RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION of 31 RAILROAD BRIDGES Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont Rensselaer County, New York

Home , Rutland Railroad, Troy and Boston Railroad

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION SURVEY BUILD GRANT - RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION OF 31 RAILROAD BRIDGES Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont Rensselaer County, New York

Prepared for: Prepared by:

Vermont Agency of Transportation Louis Berger U.S., Inc. 1 National Life Drive A WSP Company Montpelier, Vermont 05633 140 State Street, Suite 101 Albany, New York 12207

December 6, 2019 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION SURVEY BUILD GRANT - RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION OF 31 RAILROAD BRIDGES

Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont Rensselaer County, New York

Prepared for:

Vermont Agency of Transportation 1 National Life Drive Montpelier, Vermont 05633

Prepared by:

Amber Courselle Kate Umlauf

Louis Berger U.S., Inc. A WSP Company 140 State Street, Suite 101 Albany, New York 12207

December 6, 2019 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

Abstract

On behalf of the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans), Montpelier, Louis Berger U.S., Inc., a WSP Company (WSP), completed an Architectural Resource Identification Survey for the BUILD Grant replacement or rehabilitation of 31 railroad bridges in the Towns of Shaftsbury, Arlington, Manchester, Dorset, Mount Tabor, Wallingford, and Clarendon and the City of Rutland, Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont, and the Town of Hoosick, Rensselaer County, New York. The purpose of the project is to rehabilitate or replace 31 existing bridges of the former Bennington and Rutland Railroad, now operated by Vermont Railway and owned by VTrans. The area of potential effect (APE) for the architectural investigation includes the 31 bridges (properties) and the immediate area surrounding each bridge along a section of railroad track approximately 57.82 miles long and includes those parcels immediately adjacent to the bridges (the direct APE) as well as those not adjacent to the right-of-way but that may be indirectly affected by the project (the indirect APE). The total APE consists of the 31 total properties and their immediate surroundings.

The purpose of this investigation was to identify (1) historic architectural resources (properties) in the APE previously listed in the Vermont State Register of Historic Places/National Register of Historic Places (VT SRHP/NRHP) (the criteria for listing in the VT SRHP are identical to the NRHP Criteria), and (2) previously unevaluated historic architectural resources in the APE that may be eligible for listing in the NRHP. The investigation included background research and fieldwork. Fieldwork took place in September 2019. The architectural resource identification survey was undertaken pursuant to 10 VSA Chapter 151 and 30 VSA Chapter 5, Section 248.

WSP identified one previously recorded non-bridge resource, the Bennington Battlefield National Historic Landmark, (90NR00962), in the APE. One non-eligible bridge (BR 603) in the APE is located within its boundaries.

WSP identified 30 previously unrecorded properties, all bridges, plus one bridge previously listed in the Vermont State Register of Historic Places/National Register of Historic Places (SRHP/NRHP). The previously listed property, the Clarendon through truss bridge (BR 93), is recommended as remaining eligible. One bridge was found to have been constructed in 1978 and did not meet the age criterion for evaluation. The remaining 29 previously unevaluated bridge properties are at least 45 years old, and of these, WSP recommends 26 bridges as eligible for the SRHP/NRHP as contributing elements in the recommended Bennington and Rutland Railroad linear historic district. One bridge, the Shaftsbury stone arch bridge over Paran Creek (BR 59), was also found to meet the registration requirements for listing in the NRHP Multiple Property Listing, Metal Truss, Masonry and Concrete Bridges of Vermont, 1820-1978.

The three remaining bridges are all located in Rensselaer County, New York. Two are recommended as not eligible for listing individually or as part of the recommended Bennington and Rutland Railroad linear historic district because they are not historically associated with the development of the line (BR 601 and BR 603). Bridge No. 600 is recommended as individually eligible for the SRHP/NRHP. The railroad line runs though the Bennington Battlefield National Historic Landmark site, with one non-contributing bridge (BR 603) located within its boundaries. During the survey WSP also identified five properties that would be subject to Section 4(f), which regulates use of public recreation areas and NRHP-listed sites that may be affected by federal Department of Transportation funded projects.

i Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

Table of Contents

Page

Abstract ...... i List of Figures ...... iii List of Tables ...... iii

I. Introduction ...... 1 A. Project Description ...... 1 B. Scope of Services ...... 1

II. Methodology ...... 5

III. Historic Context ...... 6 A. Historical Overview of Southern Vermont ...... 6 B. Historical Overview of Rutland County ...... 7 C. Historical Overview of Bennington County ...... 12 D. Historical Overview of Rensselaer County, New York ...... 12 E. Historical Overview of Vermont Railway, Bennington and Rutland, and Hoosick Railroads ...... 15 1. Vermont ...... 18 2. New York ...... 22

IV. Survey Results ...... 24

V. Summary and Conclusions ...... 26

VI. References Cited and Bibliography ...... 27

ii Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

List of Figures

Page

1 Project Location ...... 2 2a Location of Area of Potential Effect (APE) ...... 3 2b Location of Area of Potential Effect (APE) ...... 4 3 Project APE, 1856 ...... 9 4 Rutland County, 1854 ...... 10 5 Rutland County, 1869 ...... 11 6 Bennington County, 1856 ...... 13 7 Bennington County, 1880 ...... 14 8 Rensselaer County, 1861 ...... 16 9 Western Vermont Railroad Map, 1851 ...... 17 10 Vermont Railroads in 1896 ...... 19 11 Rutland Railroad Map, 1899 ...... 20 12 Rutland Railroad Map, 1923 ...... 23

List of Tables

1 Previously and Newly Evaluated Historic Architectural Resources in the APE, Plus Recommended Historic District, That Are Eligible for VT SRHP/NRHP, and Section 4(F) Properties ...... 25 2 Newly Evaluated Historic Architectural Resources in the APE Not Eligible for VT SRHP/NRHP...... 25

iii Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

I. Introduction

A. Project Description

On behalf of the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans), Montpelier, Louis Berger U.S., Inc., a WSP Company (WSP), has completed an Architectural Resource Identification Survey for the BUILD Grant replacement or rehabilitation of 31 railroad bridges in the Towns of Shaftsbury, Arlington, Manchester, Dorset, Mount Tabor, Wallingford, and Clarendon and the City of Rutland, Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont, and the Town of Hoosick, Rensselaer County, New York. The purpose of the project is to rehabilitate or replace 31 existing bridges of the former Bennington and Rutland Railroad, now operated by Vermont Railway and owned by VTrans. The area of potential effect (APE) for the architectural investigation includes the 31 bridges (properties) and the immediate area surrounding each bridge along a section of railroad track approximately 57.82 miles long and includes those parcels immediately adjacent to the bridges (the direct APE) as well as those not adjacent to the right-of-way but that may be indirectly affected by the project (the indirect APE). The total APE consists of 31 total properties and their immediate surroundings (Figures 1 and 2).

B. Scope of Services

The purpose of this investigation was to identify (1) historic architectural resources (properties) in the APE previously listed in the Vermont State Register of Historic Places/National Register of Historic Places VT SRHP/NRHP, and (2) previously unevaluated historic architectural resources in the APE that may be eligible for listing in the NRHP. The investigation included background research and fieldwork. Fieldwork took place in September 2019.

Determinations of eligibility for the NRHP followed the guidelines and criteria established by the National Park Service (NPS) (36 CFR 60.4). In 2001 the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation (VDHP) changed the VT SRHP criteria to be identical to the NRHP criteria, and all resources then listed in the VT SRHP were deemed eligible for the NRHP, creating a single class of historic properties and thereby streamlining the historic preservation permitting process in Vermont. The historic architectural investigations were undertaken in accordance with Act 250 (Title 10 of Vermont Statutes Annotated [VSA], Chapter 151); and Title 30 VSA Chapter 5, Section 248 (Public Service Board’s Certificate of Public Good).

This report contains six chapters. Following the introduction (I), Chapter II describes the investigation’s methodology. Chapter III provides the historic context for the project vicinity. The survey results are described in Chapter IV, and the conclusions and recommendations appear in Chapter V. Chapter VI contains the references cited.

This investigation was conducted under the direction and supervision of WSP Senior Vice President Hope Luhman, PhD. Director of Historic Preservation Steven Bedford, PhD supervised the QA/QC process. WSP Senior Architectural Historian Camilla Deiber conducted research. WSP Archaeologist Kevin Sheridan conducted the fieldwork. WSP Architectural Historians Amber Courselle and Kate Umlauf conducted research and wrote the report. Principal Draftsperson Jacqueline L. Horsford prepared the graphics. Principal Editor Anne Moiseev edited the report.

BUILD Grant -GrantBUILD 31 Resource Railroad ofIdentification Bridges Architectural Resource Survey Identification

Rutland County

Vermont Vermont

NewYork

Bennington NewHampshire County

Vermont Rensselaer County Massachusetts

Vermont

NewYork 2 Rutland and Bennington Counties, RutlandVermontBennington and Rensselaer County,Rensselaer York New

Bridge 0 2 4 8 Miles Vermont Rail Line Kilometers APE 0 3 6 12

FIGURE 1: Project Location (ESRI World Topographic Map 2019) BUILD Grant -GrantBUILD 31 Resource Railroad ofIdentification Bridges Architectural Resource Survey Identification 3 Rutland and Bennington Counties, RutlandVermontBennington and

Contributing Eligible/Contributing Rensselaer County,Rensselaer York New Listed, SRHP Not Eligible APE 0 5,000 10,000 20,000 Feet Vermont Rail Line Meters 4(f) 0 1,500 3,000 6,000

FIGURE 2a: Location of Area of Potential Effect (APE) (ESRI Bing Maps Aerial 2019) BUILD Grant -GrantBUILD 31 Resource Railroad ofIdentification Bridges Architectural Resource Survey Identification 4 Rutland and Bennington Counties, RutlandVermontBennington and

Contributing Eligible/Contributing Rensselaer County,Rensselaer York New Listed, SRHP Not Eligible APE 0 5,000 10,000 20,000 Feet Vermont Rail Line Meters 4(f) 0 1,500 3,000 6,000

FIGURE 2b: Location of Area of Potential Effect (APE) (ESRI Bing Maps Aerial 2019) Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

II. Methodology

WSP’s primary task in the architectural investigation and effects assessment was to identify historic architectural resources (properties) in the APE listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP. WSP reviewed site files via VDHP’s Online Resource Center (ORC), identifying documented resources in the APE that were either already listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP. Location information on the identified properties was mapped, and nomination forms and eligibility determination data were copied for comparison against current conditions during the field survey. Available historic context data on the railroad and the development of the community in the APE were gathered from VDHP files to assist in the evaluation of additional historic resources identified during the field survey.

The field survey checked the continued existence of the historic properties identified during the site file check and collected information on each property’s architectural and historical integrity and eligibility for NRHP listing. Each resource in the APE was documented through existing inspection photographs and/or digital photographs taken at the location.

According to the NRHP Criteria for Evaluation, properties may be eligible for the NRHP if:

A. they are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

B. they are associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or

C. they embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

D. they have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory [NPS 2002:7].

WSP’s assessments of eligibility were further guided by the Multiple Property Documentation for Metal Truss, Masonry and Concrete Bridges of Vermont, 1820-1978 (VDHP et al. 2018) and Multiple Property Documentation for Stone Highway Culverts in Vermont 1750 to 1930 (VDHP et al. 2017), which establish standards of significance and integrity for listing bridges and culverts in the VT SRHP/NRHP. Results of the background research and field survey were analyzed to determine the NRHP eligibility of each architectural resource, whether previously evaluated or newly identified.

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

III. Historic Context

A. Historical Overview of Southern Vermont

The first Euro-Americans to venture into the remote region that would become Vermont in the eighteenth century were trappers and hunters. Reaching the area from the east was impeded by the natural barrier of the Green Mountains, and colonization was slow owing to the unsettled political picture. Recurring hostilities between the British and French authorities inhibited settlers from making Vermont their home.

Even before the final surrender of the French to the British at Quebec in 1760, however, many parties were making applications for land grants. The first land grants in what is now Vermont were made by the colony of Connecticut. These lands, referred to as “equivalent lands,” were transferred to Connecticut by Massachusetts, which had erroneously granted its citizens 107,793 acres within the borders of Connecticut. Connecticut immediately sold these lands to men from both Connecticut and Massachusetts, who in turn sold the land to prospective settlers at a profit. With the final resolution of the Massachusetts-New Hampshire territorial disputes in 1740, these lands became New Hampshire territory, known as the New Hampshire Grants. Not until the royal decree of 1764 established the Connecticut River as the eastern border of New York did this practice desist, securing the formal jurisdiction of New York over the area.

Organizing the New Hampshire Grants began with establishing county frameworks. With the Green Mountains as the dividing line, Bennington was the western county and Cumberland the eastern county. Allegiance to the new provincial authorities by the settlers weakened, however, with attempts to annul all land charters issued by the New Hampshire governor and to collect compensation for the granting of new charters. This was the situation, roughly paralleling the grievances of the 13 colonies against the British Crown, that precipitated the struggle of Ethan Allen’s Green Mountain Boys against the New York authorities and that resulted in the 1777 declaration of Vermont’s sovereignty as an independent Republic with its own constitution, which largely remains in place today. Vermont became the 14th state, or the first admitted to the Union after the American Revolution, in 1791.

For early settlers (prior to 1810) subsistence farming was the predominant form of household economic activity. By 1810 the economy had shifted to agriculture, concentrating on the cultivation of grains and export of potash. It was at that time that the Spanish Merino sheep, an outstanding wool producer easily adapted to the rugged terrain and climate, was introduced to Vermont. The self-sufficiency of the Vermont farmers diminished considerably as many turned to sheep ranching as an alternative source of income, to the almost complete exclusion of other agricultural products.

The increased supply of locally produced wool resulted in the establishment of fulling and cleansing mills, which were followed by carding mills. In the early nineteenth century the number of fulling and carding mills increased by 200 percent (from 136 to 273) and 275 percent (from 82 to 234), respectively. The location of these mills was dictated by population sufficient to support their services. These mills eventually became suppliers for developing woolen textile factories, which were themselves located near water sources and markets for their product. Around 1820, Vermont had 33 wool textile factories. The average wool shop employed nine people or less, no larger than some of the carding and fulling mills. In many cases the wool shops were an outgrowth of these carding and fulling mills, with the newer processing machines together in one place. Home manufacture, which was common before 1830, ended with the proliferation of the wool textile factories (Meeks 1986; Steponaitis 1975:43-50).

The breeding of wool sheep reached its peak in Vermont in the early 1840s. The industry entered the doldrums in the late 1840s and remained there through the 1850s. This decline was partly the result of lower protective tariffs on imported wool and partly the result of competition from the West with its wider

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York pastures, less costly grain, and, following the opening of the Ohio and Pennsylvania canal systems, better transportation (VDHP 1989:1). The failure of several younger enterprises owing to poor location caused the number of wool factories to decrease from 97 in the mid-1840s to 89 a decade later. In addition, the number of textile concerns in Vermont began to drop as the industry consolidated into fewer, larger firms using more efficient machinery. By the 1850s large factories tended to be located primarily near a water source and transportation route, with market factors being only a minor consideration. Household production and its related fulling and carding mills all but completely disappeared in the 1850s. The sheep industry briefly revived in the 1860s as the Civil War prompted a greater demand for wool products, particularly as cotton became less available and higher tariffs were imposed during and after the war (Steponaitis 1975:60-67).

The late nineteenth-century wool industry in Vermont was marked by the emergence of large town-based manufacturing firms (employing more than 100 employees) in places such as Bennington, Winooski, Rutland, Johnson, and Fair Haven. Vermont enjoyed prominence in the manufacture of wool and knit goods during the 1880s. The state’s industry declined steadily through the first half of the twentieth century despite a brief rise during World War II (Steponaitis 1975:118; VDHP 1991:10-11).

With the decline of the sheep and wool industry in the late 1840s, many farmers returned to breeding beef cattle, although not before mutton sheep were introduced on many farms formerly devoted to wool-bearing sheep (VDHP 1989:2). The introduction of dairy breeds and replacement of beef cattle was a slow and intermittent process. Up until the 1850s, only private dairying took place, but as the industry became more general, cheese factories and later creameries were built to service entire dairying communities (Bremer 1929:587). Butter and cheese were soon steadily manufactured in centrally located factories, usually privately owned. The first railroads in Vermont were running by 1850, expanding the markets for agricultural products, especially the perishable dairy staples which were in high demand in eastern cities. By the close of the nineteenth century, the Vermont dairy farmer was confronted by direct competition from the dairy industries of Ohio and Wisconsin, for whom the transport of perishable goods did not pose as great an obstacle when rail systems connected these states with the East.

Mining and processing of stone and mineral deposits were also significant Vermont industries dating to the time of early settlement. The first reported lime kiln in Vermont was at Isla la Motte, where the French burned limestone to make lime for mortar ca. 1665. Lime kilns started appearing in large numbers with the clearing of farms and the discovery of good quality limestone deposits. Eventually lime kilns were present in the vicinity of nearly all outcrops of limestone. The earliest type of kiln in Vermont, the farm kiln, was constructed to fulfill local demands for agricultural lime and building mortar, although surplus was sold to tanneries, paper mills, and chemical factories. These types were operated up to the 1840s. Larger and more complex kilns were constructed in association with multiple quarry operations, from about 1850 through 1920, and later near railroad lines for easier transportation to external markets (Rolando 1992:216-217). B. Historical Overview of Rutland County

Settlement of Rutland County began around 1760, with the arrival of settlers from western Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Hudson Valley. The pattern of settlement in the county “generally flowed south to north through the Taconic hills and Otter Creek valley, and then into the foothills of the Green Mountains” (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988:3). Primary settlements occurred as clusters of buildings with mills or a meetinghouse soon following. Residents of Rutland County were primarily involved in agriculture. The early farms were small-scale and diversified subsistence enterprises. Established farms produced a cash crop, such as potash made from wood ashes, a byproduct of clearing land. The discovery of local iron deposits, such as the Tinmouth bog iron, in the 1780s led to the iron manufacturing industry. By 1793 Rutland County was home to 16 forges and three blast furnaces, more than in the rest of the state. After 1790 the increased demand for potash and wheat in New England and Europe helped stimulate the agricultural economy. By 1791 Euro-

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

American settlers numbered 15,590; by 1810 that number had nearly doubled to 29,486. Sawmills were established in the 1780s in Pittsfield, Middletown, Ira, Mount Holly, Wallingford, Benson, Danby, Fair Haven, Sudbury, and West Haven. With widespread availability of sawn lumber and nails during the 1780s, construction of wood-frame houses was made easier, and the Cape Cod style was the most common. Previously, the majority of dwellings were log or block houses constructed of hewn logs (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988).

The creation of toll roads in the early nineteenth century generated revenue to construct additional maintained roads that helped farmers and manufacturers transport products to market much faster and more efficiently. This was a boon to the local economy. High prices during the War of 1812 continued the economic prosperity, but with resumption of British imports after the war came an economic crash. Vermont’s wool industry suffered with the resumption of wool imports. European farming imports caused wheat prices to drop and further added to the economic decline. Hardships that came with the War of 1812, natural disasters, an epidemic, and two seasons of famine discouraged settlement in Rutland County between 1811 and 1817. Many emigrated in search of better opportunities (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988).

The years from 1820 to 1850 were a difficult time for industry in Rutland County. Although tariffs helped protect the wool and iron markets, in earlier years transportation costs were high. Companies that were able to turn a profit eventually supported better transportation, and industries with access to the railroads that came in the mid-nineteenth century were able to succeed. Local manufacturers whose goods could be mass- produced elsewhere or were not located on rail lines suffered (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988).

It was not until the construction of railroads between 1849 and 1852 (Figures 3-5) that the local economy began to rise and population began to increase. Irish immigrants escaping the Irish Famine in the 1840s were among the first immigrants to settle in Rutland County to help build the Vermont railroads. Towns without railroad connections, however, continued a slow population decline. With the invention of insulated iced railroad cars, the dairy industry prospered. Farms shifted from sheep specialization to breeding cattle stock and dairying. In 1850 Rutland County produced the most cheese in the state and was fifth in butter production. Factory-produced cheese eventually replaced farm cheese and with improved mechanical refrigeration methods, fluid milk became much more important. Between 1870 and 1880, a milk train between Rutland County and New York City was initiated. In addition to population increase, the railroads also fostered commercial and industrial wealth in the county. By 1870, the value of manufactures ($3,714,795) had exceeded the value of agricultural products ($3,458,102) (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988).

Although sheep raising and later dairying were economically important, the majority of farmers between 1850 and 1900 relied primarily on small-scale diversified agricultural practices. During the early twentieth century farms in the county declined by over 30 percent and the farm population declined by 25 percent or more. The decline in agriculture coincided with a shift to industrial manufacturing, in which investment in building and equipment was double that of agriculture. Quarries, especially those extracting marble and slate, were the main beneficiaries of the railroad’s presence in Vermont. Although the stone industries had been important in Vermont for decades, these cumbersome local resources were much more easily shipped to distant markets by rail and the industry expanded greatly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In the 1930s the Great Depression, agricultural overproduction, and decreased prices made life on the farm more difficult. As a result the number of farms and the amount of land in the county dedicated to farming decreased further. In 1940 only about 20 percent of the county population lived on farms. Although the diversity of the agricultural market declined, dairying remained important and was still an economically sound activity (Johnson and Gilbertson 1988).

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 10 20 40 Miles Kilometers APE (approximate location) 0 17 34 68

FIGURE 3: Project APE, 1856 (Colton 1856) 9 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 2 4 8 Miles Kilometers 0 3 6 12

FIGURE 4: Project Vicinity, Rutland County, 1854 (Moore et. al 1854) 10 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 2 4 8 Miles Kilometers 0 3 6 12

FIGURE 5: Project Vicinity, Rutland County, 1869 (Beers 1869) 11 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

C. Historical Overview of Bennington County

Created by the Vermont legislature on March 17, 1778, Bennington County is the oldest existing county in the state. On February 13, 1781, the northern part of Bennington County was made into Rutland County, but since that time Bennington County’s boundaries have remained substantially the same. Bennington County has 673 square miles of land, which makes it ninth largest of Vermont’s counties. In 1970 the population was recorded as just under 30,000 (Swift 1977:75-76). There are 17 towns in Bennington County. The county has two shire towns, Bennington and Manchester.

As part of New Hampshire Colonial Governor Benning Wentworth’s attempt to expand the size of his province, he issued charters for 16 towns in the southern portion of disputed territory north of Massachusetts and east of the Hudson River. New Hampshire’s first grant in what would become Vermont was for the Town of Bennington, deep in the southwestern corner of Wentworth’s expanded province. Although the New Hampshire Council approved the charter on January 3, 1749, Wentworth apparently did not officially issue the Bennington grant until March 1750 (Graffagnino 1983:3). Bennington’s charter established the pattern for all Wentworth’s later grants of Vermont lands; in Bennington the governor reserved one lot for the town’s first settled minister and another for a local school. In subsequent grants he set aside lots for the Church of England’s Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts and for a Church glebe. As Surveyor of the King’s Woods Wentworth ordered that all pine trees suitable for use by and sale to the Royal Navy were to be protected against unlicensed cutting, shielding another source of income for the governor (Graffagnino 1983:4).

The settlement of the Town of Bennington did not begin until 1761, when Samuel Robinson, the only original proprietor to become a resident of Bennington, led a group of Massachusetts and Connecticut separatists north to the valley of the Walloomsac on the western side of the town (Graffagnino 1983:4). Bennington quickly became the principal west-side Grants town, a position it maintained for nearly half a century. By 1789 industry had begun with the creation of a small but eventually unsuccessful ironworks, Blodget’s Forge (Graffagnino 1983:60).

Until 1830 the Town of Bennington remained one of the leading communities in Vermont, but its importance was on the wane. It was second in the state in population in 1830, but it was third in 1840. The town was split between Old Bennington, on the border with New York State, and East Bennington farther east. Old Bennington dominated town politics until about 1830, when East Bennington became the industrial center and provided the community’s commercial vitality and population growth (Graffagnino 1983:91). One of the leading industries was the Bennington Iron Works, which employed 200 men at three large blast furnaces, until it went bankrupt in 1842. Nonetheless, Bennington was still very much a rural community and retained many of the characteristics of smaller Vermont towns. Three quarters of its residents were involved in some way in agriculture, and scattered industries consisted of small-scale mills processing local agricultural or other raw materials, primarily stone, for a relatively limited and near market.

Bennington’s favorable geographic location at the junction of two well-traveled roads helped the town find markets for its products. The arrival of the railroad in 1852 eventually brought greater industrialization and commercial diversity to Bennington. After the Civil War Bennington experienced gradual growth and relative prosperity (Figures 6 and 7).

D. Historical Overview of Rensselaer County, New York

In 1629 Kilean Van Rensselaer, an Amsterdam merchant, obtained a land grant of approximately one million acres that extended for some 23 miles on both sides of the Hudson. Known as Rensselaerwyck, the enormous manor of the Van Rensselaer family surrounded Fort Orange (Albany) and included most of what

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 2 4 8 Miles Kilometers 0 3 6 12

FIGURE 6: Project Vicinity, Bennington County,1856 (Rice and Harwood 1856) 13 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 2 4 8 Miles Kilometers 0 3 6 12

FIGURE 7: Project Vicinity, Bennington County, 1880 (Child's Gazetteer and Directory 1880) 14 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York is now Albany and Rensselaer counties (Bleeker 1767). Although control of this area was surrendered to the English in 1664, the settlement remained Dutch in character until the late eighteenth century. A prosperous fur trade with Native American inhabitants had been the first impetus for settlement in the upper Hudson Valley, although all exports were required to be shipped through Manhattan to be taxed by the Dutch West India Company. Prior to the 1750s, permanent settlers in Rensselaerwyck were mostly Dutch tenant farmers who occupied tracts along the Mohawk and Hudson rivers and their tributaries, which offered rich alluvial soil and access to transportation waterways.

Rensselaer County played a prominent role in the Revolutionary War campaign of 1777. The Battle of Bennington did not actually take place in Vermont, but rather several miles across the New York border in Walloomsac, in the Town of Hoosick (Rensselaer County Online 2003). After the war ended, New Englanders moved south and west to settling in the area. Among them was Sam Wilson, better known as “Uncle Sam,” who walked from Mason, New Hampshire, with his brother in 1789, settling in Troy, where he established a business as a meatpacker (Rensselaer County Online 2003).

Rensselaer County was established February 7, 1791. At the time of establishment, the county contained seven townships: Rensselaerwick, Hoosick, Troy, Schaghticoke, Pittstown, Petersburgh, and Stephentown. Over the next 60 years five of the original seven towns, excluding Hoosick and Pittstown, divided into their current boundaries, to form a total of 16 townships by 1855 (Sylvester 1880:12-13).

Starting in 1787, Rensselaer County had a strong shipping industry through the businesses in Troy, located at the head of the navigable waters of the Hudson River (Sylvester 1880:161). The first steamboat in the county was operated in 1812 on the Hudson River. In 1820 the North River Steamboat Company was established, operating steamboats on the Hudson River between New York City and Troy. This enterprise was followed by the Troy Steamboat Company, which was incorporated several years later. In addition to the establishment of steamboat companies, commercial interests for Rensselaer County were greatly expanded by the opening of the Erie and the Champlain canals in 1825 (Sylvester 1880:163).

The first railroad to connect to Rensselaer County was the Rensselaer and Saratoga Railroad in 1835. Numerous railroads were constructed through the mid-nineteenth century, connecting Rensselaer County to external markets (Figure 8).

E. Historical Overview of Vermont Railway, Bennington and Rutland, and Hoosick Railroads

The Vermont Railway (VTR) Bennington and Rutland (B&R) railroad runs approximately 60 miles north- south between Rutland and North Bennington, Vermont, with one branch extending southwest from North Bennington to the Vermont-New York state line and another branch extending southeast from North Bennington to Bennington. The southwestern branch connects to the VTR-Hoosick railroad, which ends at Hoosick Junction in New York.

The development of these lines began in 1845 with the charter for the Western Vermont Railroad (WVRR) (Figure 9). Completed in 1852, the state-charted railroad passed through 10 towns in the Valley of Vermont, between the Taconic Mountains to the west and the Green Mountains to the east (Rutland Weekly Herald [RWH] 1867b; Shaughnessy 1964:358). The track opened from Rutland to Arlington in 1851 and from Arlington to the state line in 1852 (Poor 1860:82). At the state line the railway connected to the Troy and Bennington and Troy and Boston Railroads of the Troy and Boston Railroad Company (T&B) running west toward Troy, New York. The WVRR track was extended the short distance southeast from North Bennington to Bennington in 1854 (Parks 2004; Poor 1860:82). The current VTR-Hoosick branch was

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 2.5 5 10 Miles Kilometers 0 4 8 16

FIGURE 8: Project Vicinity, Rensselaer County, 1861 (Lake and Beers 1861) 16 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 4 8 16 Miles Kilometers 0 6 12 24

FIGURE 9: Project Vicinity, Western Vermont Railroad Map, 1851 (Gilbert 1851) 17 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York incorporated into the VTR in 1996 when the State of Vermont purchased the section of track from the Boston and Maine Railroad Company.

1. Vermont

WVRR first leased the railroad to the T&B in 1857 for a 10-year term. The operation of the railroad by T&B during this lease is documented within the context of legal proceedings held to address “grievances of the Bennington & Rutland Railroad” (RWH 1867b). T&B Railroad Company was accused of neglecting to maintain the road to specifications in the lease agreement and incurring significant damage to the railroad without repair (Shaughnessy 1964:77). In January 1867, at the lease end, the majority owner of the WVRR, Trenor W. Park, won back control of the railroad under the name Bennington and Rutland Railroad Company.1

What ensued is referred to as the “Railroad War,” a series of incidents between the B&R Railroad and T&B that occurred along the railroads of western Vermont. Numerous T&B trains were seized in Vermont towns, including North Bennington, Manchester, and North Adams, and workers raced up and down the lines to recapture them and escape back to New York (Shaughnessy 1964:78-81). These incidents, along with conflicts concerning ownership of the lines,2 came to a head when T&B removed portions of their track between North Bennington and the state line and announced they would no longer operate their 5-mile section of track from Vermont to Hoosick Junction (Troy and Bennington Railroad), cutting off B&R Railroad’s western connection to New York (Burlington Free Press 1873; RWH 1867b).

In response, the B&R Railroad Company pledged to construct a new railroad connection south of Bennington to provide western Vermont towns with a southern outlet, in turn requesting that the towns along the B&R line not do any business with the T&B Railroad until they agreed to construct a fair connection with the B&R (RWH 1867a). The following towns subscribed to this agreement: Arlington, Bennington, Clarendon, Danby, Dorset, Landgrove, Manchester, Mt. Tabor, Peru, Shaftsbury, Sunderland, Wallingford, and Winhall, along with businesses and individuals not named (RWH 1867a).

The B&R Railroad purchased the incomplete Lebanon Springs Railroad (LSRR), south of Bennington, from Lebanon Springs, Vermont, to Chatham, New York, and completed the line from Lebanon Springs north to the Bennington Station in 1869, per the 1867 agreement. The completed track from Bennington to Chatham, known as the “Corkscrew Railroad” for its numerous winding curves, was consolidated as the Harlem Extension in 1870 (Parks 2004) and linked to the New York, Boston, and Montreal Railway (Burlington Free Press 1873).

By 1873 T&B had re-laid the track from the state line to Hoosick Junction but continued to block any B&R traffic. Property and ownership disputes and rate disagreements for use of Western Vermont railroads continued until T&B gave up their blockade of traffic from North Bennington, realizing that the route from Bennington to Chatham had gained more importance (Shaughnessy 1964:85) (Figures 10 and 11).

A series of leasors kept the B&R Railroad afloat through 1901, when the Rutland Railroad Company (operating north of Rutland) consolidated with four other lines, including the B&R line from Rutland to Bennington (Shaughnessy 1964:358). The Rutland Railroad Company (Rutland RR) was formed in 1867 after reorganization of the Rutland and Burlington Railroad Company, chartered in 1843 as the Champlain

1 This name change occurred in 1865, a few years prior to the end of the lease by Troy & Boston Railroad Company (Shaughnessy 1964:358). 2 Rutland Weekly Herald, April 4, 1867:1. This article explains that the Western Vermont Railroad Company attached “the entire rolling stock and property of the Troy and Boston Railroad Company in Vermont,” to which T&B responded by ending traffic from the Hoosick Junction to the state line until their stock was returned.

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 10 20 40 Miles Kilometers APE (approximate location) 0 15 30 60

FIGURE 10: Project APE, Vermont Railroads in 1896 (Coffin 1896) 19 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 30 60 120 Miles Kilometers APE (approximate location) 0 50 100 200

FIGURE 11: Project APE, Rutland Railroad Map, 1899 (Wikimedia Commons 1899) 20 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

& Connecticut River Railroad Company (Shaughnessy 1964:358). From 1901 to 1903, Rutland RR replaced at least 20 of 43 bridges along the B&R line. As-built drawings list the Rutland Railroad Company builder as the builder for one bridge and the American Bridge Company as the builder of at least eight of these new bridges.

Early railroad bridges were often constructed of local materials of either timber or stone, or a timber-iron combination. By 1860 railroad companies almost exclusively used pre-fabricated iron bridge members produced by specialized bridge fabrication companies. Trusses were often assembled off-site and shipped to the bridge location (Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage [PB and EIH] 2005:2- 10). The Civil War and westward expansion brought about a growing demand for longer and more durable bridges, which prompted advances in steel production and fabrication methods to produce a stronger and less expensive material than iron. Methods to purify and remove impurities from steel, creating a higher quality product, were refined and large-scale production increased dramatically, bringing down the price of this material that had been known for centuries but was costly to produce. After 1880 steel became the dominant material for bridge building (PB and EIH 2005:2-14).

In 1900 J.P. Morgan formed the American Bridge Company by merging 28 bridge fabrication companies. Directly linked to the U.S. Steel Corporation, another conglomerate engineered by Morgan, it became the dominant firm in the design, fabrication, and erection of bridges across the country. By that time most bridge and railroad companies had standard plans and specifications that expedited the construction of new and replacement bridges. American Bridge Company’s preface to their 1901 Standards for Structural Details elaborates on the importance of these standards for developing product uniformity in design fabrication and erection of bridges:

In order to obtain uniformity in the work done at the various plants of the American Bridge Company, it has been deemed advisable to prepare a system of standards for use in every engineering office to assist the engineers and draughtsmen in making detail and shop drawings.

These standards are the result of years of experience. They have been revised from time to time in order to keep pace with the progress made in the art of designing, and particular attention has been paid to have them adapted to the latest improvements in the tools used in bridge construction. They also contain such useful tables and information as will be found convenient in every engineering office where steelwork is being designed [Schneider 1901].

The American Bridge Company continued to work designing, fabricating, and building one bridge at a time in the early twentieth century. It was not until the 1930s that those phases became specialized (PB and EIH 2005:2-20, 2-21). Anti-trust laws also contributed to this trend by breaking up monopolies and solidifying fabrication as a separate market from the design and construction of bridges.

In 1904 the New York Central Railroad3 took controlling interest in the Rutland Railroad Company. Its influence on the B&R line is captured in as-built drawings, which indicate that “New York Central [NYC &HRR] general specifications for steel bridges, 1900” were used for superstructure designs by the American Bridge Company (Rutland Railroad 1902).

In 1915 the opening of the Panama Canal caused a major shift in trade routes, forcing Rutland RR, which operated several shipping lines under the Rutland Transit Company, to end all water transportation and sell

3 New York Central Railroad consolidated into the New York and Hudson River Railroad in 1869. After the company took controlling interest of the Rutland Railroad in 1904, half of that stock was sold to the New Haven Railroad in 1911. Both railroad companies retained their stock in the company until 1941, when it was turned over to private investors (Shaughnessy 1964:359).

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York several steamers. As a result the Rutland Railroad struggled to expand its services (Louis Berger 2018:55; RDH 1917; Shaughnessy 1964:359).

During World War I the United States Railroad Administration was created to take over the operation of American railroads. Railroads were provided with funding equal to their average annual incomes from the previous three years and worked for two years under the federal agency (Shaughnessy 1964:125). Nine B&R bridges were replaced during the war years under federal control (Figure 12).

The Great Vermont Flood of 1927, a significant event in the state’s history, did not affect the B&R line as severely as the northern sections of the Rutland RR and the rest of the state (Louis Berger 2018:56). Six bridges along the B&R line were constructed after 1927, three of which were built between 2014 and 2017. Clarendon Bridge over Cattle Pass was constructed in 1927, possibly a replacement after flood damage. The American Bridge Company was awarded several Rutland RR bridge replacement contracts after the flood; however, it is unclear which bridges were covered in those contracts (Burlington Free Press 1928).

After the Great Depression railroad income and passenger numbers began to decline. Because of the economic depression and the increase in automobile usage, railroad income dropped 11 percent from 1926 to 1930 and passenger numbers dropped by 69,508 between 1929 and 1930 (Burlington Free Press 1930). As a result passenger service was cut on the Chatham line of the Rutland RR in 1932. The railroad survived another two decades, providing both freight and passenger service in Vermont, until a major strike in 1953 effectively ended all passenger service on the Rutland (Shaughnessy 1964:359). A study of passenger service concluded that it was no longer economically feasible for the railway to provide the service (Louis Berger 2018:59). A few years prior to the strike, the company reorganized as the Rutland Railway Company, ending 12 years in receivership.

Despite the reorganization and efforts to revitalize the railroad, the effects of the strike and the dropping numbers of passengers forced the company to apply for full abandonment of the railway, which was approved in 1963 (Louis Berger 2018:57). The Rutland Railway was purchased by the State of Vermont and leased to private owner Jay Wulfson to be operated as part of the Vermont Railway (VTR) (Vermont Railway System [VRS] 2019). VTR did not reinstate passenger service on the B&R branch, and it remains a freight-only line today. Passenger service is available on the Green Mountain Railroad, purchased by VTR in 1997 (VRS 2019).

2. New York

The 5-mile section of track extending west from the Vermont-New York state line to Hoosick Junction, New York, was constructed in 1851-1852 by the Troy and Bennington Railroad. The Troy & Boston Railroad continued west from the Hoosick Junction to Troy. Both roads were owned by the Troy & Boston Railroad Company. The Troy and Bennington road connected to the WVRR at the Vermont-New York state line, which was leased by T&B from 1857 to 1867.

Fifteen years after the lease conflicts with the B&R Railroad, the Troy & Boston was acquired by the Fitchburg Railroad, which sought to gain control of the Hoosac Tunnel in Vermont. In 1900 the Fitchburg was leased by the Boston and Maine Railroad (B&M), which retained control into the 1990s. The state of Vermont extended its reach into the state of New York through the purchase of abandoned B&M track running from the state line to Hoosick Junction in New York in 1996. This purchase was intended to reintroduce passenger service from Hoosick Junction to North Bennington, which has not yet been achieved (Kelly 1996).

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

0 30 60 120 Miles Kilometers APE (approximate location) 0 50 100 200

FIGURE 12: Project APE, Rutland Railroad, 1923 (American-Rails.com 2019) 23 Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

IV. Survey Results

The APE for the architectural resource identification survey, extending along the former Bennington and Rutland Railroad between Rutland, Vermont, milepost 53.82 and Hoosick, New York, milepost 0.96, includes the 31 individual bridges (properties) proposed for upgrade and resources adjacent to the bridges (the direct APE), as well as resources that are not adjacent to the right-of-way but that may be indirectly affected by the project (the indirect APE). Most of the indirect APE consists of rural and agricultural lands and associated resources.

WSP identified one previously recorded non-bridge resource, the Bennington Battlefield National Historic Landmark (90NR00962), in the APE. One non-contributing bridge (BR 603) in the APE is located within its boundaries. WSP identified 30 previously unrecorded properties, all bridges, plus one bridge previously listed in the VT SRHP/NRHP. The previously listed property, the Clarendon through truss bridge (BR 93), is recommended as remaining eligible. One bridge was found to have been constructed in 1978 and did not meet the age criterion for evaluation. The remaining 29 previously unevaluated bridge properties are at least 45 years old, and of these, WSP recommends 26 bridges as eligible for the SRHP/NRHP as contributing elements in the recommended Bennington and Rutland Railroad linear historic district, discussed below. One bridge, the Shaftsbury stone arch bridge over Paran Creek (BR 59), was also found to meet the registration requirements for listing in the NRHP Multiple Property Documentation, Metal Truss, Masonry and Concrete Bridges of Vermont, 1820-1978 (VDHP et al. 2018). WSP also identified five properties that would be subject to Section 4(f), which regulates use of public recreation areas and NRHP-listed sites that may be affected by federal Department of Transportation funded projects.

Table 1 summarizes the historic architectural resources identified as listed in or eligible for listing in the VT SRHP/NRHP as well as the additional historic and recreational properties that are subject to 4(f) consideration. Photographs of the bridge resources are located in the Bridge Survey Inventory Forms (supplied separately).

As part of this survey, WSP evaluated the Bennington and Rutland (B&R) Railroad, formerly the Western Vermont Railroad, and recommends the resource as eligible as a linear historic district (see Table 1). The Western Vermont Railroad was chartered in 1845 with the intent to connect the Rutland area to the Boston markets by way of a connection through Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Although this particular connection was never realized, the line became an important connector railroad in western Vermont, making both Rutland and North Bennington important junction communities. The railroad connects Rutland City and Bennington County’s two shire towns of Bennington and Manchester. Sparsely populated, the communities in this area depended on transportation to larger markets. Agricultural and industrial products, most importantly milk and other dairy products and quarried stone, could reach buyers on a number of different routes from the mid- nineteenth century through the mid-twentieth century using the B&R. Passenger service was also important before the Great Depression of the 1930s. Many western Vermont communities relied on the connections made by the B&R Railroad.

The remainder of the evaluated properties, consisting of the three railroad bridges located in New York State, are not directly historically associated with the Bennington and Rutland Railroad. One of these bridges, a three-span deck girder bridge over Walloomsac River (BR 600), is recommended as individually eligible for the SRHP/NRHP (see Table 1). The remaining two bridges are early twentieth-century examples of common bridge types in steel, concrete, and stone with no decorative treatments (BR 601 and BR 603). These two bridges have varying degrees of historic integrity and are not eligible for the NRHP given their lack of historical significance (Table 2).

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

TABLE 1: PREVIOUSLY AND NEWLY EVALUATED HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES IN THE APE, PLUS RECOMMENDED HISTORIC DISTRICT, THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR VT SRHP/NRHP, AND SECTION 4(f) PROPERTIES

NAME ID NO. TOWN / ADDRESS NRHP ELIGIBILITY Clarendon Through Truss Bridge BR 93 Clarendon, Mill Brook Listed, SRHP Shaftsbury Stone Arch Bridge BR 59 Shaftsbury, Paran Creek Eligible / Contributing Bennington and Rutland Railroad N/A Rutland and Bennington Cos. Eligible N/A BR 57.5 Shaftsbury Contributing* N/A BR 58.5 Shaftsbury Contributing* N/A BR 58 Shaftsbury Contributing* N/A BR 59.5 Arlington Contributing N/A BR 62 Arlington Contributing N/A BR 67 Manchester Contributing N/A BR 71 Manchester Contributing N/A BR 72.5 Manchester Contributing* N/A BR 72.7 Manchester Contributing** N/A BR 72 Manchester Contributing N/A BR 73 Manchester Contributing N/A BR 74 Manchester Contributing N/A BR 76 Dorset Contributing* N/A BR 77 Dorset Contributing* N/A BR 80 Dorset Contributing* N/A BR 83 Mount Tabor Contributing N/A BR 85 Mount Tabor Contributing N/A BR 86 Mount Tabor Contributing* N/A BR 87 Wallingford Contributing N/A BR 88 Wallingford Contributing N/A BR 89 Wallingford Contributing* N/A BR 92 Wallingford Contributing* N/A BR 96 Clarendon Contributing N/A BR 98 Clarendon Contributing N/A BR 99.5 Rutland City Contributing N/A BR 600 Hoosick Eligible* Bennington Battlefield NHL 90NR00962 SR 67, near Walloomsac Listed, NHL/NRHP, 4(f) Bennington Battlefield State Historic Site N/A SR 67, near Walloomsac 4(f) Green Mountain National Forest N/A Bennington and Rutland Cos. 4(f) Otter Creek State Wildlife Management N/A Otter Creek, Mount Tabor 4(f) Area Emerald Lake State Park N/A Dorset 4(f) *Denotes no as-built plans were available at the time of evaluation ** Denotes no as-built plans or inspection photographs were available at the time of evaluation

TABLE 2: NEWLY EVALUATED HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES IN THE APE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR VT SRHP/NRHP

ID NO. TOWN / ADDRESS NRHP ELIGIBILITY BR 61 Arlington Not Eligible BR 601 Hoosick Not Eligible* BR 603 Hoosick Not Eligible* *Denotes no as-built plans were available at the time of evaluation

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

V. Summary and Conclusions

On behalf of VTrans, Montpelier, WSP has completed an Architectural Resource Identification Survey for the BUILD Grant replacement or rehabilitation of 31 railroad bridges in the Towns of Shaftsbury, Arlington, Manchester, Dorset, Mount Tabor, Wallingford, and Clarendon and the City of Rutland, Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont, and the Town of Hoosick, Rensselaer County, New York. The purpose of the project is to rehabilitate or replace 31 existing bridges of the former Bennington and Rutland Railroad, now operated by Vermont Railway and owned by VTrans. The APE for the architectural investigation includes the 31 bridges and the immediate area surrounding each along a section of railroad track approximately 57.82 miles long and includes those parcels immediately adjacent to the bridges as well as those not adjacent to the right-of-way but that may be indirectly affected by the project.

WSP identified 30 previously unrecorded properties, all bridges, plus one bridge previously listed in the Vermont State Register of Historic Places/National Register of Historic Places (SRHP/NRHP). The previously listed property, the Clarendon through truss bridge (BR 93), is recommended as remaining eligible. One bridge was found to have been constructed in 1978 and did not meet the age criterion for evaluation. The remaining 29 previously unevaluated bridge properties are at least 45 years old, and of these, WSP recommends 26 bridges as eligible for the SRHP/NRHP as contributing elements in the recommended Bennington and Rutland Railroad linear historic district. One bridge, the Shaftsbury stone arch bridge over Paran Creek (BR 59), was also found to meet the registration requirements for listing in the NRHP Multiple Property Documentation, Metal Truss, Masonry and Concrete Bridges of Vermont, 1820-1978 (VDHP et al. 2018).

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

VI. References Cited and Bibliography

American-Rails.com 2019 Rutland Railroad, The Green Mountain Gateway. Accessed September 2019, https://www.american-rails.com/rutland.html#gallery[pageGallery]/0/.

Beers, F.W. 1869 Plan of Rutland Co., Vermont. F.W. Beers, A.D. Ellis & G.G. Soule, New York. Accessed online, https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/3i4v78.

Bleeker, John R. 1767 A map of the Manor Renselaerwick: surveyed and laid down by a scale of 100 chains to an inch. New York Public Library Digital Collections. Accessed September 2019, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/bda6ddc0-d7c4-0132-e087-58d385a7bbd0#.

Bremer, H.E. 1929 The Dairying Interests. In The Vermont of Today, edited by Arthur F. Stone, pp. 585-597. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., New York.

The Burlington Free Press 1873 The Railroad War in Rutland. November 7:3. Accessed September 6, 2019, .

1928 Railroad Bridge over Winooski River at Intervale Road Built in Record Time. August 14:9. Accessed September 5, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/197367988/.

1930 Rutland Railroad Reports Property Greatly Improved, But Income Decreased. November 1:15. Accessed September 5, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/198116582/.

Child’s Gazetteer and Directory 1880 Item 2011590004, Library of Congress, Bennington County, Vt. to accompany Child's Gazetteer and Directory [map], https://www.loc.gov/item/2011590004/. Syracuse Lith. Eng. & Prtg. Co., Syracuse, New York.

Coffin 1896 Item 98688563, Library of Congress, Coffin’s new rail-road map of Vermont accompanying report of the board of railroad commissioners, 1896, https://www.loc.gov/item/98688563/. Boston.

Colton, G.W. 1856 Vermont. Published by J.H. Colton & Co. 172 William St. New York. Entered ... 1855 by J.H. Colton & Co. ... New York. No. 11. Accessed online, https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/5yyr42.

Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. [ESRI] 2019 Bing Maps Aerial. (c) 2011 Microsoft Corporation and its data suppliers. ArcGIS Bing Maps aerial imagery web mapping service accessed October 2019 via ArcMap 10.7, http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=8651e4d585654f6b955564efe44d04e5.

2019 World Topographic Map. ArcGIS map server accessed October 2019 via ArcMap 10.7, http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/rest/services/World_Topo_Map/MapServer.

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

Gilbert, William B. 1851 Item 98688855, Library of Congress, Map of the Western Vermont Rail Road and connecting lines, Wm. B. Gilbert, Chief Engineer [map], https://www.loc.gov/item/98688855/. Western Vermont Railroad, New York.

Graffagnino, J. Kevin 1983 The Shaping of Vermont. Vermont Heritage Press, Bennington.

Johnson, Curtis, and Elsa Gilbertson (editors) 1988 The Historic Architecture of Rutland County: Vermont State Register of Historic Places. Vermont Division for Historic Preservation, Montpelier.

Kelly, Matt 1996 State Buys Rail Line to Hoosick Junction. Bennington Banner January 29:1. Accessed September 13, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/546717534/?terms=Vermont%2Bbuys%2Brailroad%2Bfro m%2Bnorth%2BBennington%2Bto%2BHoosick.

Lake, D.J., and S.N. Beers 1861 Item 2009583522, Library of Congress, Map of Rensselaer Co., New York, www.loc.gov/item/2009583522/. Smith, Gallup & Co. Publishers, Philadelphia.

Louis Berger 2018 Vermont Transportation Theme: Statewide, Vermont. Prepared for Vermont Agency of Transportation, Montpelier, by Louis Berger, Albany, New York.

Mead and Hunt 2007 Indiana Bridges Historic Context Study, 1830s-1965. Prepared for Indiana Department of Transportation. Accessed September 2019, https://www.in.gov/indot/files/INBridgesHistoricContextStudy1830s-1965.pdf

Meeks, Harold A. 1986 Time and Change in Vermont: A Human Geography. The Globe Pequot Press, Chester, Connecticut.

Moore, Isaac W., J. Chace, and James D. Scott & Owen McLeran 1854 Item 2012586227, Library of Congress, Scott’s map of Rutland County, Vermont [map], www.loc.gov/item/2012586227/. Owen McLeran & James D. Scott, Publishers, Philadelphia.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation 2000 Western Vermont Corridor Study, Phase 1. Report to Congress, January 28. Washington, D.C. Accessed September 11, 2019, https://studiesandreports.ccrpcvt.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/01/Vermont-Western-Corridor-Study-%E2%80%93-Report-To- Congress.pdf.

Parks, Joseph 2004 Trenor Park and The Corkscrew, Part 1. Bennington Banner May 7:14. Accessed September 6, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/546899434/.

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage [PB and EIH] 2005 NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 15: A Context for Common Historic Bridge Types. Prepared for National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C., by Parsons Brinkerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage. Available online, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/archive/NotesDocs/25-25(15)_FR.pdf.

Poor, Henry V. 1860 History of the Railroads and Canals of the United State of America. Volume 1. John H. Schultz & Co., New York.

Rensselaer County Online 2003 History Information & Timeline. Accessed June 2015, http://www.rensco.com/history_timeline.asp.

Rice, E., and C.E. Harwood 1856 Item 2011590005, Library of Congress, Map of Bennington County, Vermont, https://www.loc.gov/item/2011590005/. H.F. Walling’s New York Map Store, New York.

Rolando, Victor R. 1992 Two Hundred Years of Soot and Sweat, The History and Archaeology of Vermont’s Iron, Charcoal, and Lime Industries. Vermont Archaeological Society, Mountain Publications, Manchester, Vermont.

Rutland Daily Herald [RDH] 1917 Tells Past History of Rutland Railroad. March 5:4. Accessed September 9, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/533744172/.

Rutland Weekly Herald [RWH] 1867a Railroad Meeting at Arlington. February 14:5. Accessed September 11, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/442900849/.

1867b Another Great Railroad Meeting at Bennington. March 28:5. Accessed September 11, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/442901490/.

1867c The Railroad Controversy. April 4:1. Accessed September 11, 2019, https://www.newspapers.com/image/442901520/.

Rutland Railroad 1902 Railroad AsBuilts. Plot Set: 10g100. Manchester, Vt. Bridge Number: 72. Vermont Department of Transportation. Accessed online, http://vtransmap01.aot.state.vt.us/rp/dpr/diwebstore/RailRoad_AsBuilts/documenttoc.asp?AID=R ailRoad%5FAsBuilts&PID=90342.

Schneider, C.C. 1901 Standards for Structural Details. American Bridge Company, Pencoyd, Pennsylvania. Accessed September 2019, https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015021060119&view=1up&seq=98.

Shaughnessy, Jim 1964 The Rutland Road. Howell-North Books, Berkeley, California.

Architectural Resource Identification Survey Rutland and Bennington Counties, Vermont BUILD Grant - Resource Identification of 31 Railroad Bridges Rensselaer County, New York

Steponaitis, Louis 1975 The Textile Industry in Vermont 1790-1973. University of Vermont Press, Montpelier.

Swift, Esther Munroe 1977 Vermont Place Names: Footprints of History. Picton Press, Camden, Maine.

Sylvester, Nathaniel. 1880 History of Rensselaer Co., New York. With Illustrations and Biographical Sketches of Its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Press of J. B. Lippincott & Co., Philadelphia.

Vermont Division for Historic Preservation [VDHP] 1989 Vermont Historic Preservation Plan: Industry and Commerce Theme. Overview and Context Summaries. Vermont Division for Historic Preservation, Montpelier.

1991 Vermont Historic Preservation Plan: Culture and Government Theme. Overview and Context Studies. Vermont Division for Historic Preservation, Montpelier.

2019 Online Resource Center [ORC]. Vermont State Historic Preservation Office, Montpelier. Accessed September 2019, http://www.orc.vermont.gov/Resource/Show-Resource-Table.aspx.

Vermont Department of Historic Preservation [VDHP], Vermont Agency of Transportation [VTrans], Historic Documentation Company, Inc. [HDC] 2017 Multiple Property Documentation Form, Stone Highway Culverts in Vermont 1750 to 1930. VDHP and VTrans, Montpelier, and HDC, Portsmouth, Rhode Island.

Vermont Department of Historic Preservation [VDHP], Vermont Agency of Transportation [VTrans], Louis Berger U.S., Inc. [Louis Berger] 2018 Multiple Property Documentation Form, Metal Truss, Masonry and Concrete Arch Bridges of Vermont, 1820-1978 (updated from 1990 version). VDHP and VTrans, Montpelier, and Louis Berger, Albany, New York.

Vermont Rail System [VRS] 2019 Fifty Years of Service and Success, A History of the Vermont Rail System. Vermont Rail System, Burlington, http://www.vermontrailway.com/our_story.html.

Wikimedia Commons 1899 Rutland Railroad and Connections. Available through Wikimedia Commons, https://ia800408.us.archive.org/30/items/vtmaps_Vermont_0074/78.jpg