private papers, located
personal existence are of significance
in the Philadelphia Museum of Art Archives,
or that I can treat them with a literary
is this opening paragraph of his
art, which would justify elaborating
on the detailed experiences of
unfinished autobiography:
childhood and youth, or even of
shack mountain
89
shack mountain part
manhood. But they have happily

given me occasion to know from
the inside certain institutions, certain
happenings, certain men, and it are
these I hope to portray.29
According to Hosmer, Kimball was from

the first generation of preservation leaders
(1926) who influenced the development
of historic-sites programs up until 1946
(1981, 26). The Historic Sites Act of 1935,
This was the reflection of a middle-aged
created the advisory board that established
man, who by his mid-twenties had built
a national policy to preserve for public
a distinguished career as author, architect,
use historic sites, buildings and objects of
scholar, restorationist, and museum director.
national significance for the inspiration and
Although Kimballs memoir is unfinished,
benefit of the people of the United States.
as are the last two volumes of his wifes
Kimball served on the National Park System
biographical series on Jefferson, they both
Advisory Board for 15 years as the expert
bestowed an unprecedented legacy of
on American Architecture and Historic
scholarship for future generations. The
Preservation (Sprinkle Jr. 2010, 5). The
Kimballs were Jeffersonian Scholars; an
board helped to established the Historic Sites
appreciable amount of their work was
Survey, the Historic American Building
devoted toward researching, advancing
Survey (HABS), the Historic American
awareness, and furthering the knowledge
Engineering Record (HAER), and the NHL
of Thomas Jefferson. Kimballs first book,
(Tyler 2000, 40-2).
Thomas Jefferson Architect, 1916 written with
Hosmer credits the second wave
the help of his wife Marie, was the defining
of preservationists, after Kimball, for
moment of his early career, and the spark
developing standards for scholarly
that fueled Maries endeavor to complete
restoration work, an embryonic national
a series of five books about the life of
survey, and a central organization that
Jefferson.30
marshaled the talent of the National Park
Kimball, known for his contributions
Service and private historical associations
to architectural history, is also regarded
(26). This also led to new insight for
for his achievements in the field of
preservation theory and the criticism of
historic preservation. Kimball became a
early restoration projects, including those
driving force in the historic preservation
by Kimball and while he is acknowledged
movement, focusing not only on policy but
for the use of historical evidence, many of
also historic architectural interpretations
his restorations now receive mixed reviews
that were used as a tool for restoration.
(Chappell and Wenger 1995, 5). As stated
90
shack mountain
section
earlier, most of Kimballs projects were

completed during the infancy of historic
restorations and while his projects were
based on historical evidence, Kimball also
applied his own interpretations.
The Kimballs were devoted to each
other, respectful of the others opinion
and at times critical of the others work. It
is important to note that Marie Kimball,
though small in stature, did not bow down
to Kimballs overbearing demeanor. This is
evident in the authors note for Jefferson the
Road to Glory 1743-1776, while expressing
gratitude and appreciation, Marie Kimball
sends a special note to her husband:
3.2
built as a respite for his wife, far enough

away from Charlottesville for her to have
peace and quiet in order to write and work
on the Jefferson biographies (G. Robert and
M. Robert 1959, 166).
She wishes to particularly thank Fiske

Kimball. He has patiently discussed all
phases of the book with her. He has
given her the benefit of his wisdom,
and he has made her fight, bleed, and
die for her opinions. (M. Kimball
1943, vi)
The life and accomplishments of the
Kimballs are intertwined. It would be easy
for Marie Kimball to be overshadowed by
Kimball, but her lifes work on Thomas
Jefferson, the distinguished honor of two
Guggenheim Fellowships, and her work as
Curator of Monticello, is undeniably her
own; that of a gifted and respected scholar.
Shack Mountain was built by Fiske Kimball
as a tribute to Classicism, his artistic creation
shack mountain
91
shack mountain part
3.3 New Life: Jane

Tarleton-Smith and
Walter Bedford
Moore III
According to Jane Moore,
she and her husband first
thought about living on the
property of Shack Mountain
in 1954 when Kimball
mentioned he would give
them a lot if they built a
home. After Kimballs death,
she was curious as to what
would happen to the house
and asked local architect and
friend Henderson Heyward
if he knew anything about
its future.31 As Heyward
was unfamiliar with the
property, they drove out to
Shack Mountain where they
Figure 3.3.1. Jane and Bedford Moore wedding picture, 1944 (Private collection;
climbed over the gate and
photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
walked around the grounds;
conversation with Heyward and her skilled
the house was locked up. Shortly after the
acquiescence:
visit, Heyward rang and told Jane Moore
Not long after that, the telephone
that he had purchased the property, paying
rang one night and Henderson said I
$52,500 while the appraised value was
bought Shack Mountain, and I said
$36,000; it is unclear as to why the purchase
for me? I dont think he had but
32
anyhow he was a good enough sport.
price was more than the appraised value.
He sent an agent up, unbenownst to
Heyward did not keep Shack Mountain, but
us and evidently bought it from the
instead resold it to Bedford and Jane Moore
museum. When I said that, as I say
in January 1956. This following excerpt
there was a long pause, but anyhow
he did [sell the Moores Shack
from Jane Moores interview recalls the
Mountain].33
92
shack mountain
section
3.3
In the end, many say

Heyward gave into Jane
Moore not only because
of their friendship but
also because of her
persistence and desire
to live in the Kimball
house.34 The Moores did
not the purchase the entire
property at first. They
bought 72.3 acres in 1956
and the remaining 27.79
acres, on two parcels, on
November 19, 1957.35
When the Moores
moved into Shack
Mountain, the only
furniture remaining from
the Kimballs was a chair
and corner cupboard,
both of which Moore
purchased at the auction in
1956.36 The Moores loved
history and preservation,
keeping the house as close
to the way Kimball had
intended, carefully painting
it to match the original
colors. Their updates
were minor, replacing
the air-conditioning
unit, removing the boiler,
and replacing the front
flagstone steps with brick.37
Figure 3.3.2. Shack Mountain showing the original front entry pavers, ca. 1955 (Private
collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
Figure 3.3.3. A photograph of the kitchen entrance to Shack Mountain just after the
Moores purchase, showing the terrace and limited plantings surrounding the house, ca.
1955 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
shack mountain
93
shack mountain part
According to the 2005 interview, there

wasnt any landscaping in place except for
the terraces surrounding the house, and
[Jane] did not recall any plantings describing
the landscape as mostly woods with no
separation of house and garden.
Marie Kimball was still buried on the

property when the Moores purchased Shack
Mountain. A map drawn by Kimball shows
the location and design of the gravesite on
the east side of the house. Marie Kimballs
casket was exhumed and laid to rest next
Figure 3.3.4. An early photograph of the tree giving an approximate location of Marie Kimballs grave, ca. 1958-1960 (Private
collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
94
shack mountain
section
3.3
to her husband sometime before the 1960s

when the gardens were built.38 A tree was
planted near the location indicated on
Kimballs map.
Jane and Bedford Remembered
Those who knew Bedford and Jane
Moore described them as very private
people who cared deeply about community
and environment. Jane Moores size and
stature are also remembered alongside her
personality and demeanor:
Jane was very petite and she was a
very gentlewoman in a wonderful
old Southern style. She was soft
spoken, had an incredible memory
and was hugely intelligent, not only
remembering people and events but
she also connected (with people).39
The Moores had a deep appreciation of
history and preservation.40 Jane Moore gave
her time freely serving as a board member
for the Albemarle County Historical
Society and as a cherished member of
the Albemarle Garden Club, hosting her
first and only garden club tour of Shack
Mountain in 1976. She had an extraordinary
love for animals and an absolute devotion
to nature.41 When asked to reveal a story
which best described Jane Moore, almost
everyone interviewed referred to one story
about a tree:
Figure 3.3.6. Jane and Bedford Moore in the dining room of

Shack Mountain, ca. 1990-1995 (Private collection; photograph
courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
Figure 3.3.5. Jane Moore with one of the family dogs, ca.
1970-1980 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of
Osborne Mackie).
shack mountain
95
shack mountain part
There was a Paulownia

tree just beyond the semicircular hedge seen from the
north terrace; Jane could
see it from the window. It
was dead and had been for a
long time. It was just a strip
of bark, and she just loved it.
It had been dead for years
but Jane refused to have it
cut down. She said it was
a place for the birds to nest
but even so it was a danger
because of the advanced
state of deterioration, the
manager for Van Yahres
Trees remembers the
conversations he had
with Jane, discussing her
refusal to take it out and
many other tree hazards
they fought over. The tree
remained standing until Janes
death in 2010 when it was
finally removed.42
Figure 3.3.7. View from north terrace of Jane Moores cherished paulownia
tree, undated (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
The Moores respect for nature and

concern for the environment contributed
to their active participation with the Ivy
Creek Foundation (ICF), a non-profit
organization whose mission is enriching
lives by fostering environmental awareness
through education and connecting the
community with nature (Resources 1990).
In 1966, the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir
was built to provide a new source of public
water and a view-scape along the river but
development pressures and rezoning
96
shack mountain
created environmental concerns because of

eutrophication (ICF 2013). The Moores,
whose property abutted Ivy Creek, became
involved with Citizens for Albemarle
in 1970, a newly formed watchdog
organization seeking to restrict development
along the watershed3 in order to protect the
public water source. The Moores devotion
to conservation and ownership of Shack
Mountain would embroil them in a lawsuit
lasting more than a decade.
section
3.3
Ivy Creek Natural Area: Moore v. Flemming

James Flemming, a local realtor and
developer, acquired eighty acres of land
adjoining the reservoir from Mary Carr
Greer after her death in 1973.43 The
following year, Flemming and two
adjoining property owners combined their
land and proposed Evergreen, a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) of 804 units
on 127 acres near and along the reservoir
(Foundation 2012).44 The proposal required
the land to be rezoned from agriculture to
residential PUD.45 The Albermarle County
Planning Commission rejected the proposal
in October of 1974, asking for a revised
plan of 2.5 units per acre rather than the
proposed 6.33. The Planning Commission
meetings were open to public comment, and
Bedford Moore spoke at two of them, both
as a concerned citizen and property owner,
in opposition to the development:
Moores position was that the
project, if constructed, would create
a pollution hazard to the Rivanna
Reservoir, which supplies water to
the City of Charlottesville, and it
would also detract from the value of
his property.46
Flemming, unhappy with the decision from
the county, appeared before the board
again in December of 1975. Rezoning
was again denied with the board placing a
moratorium on building within a five mile
Figure 3.3.8. Bedford Moore, May 1980 (Private collection;

photograph courtesy of Eleanor Kuhl).
radius of the intake pipe for the reservoir

(Foundation 2012).
Flemming published paid advertisements
in the Albemarle Tribune and the
student newspaper Cavalier Daily entitled
RACISM in which Bedford Moore was
directly implicated.47 Moore sued Flemming
for libel stating the article injured his
reputation in the university community.48
shack mountain
97
shack mountain part
According to transcripts from Flemming v.

Moore:
Moores assurance that their land would

never be developed was pivotal in the
decision to purchase the land (2012). The
Bedford Moore never spoke publicly Moores conveyed 1.924 acres to the TNC
or gave an interview to the press
on January 3, 1978, and in 1990 placed
about what was said during open
comment at the planning commission a conservation easement on the Shack
meeting and Moores involvement
Mountain. According to the ICFC, Jane
with Ivy Creek, their status within the Moore played a critical role by becoming an
community, and property adjacency
intermediary linking conservation groups
made him a target.49
with the Garden Club of Albemarle and as
Moore was awarded compensatory and
a liaison with the Greer family (2012). She
punitive damages but Flemming appealed
was a skilled mediator and valuable asset to
the decision, and the lawsuit was dragged
the team, and was named to the first Board
out for over ten years with a final judgment of Directors for the Ivy Creek Foundation
against Flemming in 1989.50 During
(ICF), formed in 1979.51
the lawsuit, the Moores, especially Jane,
With the proposal for Evergreen denied,
continued in their conservation efforts
Flemmings property was one of the two
for Ivy Creek, becoming integral in the
remaining pieces of land along Ivy Creek
formation of the Ivy Creek Natural Area
that the TNC was interested in purchasing
(ICFC 2012).
to create the Ivy Creek Natural Area. The
Flemmings proposal for Evergreen
lawsuit behind them, the TNC was able
was only one example of the increasing
to negotiate a deal with the Flemming
development pressures along Ivy Creek.
and Flamenco property owners to, sell a
Concerned citizens interested in preserving
portion of their land and to develop the rest
the diverse habitat of Ivy Creek worked
along Lambs Rd (ICFC 2012) resulting in
together with The Nature Conservancy
the Ivy Creek Natural Area. Jane Moores
(TNC) in order to protect the threatened
involvement with the project is documented
landscape of an eighty-acre tract of mixed
in the Ivy Creek Chronicles and was
forest and wetland of Ivy Creek (ICFC
acknowledged in 1979 when she received
2012). The TNC purchased Riverview
the Conservation Award from the Garden
Farm along Ivy Creek, recognizing it as
Club of Virginia.
a place of beauty and ecological integrity
and renaming it the Rann Preserve (ICFC
2012). According to the TNC, the
98
shack mountain
section
3.3
Figure 3.3.9. Google Earth satellite image defining the boundaries of Shack Mountain and Ivy Creek Natural Area as of 2012,
not to scale.
Figure 3.3.10. Ivy Creek, undated (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne Mackie).
shack mountain
99
shack mountain part
The Gardens at Shack Mountain

Jane Moores passion for the landscape
is evidenced by the gardens of Shack
Mountain. With Kimball only completing
the terrace adjoining the house, the Moores
were free to build the formal garden area as
they wished. In total, their terraces, vegetable
garden, kitchen garden, pool and immediate
area around the house encompassed
approximately 8,263 sq. ft., roughly four
times the size of the house. The gardens
were constructed in the early 1960s; while
Jane Moore denied using any of Kimballs
ideas though, she did admit to seeing some
of his drawings.52 The Moores also hired
Gillette for half of a day, but according to
Jane Moore he had all sorts of plans, none
of which we used.53 Once they devised a
scheme for the garden, they first cut trees
down on the east side of the house before
acquiring soil to fill in the terraces:
Whenever wed see a load of dirt
going by somewhere down the road
wed say do you have a place for that
dirt, would you mind bringing it out
here and dumping it? So they did.54
The terraced gardens, pool, lanai, and
landscaping were installed by the Moores
gardener/handyman Frank Gipson (Gip).55
His son, Nelson Gipson is the current
groundskeeper (as of 2012) for the property
having grown up helping his father at Shack
Mountain (Gipson 2012). In a conversation
with Nelson Gipson on June 23, 2012 at
100
shack mountain
Shack Mountain, he stated that at height

of glory, there were up to four gardeners on
any given day but when she became ill in
late 2000, the focus was on her health and
wellbeing; the gardens became a reflection
of their former glory (Gipson, 2012).The
gardens, while maintained, have been in
decline since Jane Moores illness and her
subsequent death in 2010. They have also
suffered with the destruction caused by
wildlife, especially deer.56 In a March 2,
2013 telephone conversation with Osborne
Mackie, Jane Moores cousin, he described
the changes brought on by the invasion of
deer and how devastating it was to Jane,
because they destroyed large swaths of the
garden.
Jane Moores love for her trees is
documented in the files of Van Yahres Tree
Company (a tree maintenance company in
Charlottesville VA) dating back to the late
1960s. The Moores topped the interfacing
trees in the forest behind the house, in order
to create the vistas just as the Kimballs did
in the 1950s. They also cared for the trees
and shrubs surrounding the house, feeding
the trees every year. Many of the trees
surrounding the property were kept far
longer than recommended, as noted by the
manager of Van Yahres Tree Company, due
to Jane Moores insistence to leave them as
nesting places for the birds.57
In a telephone conversation with the
Moores niece, Eleanor Kuhl, on July 10,
section
3.3
Figure 3.3.11. Jane Moore on the lower terrace in the gardens, 1986 (Private collection; photograph courtesy of Osborne
Mackie).
2012, she spoke of Jane Moores love of

white flowers, and the specially planted
white tulip border surrounding the semicircular terrace which could be seen from
the dining room window. Catherine Burton,
Jane Moores housekeeper and friend stated
that she would not let a tree be cut down
without a fight and by the end would not
even let the hedges be trimmed.
Bedford Moore passed away in October
1995, and Jane Moore passed away at
Shack Mountain on August 5th, 2010. The
Moores are fondly remembered as private,
caring people whose love for nature, passion

for history and esteem for the Kimballs is
embodied through the preservation of Shack
Mountain. Those who knew Jane Moore
in her later years had many endearing
memories of her and reflected on how
her gentle ways would be missed.58 The
Kimballs legacy is in large part their work
at Shack Mountain; yet the work of the
Moores to preserve the property and their
humility in the undertaking of it, also
inspires us.
shack mountain
101
shack mountain part
3.4 A PICTORIAL HISTORY OF THE GARDENS AT SHACK MOUNTAIN

Figure 3.4.1. the gardens of shack mountain ca. 1961
Photographs courtesy of Osborne Mackie
Top Left
The pool garden area

was built first, in the
early 1960s. The pool was
formed in cinder block
with a coating of cement.
Flagstone pavers surround
the pool and it is enclosed
by hedges on three sides
and a brick wall along
the north side tie into
the north east corner of
the house.
Bottom Left
View from pool, looking west, towards the north

terrace.
102
shack mountain
section
3.4
shack mountain
103
Top Right
The brick wall was built

by Gip, the first of two
generations employed by
the Moores to oversee
the gardens and general
maintenance of Shack
Mountain.
Bottom Right
Steps leading from the

pool area to the second
terrace with planted flower
boxes on the right of the
steps. The lanai, partially in
view on the left, was used
as a reprieve from the sun.
shack mountain part
Figure 3.4.2. the gardens of shack mountain 1961

Top Left
The back retaining wall

of the pool area showing
how the landscape sloped
away from the house.
Bottom Left
Expanded view of the

retaining wall.
104
shack mountain
section
3.4
Top Right
The terrace below the

pool, looking north.
Middle
Same view as above.

Bottom Right
Same terrace as above,

looking south.
Bottom Left
Steps leading from the

pool to the first terrace.
shack mountain
105
shack mountain part

Top Left
The south terrace outside

of the kitchen entrance.
The area around the raised
terrace shows that the area
has been planted. The tops
of the buildings in the
background on the right
are near the Chapel garden
indicating that some of the
buildings may have been
in place by 1964.
Bottom Left
View of the pool, looking south, towards the

house.
106
shack mountain
section
3.4
Top Right
The lower terrace looking north.

Rock walls and border plantings are
in place as are the dry stacked rock
walls.
Middle
Lower terrace looking

south at the garden paths
leading to the house and
towards the Chapel.
Bottom Right
Extended view of above

to reveal the separation of
garden and forest.
Bottom Left
Larger view of the lower

terrace, facing south.
shack mountain
107
shack mountain part

Top Left
Jane Moore and

unknown youth sitting
outside the lanai.
Bottom
Unknown group in the

lower terrace. A vegetable
garden is roped off.
108
shack mountain
section
3.4
Top Right
Three men preparing

to move a boxwood into
place.
Middle
Same view as above

after the boxwood has
been planted, note the
growth of the plants in the
foreground.
Bottom Right
Lower terrace, the steps

leading to the field are not
yet built.
Bottom Left
A close up of the
retaining wall leading to
the field.
shack mountain
109
shack mountain part

This Page
The building of the steps off of the east side of the lower terrace leading to the sloped
field below.
110
shack mountain
section
Part
3.41

Top Left
View of
the vegetable
garden on
the southern
garden terrace.
Bottom Right
Two unknown men in the middle terrace

towards the north end. The apple orchard is
within view.
above
Enlargement
of the flowers
growing on the
fence.
shack mountain
111
shack mountain part

Bottom Row
Bedford Moore on the terrace outside of the dining room window.
112
shack mountain
section
3.4
shack mountain
113
Top Row
By 1987 gardens had been developed; their form is similar today.
shack mountain part
Figure 3.4.8. the gardens of shack mountain november 1987

Top Left
Jane Moore working in

the asparagus garden.
Bottom Left
The cutting garden in

the fall.
114
shack mountain
section
3.4
Top Right
View from the north

patio of the fall colors.
Bottom Right
Cutting garden just

below the middle terrace.
shack mountain
115
shack mountain part
Figure 3.4.9. foundation for chapel
(undated)

Top Right
Finishing the concrete slab

for one of the Chapel area
buildings.
Bottom Left
A close-up of Gip.
116
shack mountain
section
3.4
Figure 3.4.10. moore family photographs

Top Right
Gip (left), unknown woman,

and Peter the squirrel, 1971.
Right
Catherine Burton and Jane Moore.
Left
Jane Moore ca. 19902000 (photograph

courtesy of Eleanor Kuhl).
Above
Bedford Moore 1984

(photograph courtesy of
Eleanor Kuhl).
shack mountain
117
shack mountain part
Figure 3.4.11. moore family photographs

Top Left
Unknown woman
and the Moores dogs, ca.
1955-1960.
Right
Dogs at the pool, ca.

1960s.
Bottom Left
Bedford Moore training

his dog, ca. 1980s.
118
shack mountain
notes
NOTES
1 F. Kimball to General Vandegrift, 13 May 1953,
PMA.
2 Jane Moore, interview by Bill Beiswanger,
Jack Robertson, and Chad
Phillips, October 20, 2005,
Shack Mountain, Charlottesville, VA, from the audio-visual archives, Jefferson
Library Special Collections,
courtesy The Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. (hereafter know as: Jane Moore,
Interview, 2005.)
3
Ibid.
Ibid.
18 Ibid.
responded, The Kimballs
kept up with us pretty well,
Jane Moore, Interview, 2005. 19 Burial in the cemetery
at Monticello is limited to
lineal descendants of Thomas
10 Hohman, Theodora
Kimball, 25:181n27. Kim- Jefferson. The Monticello
Association. Graveyard Hisballs sister had also shown
similar symptoms before she tory. Accessed March 12,
2013. http://www.monticeldied but it is not known if
lo-assoc.org/hsitory
this was hereditary.
11 Marie Kimballs funeral instructions, 1951,
Series II, Subseries C, FKP,
PMA.
12 F. Kimball to General Vandegrift, 13 May 1953,
PMA.
13 F. Kimball to G. Barkley, 3 June 1953, Series III,
5 Eleanor Kuhl, phone

14 G. Barkley to F. Kimconversation with the author,
ball, 12 June 1953, Series III,
July 10, 2013.
6 Jane Moore graduated
15 F. Kimball to B. Lee,
from Randolf Macon Wom16 March 1954, Series III,
ans College and accordSubseries I, FKP, PMA; B.
ing to several sources was
Lee to F. Kimball, 29 March
a highly intelligent woman
with an excellent memory
FKP, PMA; F. Kimball to B.
and was very well read.
Lee, 31 March 1954, Series
7 Jane Moore, Interview, III, Subseries I, FKP, PMA.
2005.
16 F. Kimball to B. Lee, 3
March 1954, Series III, Sub8 Jane Moore, Interview,
series I, FKP, PMA.
2005.
9
When asked about the
friendship with the Kimballs
and the age difference Jane
26 January 1955, Series III,
20 J. Lippencott, Jr. to B.
Lee, 29 March 1955, R.E.
Lee Papers, Special Collections, UVA; J. Lippencott,
Jr. to B. Lee, 19 April 1955,
R.E. Lee Papers, Special
Collections, UVA.
March 1955, R.E. Lee Papers, Special Collections,
UVA.
22 Jane Moore, Interview,
2005.
23 Marie Kimball funeral
program, 1951, Series II,
2005.
2005.
26 J. Lippencott, Jr. to B.
Lee, 29 March 1955, R.E.
Lee Papers, UVA.
27 F. Kimball to P. Montague III, Esq., 5 May 1955,
R.E. Lee Papers, UVA.
shack mountain
119
shack mountain part
28 Will of Marie Kimball,

March 1951, Series II, SubSeries C, FKP, PMA.
29
Memoirs, FKP, PMA.
30 In the acknowledgments for Kimballs book

Thomas Jefferson Architect,
Kimball wrote a special
note about Marie Kimball,
thanking her for her assistance, self sacrificing collaboration and editorial experience in the examination of
the Jefferson Manuscripts.
Kimball, Thomas Jefferson
Architect, 1. Marie Kimballs
published books on Jefferson are:
Jefferson: the Road to Glory
1743 to 1776, Jefferson: War
and Peace 1776 to 1784, and
Jefferson: the Scene of Europe
1784 to 1789.
33 Jane Moore, Interview, 43 The Moores and

Greers were neighbors
2005.
with adjoining parcels. Jane
34 Taken from several in- Moore, Interview, 2005;
terviews and conservations
Deed of Easement, 1990.
about Jane Moore between
According to Jane Moore
June 2012 and February
they were cordial with the
2013.
Greers, getting eggs from
them and trading land in
35 Deed of Easement by
1957 (the Moores traded maW. Bedford Moore III and
Jane Tarleton Smith Moore, ture Pine for springs on the
Greers land).
13 December 1990, no.
011088, Albemarle County, 44 Evergreen was proVA, Real Estate office reposed as high-density resicords, 3.
dential units for predomi-
36 Jane Moore, Interview, nantly black and lower-middle income group of occu2005.
pants. Fleming v. Moore,
37 Ibid.
275 S.E.2d 632, 221 VA. 887
(VA. 03/06/1981), Virginia
38 Ibid.
Coalition for Open Gov39 Jack Robertson, in a
ernment (hereafter cited as:
telephone conversation with Fleming v. Moore).
31 Heyward was an archi- the author, January 25, 2013. 45 Agriculture zoning altect with a practice in Char- 40 Ibid.
lowed 1 unit for every 2.15
lottesville VA, called Baker,
acres.
Heyward, Lorens, Architects. 41 Osborne Mackie, in a
telephone conversation with 46 Fleming v. Moore, 887.
Heywards wife Jane Heythe author, 2013.
ward and Jane Moore were
47 Ibid., 894.
good friends.
42 The narrative is com48 Ibid.
piled from several sources:
32 Minutes, FKP, PMA.
Osborne Mackie, conversa- 49 Ibid., 887
Water from the City was
tion, 2013; Catherine Burimminent because of the
50 Ibid.
ton, Conversation, 2012;
High School being built at
the bottom of Road 29 ne- Eleanor Kuhl, conversation, 51 Jane Moore was de2012; Dave the manager at
gating the lack of water for
scribed as, a very strong
the house-sites proposed by Van Yahres Tree Company, person who also had pretty
conversation with the author strong opinions about things
Kimball.
at Van Yahres Tree Compa- but was always extraordiny, July 2012.
narily diplomatic in com120
shack mountain
notes
municating her opinions,

Melinda Frierson, telephone
conversation with the author,
January 25, 2013.
2005.
53
Ibid.
54
Ibid.
55 Jane Moore refers to

Gip when speaking about
the building and planting of
the gardens but does not use
his name in the 2005 interview. Nelson Gipson, conversation at Shack Mountain
with the author, June 23,
2012. Nelson Gipson (Peanuts) is the current grounds
keeper of Shack Mountain
and Frank Gibsons son. He
confirmed that his father
built the rock walls of the
terraced gardens, the brick
wall on the west side of the
pool, the dry stack rock wall
at the end of the oval drive,
the lanai and planted and
maintained the grounds.
56 Nelson Gipson, conversation, 2012.
57 Catherine Burton, conversation at Shack
Mountain with the author,
May 25, 2012.
58 Mrs. Avery Catlin,
email to the author, February 8, 2013.
shack mountain
121
PART 4
THE PHYSICAL LANDSCAPE
Figure 4.1. Shack Mountain, 2013.
shack mountain part
Figure 4.1.1. shack mountain, 1955

4.1. Evolution of the
Landscape 1955-2010
Kimballs instructions for his wifes
burial included a hand drawn map, offering
the final glimpse of the Kimball landscape.
The rough sketch, drawn in bereavement,
outlines the funeral procession; starting
from the front door, heading to the north
patio, down through the lower garden
between trees to the rear of the house.
This indicates that the back terrace was
in place during the time of the Kimballs.
The map also shows a lower garden area
where Marie Kimball was buried. The only
elements present in 1956 were the terraces
surrounding the house, the oval drive and
service entrance, a small shed used as a
garage, and a few English boxwood at the
corners of the soapstone patio. The pavers
leading from the kitchen entrance down
to the back entrance of the house and the
pavers leading up to the portico were also
from Kimball. Most of the outdoor
elements visible today are improvements
made by the Moores. The main entry had
a stepping stone pathway leading to the
oval drive, which was replaced by the
Moores sometime in the 1950s with a
brick walk. The landscape as of 2012, with
the pool area, terraced gardens, all the
plantings including the semi-circular hedge,
and the Chapel1 garden area, was built by
the Moores during the 1960s.2
124
shack mountain
BW Photographs courtesy of Osborne Mackie.
section
4.1
Figure 4.1.2. shack mountain, 2012

Jane Moore denied using any of
Kimballs ideas or seeing his drawings
when she built the gardens yet, by
overlaying Kimballs landscape plan on
top of a current site plan, the current
landscape looks to be an interpretation of
Kimballs 1937 plan. Jane Moore contends
that they did not follow Kimballs plan or
Gillettes advice, but instead transferred
her passion for gardening and love of
nature into a garden design that was
dictated by the terrain, unknowingly
creating the landscape that Kimball
envisioned. The Moores were key figures
in furthering recognition of the Kimballs
work by preserving the legacy of Shack
Mountain through the 1992 National
Historic Landscape and the placement of
a conservation easement on the property
securing it from future development. The
Moores constructed the current landscape
during the 1960s, respective of the built
landscape already in place. The property
was placed in a Deed of Easement in 1990,
insuring the preservation and protection of
this National Landmarks architectural and
historical features, and setting within the
landscape.
shack mountain
125
shack mountain part
4.2. Spatial Organization:

character and description of
the current landscape
The Approach
The entrance to Shack Mountain is only
noticeable by a white wooden gate and
black mailbox with the name written on
the outside. The gravel drive to the house is
one third of a mile and follows the original
Old Wood Road. The graveled road surface
ensures a leisurely pace while driving
through a densely wooded forest, dappled
sunlight streaming through the trees. The
road is wide enough for a single car to pass
comfortably, yet is not intended as a twolane road, varying from 11 to 15 in width.
The trees concealing the house open up just
before the oval drive when the house comes
into view on the left, resting above the road
Figure 4.2.1. Brick entry looking from the portico

of Shack Mountain, 2012.
126
shack mountain
Figure 4.2.2. The entry road, Shack Mountain

appears in the distance on the right side of the
photograph, 2012.
and nestled into the hillside with only the

first floor visible, highlighting the Palladian
windows and columned portico. The
entrance of the house is aligned with the
road, orienting the central axis of the house
slightly northwest across the contours.
The drive continues forward
perpendicular to the house until the bottom
of the oval reveals itself as a gentle turn to
the left before the low dry stacked rock wall,
completing the oval when it intersects the
entry road. Another road continues past
the wall into the pasture where the views
are opened up to sky, before it gradually
descends into the woods towards Ivy Creek.
There is a service entrance off the main
road branching to the right before the oval
turn with parking near the kitchen entrance
behind an overgrown hedge.
section
4.2
shack mountain approach, 2012
Pasture
Dry stacked stone wall
Oval drive
Parking
Service entrance
Chapel area
Figure 4.2.3. Outline of the road, showing the oval drive and side entry parking, and house,
AutoCAD drawing, 2012.
shack mountain
127
shack mountain part
Circulation
A small path leads from the
parking to the kitchen entrance; the
area is completely shaded by mature
red oaks and maples surrounding
the house. The soapstone pavers
are dark gray and rectangular in
shape, placed in an offset pattern,
surrounding the northwest half
Figure 4.2.5. Path from the kitchen to the parking area, 2012.
of the house. A hole is cut in the
pavers for a large Chestnut Oak tree,
from the road leads to portico steps. Due to
with limbs growing precariously over the
the dense vegetation, the vista is not visible
house. The tree is centered on the dining
from the portico but only from inside the
room window, pushing its way up through
drawing room or from the terrace on the
the patio displacing the stones and cracking
north side of the house.
the steps. Camellias follow the semi-circular
pattern of the terrace on the south side of
the house; the edges of the bed below the
Camellias hold white and some pink Tulips,
and Mountain Laurel.
The main entrance is impressive from the
oval drive, forcing the gaze slightly upward
in order to see the portico. A brick path
Figure 4.2.6. Entrance to Shack Mountain, 2012.

Figure 4.2.4. South terrace outside the dining room, the pavers
are heaving from the pressure of the tree roots, 2012.
128
shack mountain
section
4.2
shack mountain circulation, 2012
paths
Figure 4.2.7. The solid black areas are walkways/garden paths put in by the Moores, 2012, not to scale.
shack mountain
129
shack mountain part
Views and Vistas

The trees of the forest are topped in order
to open up the views from the north terrace
so that panoramic views of the surrounding
forest within the backdrop of the Blue
Ridge Mountains are revealed.
Figure 4.2.8. North view looking from the drawing room, 2012.
130
shack mountain
section
4.2
Figure 4.2.9. Entrance to the pasture at the north end of the oval drive, 2012.
Figure 4.2.10. View of Blue Ridge Mountains from the north patio, 2012.
Figure 4.2.11. Same view as figure 4.2.7., taken while standing on the north
terrace, showing the vista above the semi-circular hedge, 2012.
shack mountain
131
shack mountain part
The Gardens
A semi-circular English
boxwood hedge beginning at
the rock wall and ending at
the corner of the pool hedge
provides a sense of enclosure
between the formal garden
and the pasture.
Figure 4.2.12.View of north elevation of Shack Mountain, 2012.
Figure 4.2.13. Pool entrance from the north terrace, 2012.
Figure 4.2.14. Above, pool gate from path, 2012.

Figure 4.4.15. Below, pool 2012.
132
shack mountain
Soapstone pavers on the

north terrace lead to the pool
area just beyond a brick wall.
This is the first level of the
garden, beginning at the east
end of the house forming a
rectangular enclosed garden.
A tall hedge surrounds the
garden with trees along the
southern boarder, and a smaller
hedge forming the northern
boundary just beyond the
pool. The southern entrance
to this private garden is
accessed from a soapstone path
beginning outside the kitchen
doors. There are three English
Boxwoods planted astride
each basement window and a
Honey Locust planted near the
pool offering dappled sunlight
in the garden. The rectangular
pool extends from the
southeast corner of the house
north with Peonies planted
near the pool house.
section
4.2
The larger garden is

located below the pool area
on the east side of the house,
level with the terrain on the
north and south with a large
retaining wall forming the
east end of the garden. There
is a lanai on the second
terrace and dry stacked
stonewalls delineate various
rooms, creating intimacy
within the larger garden.
Figure 4.2.16. Second terrace below the pool garden, 2012.
Flowerbeds line the retaining walls, with

peonies, tulips and open grass paths replacing
older parterres and herbs and mint that were
grown on the lower terrace below the pool
house.
Figure 4.2.17. Second terrace looking south, 2012.
The remnants of an
apple orchard form the
north end of the second
terrace with a small seating
area enclosing the garden.
Figure 4.2.18. Apple orchard, 2012.

shack mountain
133
shack mountain part
Along the wall to the

outside of the terrace garden
overlooking the meadow
is Japanese roof iris and a
cutting garden of zinnias
next to the fenced vegetable
garden in the meadow.
Figure 4.2.19. Retaining wall, east end of the garden, 2012.
Figure 4.2.20. Former vegetable garden, 2012.
The former vegetable garden

was located in the terrace
along the southern end of
the larger garden. A path
leading to it from the house
created an edge between the
formal and natural areas. This
terrace is currently grass.
There are several beds
along the front and side of
the house with the garden
becoming less formal as it
recedes away from the house
towards the forest.
Figure 4.2.21. View looking north, 2012.

Figure 4.2.22. View of path from the southern terrace, 2012
134
shack mountain
section
Figure 4.2.23. Rear view of the Chapel building/garden shed, 2012.
Figure 4.2.24. The Chapel area, view from north entrance, 2012.
4.2
Outbuildings
The Moores built a
small service area, to the east
of the house, hidden from
view by a fence and the
surrounding landscape. This
area was most likely built
around the same time as the
gardens during the 1960s
and it was in place during
the 1976 Garden Tour. The
simple wooden structures
are utilitarian housing: a
garden shed, wood shed,
garage, compost area, dog
run and parking. A series of
maintained paths lead toward
the house, terraces, and
woods.Virginia blue bells
are plentiful in the shaded
areas between the house and
Chapel.
Notes
1 The Chapel is a garden
shed named by Jane Moore.
2005.
Figure 4.2.25. The Chapel area, view of woodshed on the right, 2012.
shack mountain
135
shack mountain part
4.3 then & now

Figure 4.3.1. then and now, 1970
BW Photographs courtesy of Osborne Mackie.
then and now, 2012

Same view as above.
2012
136
shack mountain
section
shack mountain
4.3
137
shack mountain part
Figure 4.3.2. then and now, 1984

Photographs courtesy of Osborne Mackie.
then and now, 2012

Photographs below were taken to approximate the same location as the images above.
138
shack mountain
section
shack mountain
4.3
139
shack mountain part
Figure 4.3.3. Rendered SketchUp Model of Shack Mountain, current landscape, 2012.
140
shack mountain
section
shack mountain
4.3
141
shack mountain
bibliography
Ali, Maria. 1984a. Fairmount Park Along
the Schuylkill River, Spring Garden
Street to Northwestern Avenue,
Philadelphia, PA, Historic American
Buildings Survey Report (HABS
No. 51-Phila.). Washington DC: US
Department of the Interior, National
Park Service.
. 1984b. Lemon Hill Lemon
Hill Drive, Fairmount Park East,
Philadelphia, PA. (HABS No.
51-Phila.) Washington DC: US
Department of the Interior, National
Park Service.
Alter, Jonathan. The Defining Moment: FDRs
Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope.
New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006.
Bricker, Lauren Weiss. 1990. The Writings
of Fiske Kimball: A Synthesis of
Architectural History and Practice.
Studies in the History of Art. 35.
Chappell, Edward A., and Mark R. Wenger.
1995. Fiske Kimball and Colonial
Williamsburg. University of Virginia.
Accessed June 8, 2012.
Deed of Easement. 1990. Albemarle County
Real Estate Office. Charlottesville:
Virginia Board of Historic Resources.
Downing, A. J. 1841.A Treatise on the Theory
and Practice of Landscape Gardening:
Adapted to North America. Washington,
D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research
Library and Collection.
142
shack mountain
Gromort, Georges, H. Stafford Bryant,

and Henry Hope Reed. 2001.The
Elements of Classical Architecture. New
York [u.a.]: Norton.
Haavik, Ben. 2004. Lemon Hill Cultural
Landscape Inventory. Philadelphia:
The Friends of Lemon Hill.
Hohmann, Heidi. 2006. Theodora Kimball
Hubbard and the Intellectualization
of Landscape Architecture, 19111935.Landscape Journal.25 (2): 16986.
Hosmer, Charles B. 1981.Preservation Comes
of Age: from Williamsburg to the National
Trust, 1926-1949. Charlottesville:
Published for the Preservation
Press, National Trust for Historic
Preservation in the United States by
the University Press of Virginia.
. 1980. Preservation Comes of Age:
From Williamsburg to the National
Trust, 1926-1949.Bulletin of the
Association for Preservation Technology.
12 (3): 20-27.
Howard, Hugh. 2006.Dr. Kimball and
Mr. Jefferson A Journey into Americas
Architectural Past. New York:
Bloomsbury Pub. Kindle edition.
Hubbard, Henry Vincent, and T. Kimball.
1935.An Introduction to the Study of
Landscape Design:Text and Plates. New
York: Macmillan.
Ivy Creek Foundation. 2012. The Ivy Creek
Foundation Chronicles. Accessed
June 10.
http://ivycreekfoundation.org/pdf/
IvyCreekFoundationChronicles.pdf.
bibliography
. 2013. On Kimball as Architect and

Historian. University of Virginia 1995.
Accessed December 5.
http://www2.lib.Virginia.edu/
Jefferson, Thomas, Andrew Adgate Lipscomb,
finearts/exhibits/fiske/conference/
Albert Ellery Bergh, Richard Holland
Lahendro.html.
Johnston, and Thomas Jefferson
Langlois, Charles Victor, Charles Seignobos,
Memorial Association of the United
and George Godfrey Berry. 1932.
States. [from old catalog]. 1905. The
Introduction to the Study of History. New
Writings of Thomas Jefferson. Definitive
York: H. Holt & Co.
ed. 20 vols. Washington, D.C.,: Issued
under the auspices of the Thomas
Jefferson Memorial Association of the Lilly, R.M., and R.M. Rainey. 1992. The
Country Place Era in Virginia: The
United States.
Residential Site Planning of Charles
F. Gillette. Landscape Journal no. 11
Kimball, Fiske. 1916. Thomas Jefferson
(2):99-115.
Architect. In Boston: Riverside Press.
Accessed 14 Aug. 1997.
Garden Club of America, and Alice G. B.
http://www2.iath.Virginia.edu/
Lockwood. 1931.Gardens of Colony
wilson/TJA/tja.home.html
and State: Gardens and Gardeners of the
American Colonies and of the Republic
. 1917. The Beginnings of Landscape
before 1840. [New York]: Published
Gardening in America.Landscape
for the Garden Club of America by C.
Architecture, July 1917.
Scribners Sons.
. 1944.Romantic Classicism in
Menke & Menke, Landscape Architects and
Architecture. Paris: Gazette des BeauxPlanners. 2002. Lemon Hill Cultural
Arts.
Landscape Study. Philadelphia: The
. 1966.Domestic Architecture of
Friends of Lemon Hill.
the American Colonies and of the
Pitts, Carolyn. 1992. National Historic
Early Republic. New York: Dover
Landmarks Nomination. Washington,
Publications.
DC: U.S. Department of Interior,
Kimball, Marie Goebel. 1943.Jefferson, the
National Park Service.
Road to Glory, 1743 to 1776. New
Robert, George, and Mary Robert. 1959.
York: Coward-McCann, Inc.
Roberts, George, and Mary Howland
Lahendro, Joseph Dye. 1982.Fiske Kimball,
Roberts. 1959.Triumph on Fairmount:
American Renaissance Historian. Thesis
Fiske Kimball and the Philadelphia
(M. Arch. Hist.)--University of
Museum of Art. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
Virginia, 1982.
Rogers, Elizabeth Barlow. 2001.Landscape
Design: A Cultural and Architectural
History. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
. 2013. Ivy Creek Foundation.
Accessed November 20.
http://ivycreekfoundation.org.
shack mountain
143
shack mountain
Bibliography continued
Shack Mountain, 1976. National Register
of Historic Places Inventory
Nomination Form. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Interior, National
Park Service.
Sprinkle Jr., John H. 2012. Fiske Kimballs
National Park Service Memoir (volume
7 Number 2). U.S. Department of
Interior, 2010. Accessed July 15.
http://crmjournal.cr.nps.gov/04_
article_sub.cfm?issue=volume
7 Number 2 Summer
2010&page=1&seq=1.
Treib, Marc. 1993.Modern Landscape
Architecture: A Critical Review.
Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Treib, Marc, and Dorothee Imbert.
2005.Garrett Eckbo: Modern Landscapes
for Living. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Tyler, Norman, Ted Ligibel, and Ilene R.
Tyler. 2009.Historic Preservation: An
Introduction to its History, Principles, and
Practice. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Wilson, Douglas L. 1993. Dating Jeffersons
Early Architectural Drawings. Virginia
Magazine of History and Biography. no.
101. (1):53-76.
144
shack mountain
bibliography
shack mountain
145

Shack Mountain Final Report

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Shack Mountain Final Report

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

SHACK MOUNTAIN

Cover, adapted from Photograph, ca. 1955 (Courtesy of Osborne Mackie)

Prepared for The Garden Club of Virginia

Copyright 2012 By the Garden Club of Virginia

*Unless noted, illustrations and photographs are by the author

DEFINING THE PROJECT

While the period of significance for

2.1 Synopsis: The Construction of Shack Mountain

3.1 Shack Mountain, the Kimballs Retreat

I would especially like to thank the

gratitude to all of those who made this

following people, who enriched the paper

report possible by contributing their time

by sharing their personal stories of Jane

and effort, and by sharing information,

and Bedford Moore, filling a void with

research, and memories.

information about the Moores and the

The Garden Club of Virginia Fellowship

gardens of Shack Mountain including:

housekeeper and companion Catherine

to the office of Rieley and Associates

Burton, and the groundskeeper of Shack

including William D. Rieley, Roxanne

Mountain, Nelson Peanuts Gipson.

Brouse, and Karen Kennedy, for their time,

Lastly I would like to acknowledge the

Monticello for the valuable information on

fill in details about the gardens, and Osborne

both the Kimballs and Moores, with special

Mackie for photographs and animated

thanks to Bill Beiswanger, Jack Robertson,

stories of Jane Moore.

Leah Sterns and Anna Berkes.

shack mountain part

shack mountain part

materials along with advanced construction

Figure 1.1.2. Shack Mountain Site and Floor Plans by Building

rooms, the addition of modern features such

shack mountain part

Jeffersons interpretation of the Picturesque,

Shack Mountain represented Kimballs

Figure 1.1.4. Photograph of Monticello, 2012.

rocks, riverswith what majesty

has claimed a romantic act unparalleled

Kimball theorizes that Jefferson, by choosing

shack mountain part

1.2 PROFILE OF MARIE GOEBEL

their close relationship, which extended

shack mountain part

credits his roommates, the young history

Lahendro credits Kimballs Harvard

masters in Architecture (Hohmann

Figure 1.2.2. Theodora Kimball, ca. 1913, Print Department Records,

Kimball returned to Harvard after

graduated from Harvard in 1912 with a

shack mountain part

the position of professor of Germanic

but also as the father of national

shack mountain part

landscape gardening, a mutual topic of

There are several passages of particular

approached by the University of Virginia

Philadelphia Architect Erling H. Peterson