Sustainable Site Design at Mary Colter’s Bright Angel Lodge
Aerial view with Bright Angel Lodge and Cabins, c. 1936 (Grand Canyon Museum Collection image index no. 08281).
Mary Colter included a number of sustainable strategies in her design for the Bright Angel Lodge and Cabins that opened in Grand Canyon Village in the mid-1930s. Although these strategies were incorporated primarily for practical or aesthetic reasons rather than out of environmental concerns, they foreshadowed methods used in today’s sustainable buildings. This post will focus on strategies related to the buildings’ site design.
The Bright Angel Lodge and Cabins are located near the south rim of the Grand Canyon not far from the railway depot. When it opened, the Lodge building housed the lobby, restaurant, kitchen, shops, lounge, offices, and restrooms. Seven guesthouses were connected to the lodge by covered walkways, and there were fifteen cabins of one to four units each. There were also several utility buildings.
One goal of sustainable site development is to minimize site disturbance. Doing so maintains existing vegetation, reduces erosion, and avoids undesirable soil compaction. Colter minimized disturbance at the Bright Angel site in a number of ways. She paid special attention to the site planning, using a model of the site that was six feet long and contained not only buildings but also trees. While other camps at Grand Canyon were organized in rows, Colter distributed cabins more randomly to give the impression of a community that had grown over a several decades. She could also avoid building where there were existing trees.
The Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Railway, in the role of Owner for the project, did some site clearing and then instructed the contractor to protect all remaining trees and other vegetation adjacent to the building site. Upon discovering that a significant tree spread above one of the Lodge’s chimneys, the Santa Fe paid to increase the chimney’s height rather than cut the tree down.
Grading for the new buildings was also minimized by limiting topographical changes. Built on a sloping site, the floor level for each cabin was set by the adjacent natural grade, with only enough earth removed to accommodate the depth of the floor structure.
This is not to say there was no site disturbance; in addition to constructing the buildings, there were also roads, retaining walls, and a parking area constructed. But an effort was made to minimize disturbance to the site around the buildings. In doing so, Colter reduced construction costs, preserved vegetation, and achieved her aesthetic goals.
Next month, I’ll write about other environmentally beneficial strategies Colter employed in the design and construction of the Bright Angel Lodge and Cabins.
Please subscribe to The Architectress.
Sources
Grand Canyon Museum Collection, Grand Canyon, Arizona:
“Specifications for Lodge,” GRCA 26548 Folder 20
“Specifications for Four-Room Frame Cabins without Baths,” GRCA 26548 Folder 20,
Letter from M. C. Blanchard to Myers Brothers, Dec. 24, 1934, GRCA 26548 Folder 19
“Floor plans of Bright Angel Lodge, 1934-36,” ATSF Maps and Plans: MCA D19 F168, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Records, Kansas Historical Society.
“The New Bright Angel Lodge and Cabins,” The Hotel Monthly, December 1936, 13-22.
Historic American Buildings Survey, HABS No. AZ-136, “Bright Angel Lodge,” Washington, DC: National Park Service, 1982.