Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
143605647
label
West Front of Capitol Extension: General, 1965-1973 (5)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
143605647
contentType
document
title
West Front of Capitol Extension: General, 1965-1973 (5)
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Special Files
subjects
United States Capitol (Washington, D.C.)
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
143605647
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1973-02-28
month
2
year
1973
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1965-05-01
month
5
year
1965
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
1d566cd840269a93
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box J30, folder "West Front Extension: General,
1965-1973 (5)" of the Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers, 1948-1973 at the Gerald R.
Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box J30 of the Gerald R. Ford Congressional
Papers, 1948-1973 at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
to White House
meeling
In is checkeng House 6-11-70 wett What
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
MARIO E. CAMPIOLI
Copital June 1970
Rechited P
- Bibliography -
PERSONAL DATA
Born: Parma, Italy - 1910. Arrived United States - 1911. Naturalized - 1935.
Marital Status: Married. Wife - Margaret; Children - 3 daughters, 1 son.
Address: 1136 Basil Road, McLean, Virginia 22101
EDUCATION
Architecture
Columbia University - 1930.
New York University - 1937. Bachelor's degree.
Architectural Research Abroad
England, France, Portugal, Sweden and Italy.
PROFESSIONAL STATUS
Registered Architect
FORD is LIBRARI GERALD
New York - since 1936;
1
Virginia - since 1949;
New Jersey (Formerly) - from 1940 to 1949.
MEMBERSHIP
Since 1947 - Member. The American Institute of Architects.
Since 1949 - Member. Society of Architectural Historians.
Since 1957 - Member. The American Institute of Architects, Washington Metropolitan
Chapter.
Appointed April 1965. Fine Arts Commission, Board of Consultants for Georgetown.
Elected March 1966. United States Capitol Historical Society, Board of Consultants.
Since 1968 - Honorary Member. American Registered Architects.
November 1968 - Honorary Member. The Producers' Council, Inc., Washington, D.C.,
Chapter.
March 1969 - Member. United States Capitol Historical Society, Board of Trustees.
November 1969 - Allied Professional Membership. National Sculpture Society.
AWARDS
Sons of Columbus of America - 1970 Michelangelo Award in Architecture.
- 2 -
Mario E. Campioli - Bibliography
EXPERIENCE
1959 to Present: Office of the Architect of the Capitol, Washington, D. C.
Appointed Assistant Architect of the Capitol in 1959.
Duties consist of the following: In charge of architectural
design and technical work of the office of the Architect of
the Capitol. Primary responsibility for the Extension of
the Capitol project after its authorization. Responsible
for development of schematics on new projects such as pro-
posed Additional Library of Congress Building. Consultant
for the Architect of the Capitol with Advisory and Associate
Architects on new projects as well as alterations and addi-;
tions. Acting Architect of the Capitol during the absence
of the Architect of the Capitol.
1957 to 1959:
DeWitt, Poor and Shelton, Architects, Washington, D.C.
Office Manager and Project Director of Extension of the Capitol
Project. In this capacity, developed plans and specifications
for project, conducted historical research to develop back-
ground information, and lectured before interested groups
and societies. Represented the Associate Architects in dis-
cussions and conferences with the Architect of the Capitol,
Members of Congress and their staff, and with the Advisory
Architects.
1949 to 1957:
Colonial Williamsburg, Williamsburg, Virginia.
Director of Architecture for this project.
This work required abilities and training in restoration work.
Had charge of architectural, engineering and landscape work
required to restore many of the historical buildings at this
site as well as visitor facilities such as the New Informa-
tion Center area. During this period, also directed the
restoration of the Van Cortlandt Manor Project at Croton,
New York, for Mr. J. D. Rockefeller, Jr.
1940 to 1949:
Eggers and Higgins, Architects, New York, New York.
Served as Production Manager (and in other positions) in the
development of plans and specifications for many prominent
buildings, including those Washington buildings such as the
American Red Cross Building, New Senate Office Building**,
and including detailing of the National Gallery of Art.
1928 to 1939:
Office of Dwight James Baum*, Architects, New York, New York.
Trained from 1928 and remained to become an associate of the
firm a year before Mr. Baum's death in 1939.
Served for many years as a draftsman on residential, institu-
tional work, restoration work and on some Federal work such
as the Flushing, New York, Post Office, served as job captain
of the Administration Building for the American Institute of
Architects in Washington, D. C., and other projects in the
latter years of employment there.
** - Supervised the preparation of plans and specifications of the original
design not the building as revised and built, 1955-1958.
Recipient of Hoover Medal in 1932 for Excellence in Architecture for the
period 1927-1932.
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
HOOVER PRESENTS GOLD MEDAL TO ARCHITECT. April 28. 1932. President Hoover today presented the gold medal which
LIBRARY
FORD
GERALD
HOOVER PRESENTS GOLD MEDAL TO ARCHITECT, April 28, 1932. President Hoover today presented the gold medal which
is awarded to the winner of the Small House Architectural Contest, conducted under the sponsorship of Better
Homes in America, to Dwight James Baum, Architect of New York, at the White House in Washington.
Left to right: Dr. John M. Gries of the President's Conference on Home Building and Ownership; Frank C. Bald-
win, Secretary of AIA; William Stanley Parker, President of Architects Small House Service Bureau; Mr. Baum;
The President; E. J. Russell, First Vice President of AIA; Dr. James Ford, Executive Director of Better Homes
in America; and Ray Lyman Wilbur, Secretary of the Interior.
Mr. Mario E. Campioli Acting Architect of the Capitol, was employed by Dwight James Baum, Architect, in March
1928 and was an associate of the firm at the time of Mr. Baum's death in December 1939.
ITEM TRANSFER REFERENCE FORM
The item described below has been removed to:
New File Location:
NLF AudioVisual Collection
Document Description:
One 8x10 glossy 0 hotograph, Resident Hoover presenting
gold metal award to Dwight James Barn, April 28, 1932
Old File Location:
GRF Cong. Paper, Special Files: West Front Commission
A77-128, A77-130 A77-130
By
DAD
Date 9/6/78
NLFP - 11/4/77
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20515
May 20, 1970
Honorable John W. McCormack
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Dear Mr. Speaker:
Upon your direction, arrangements have been made for a meeting of
the Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol to consider your
report of April 17, 1970 to the Commission and to select the engineering
firm to proceed with the West Front feasibility study.
The meeting is arranged for Monday, May 25, 1970, at 2 P. M., in
Room H-201, Capitol Building. Congressman Albert has kindly agreed to the
Commission's use of Room H-201, his Majority Conference Room.
Calls to the various Commission Members' offices indicate the following
probable attendance:
Chairman McCormack
will be present
Vice President Agnew
will be present
Majority Leader Mansfield
unable to be present
Minority Leader Scott
expects to be present
Majority Leader Albert
will be present
Minority Leader Ford
unable to be present
Architect of the Capitol
Acting Architect will
be present
Senator Scott has a speaking engagement out of the city but expects to
return in time for meeting. Congressman Ford has a speaking engagement that
will keep him out of the city all day.
Because of the urgency of a decision on this matter, I would, suggest
that the meeting proceed if a quorum is present. A decision could then be
-2-
made with the understanding that we would seek the concurrence of any absent
Members before proceeding to negotiate a contract.
With best wishes, I am
Sincerely Shil yours,
Philip L. Roof
Executive Assistant
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Tulyhne
Mike Conlin
1 award up Nary
over 10
standly indicators
Ravangh,
mean 30 more people in our orpany of
Parsegn Comel
materbing
10:00 Wed
FORD & LIBRARY 9ERALD
2:00
RomA201
feueble shay M redoral
ch of B. well had of
NV (if)
nedues
are
T. Restord w/H
noM
large 1000
J. s Louis
clamful in all men n you
swall
to
3. sant
can
more thank then
WEST FRONT OF THE CAPITOL
KEY REQUIREMENTS IN ENGINEERING CONTRACT
May, 1970
Public Law 91-145 and the basic legislation involved authorizes
the Architect of the Capitol, under the direction of the Commission for
Extension of the United States Capitol, to negotiate a personal service
contract for employment of independent nongovernmental engineering
services, in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for studying and
reporting (within six months after the date of the employment contract)
on the feasibility and cost of restoring the west central sandstone
front of the Capitol under such terms and conditions as the Commission
may determine.
Public Law 91-145, in authorizing this feasibility study of
restoration, provides, in pertinent part, as follows with respect to
such study:
"***That after submission of such study and report
and consideration thereof by the Commission, the
Commission shall direct the preparation of final
plans for extending such west central front in accord
with Plan 2 (which said Commission has approved),
unless such restoration study report establishes to
the satisfaction of the Commission:
"(1) That through restoration, such west central front can,
without undue hazard to safety of the structure and
persons, be made safe, sound, durable, and beautiful
for the foreseeable future;
"(2) That restoration can be accomplished with no
more vacation of west central front space in the
building proper (excluding the terrace structure)
GERALO, FORD LIBRARY
than would be required by the proposed extension
Plan 2;
- 2 -
"(3) That the method or methods of accomplishing
restoration can be so described or specified as to
form the basis for performance of the restoration
work by competitive, lumpsum, fixed price construc-
tion bids or bids;
"(4) That the cost of restoration would not
exceed $15,000,000; and
"(5) That the time schedule for accomplishing the
restoration work will not exceed that heretofore
projected for accomplishing the Plan 2 extension
work: Provided further, That after consideration
of the restoration study report, if the Commission
concludes that all five of the conditions herein-
before specified are met, the Commission shall then
make recommendations to the Congress on the
question of whether to extend or restore the west
central front of the Capitol."
It is essential that the Architect of the Capitol, in negotiating
such contract, incorporate therein clearly-spelled out requirements that
will result in the production of a report containing all data, estimates,
schedules, findings, evaluations, and other information necessary to
enable the Commission to make a sound determination with respect to the
aforecited five vital conditions set forth in Public Law 91-145. In
addition, the contract should make provision for the following:
PREPARATORY WORK:
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
The engineering firm shall --
(1) review the "Report on the Foundation Investigation of
the Extension of the Capitol" by Moran, Proctor,
Mueser and Rutledge, Consulting Engineers, dated May
1957;
(2) review the "Report on the Structural Condition of the
West Central Portion of the United States Capitol,
Extension of the Capitol Project", dated November
1964, by The Thompson and Lichtner Company,
Consulting Engineers;
- 3 -
(3) review the "Preliminary Plans and estimates of cost
for the Extension of the West Central Front of
the Capitol" published in 1967;
(4) review the study and records of the settlement,
movement, and cracking of the West Central
Front made during the period August 1968 to April
1970;
(5) review the legislative history of the project;
(6) review other pertinent data, information, plans, etc.,
in the Office of the Architect of the Capitol;
(7) examine the exterior and interior of this section of
the building;
(8) if previous borings and test pits are not considered
adequate for their study, make such additional
borings and test pits as mutually agreed to by
engineer and Architect of the Capitol;
(9) provide necessary testing of old material;
(10) remove all coats of paint from the old sandstone to
the extent considered necessary by the engineer
to permit him to make a proper evaluation of the
condition of the wall;
(11) take such measurements of existing exterior stonework
as are necessary to permit sound decision on
restoration; and
(12) make such further exploratory work as required, with
the provision that no stones may be removed or the
structure be otherwise disturbed, if removal or
FORD LIBRARY & GERALD
disturbance would, in the judgment of the Architect
of the Capitol, jeopardize the safety of the
structure.
- 4 -
SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED IN STUDY:
The engineering firm in making a study to determine the
feasibility of restoring this old section of the building, shall deal
specifically with the following items:
(1) make recommendations for properly restoring all
deteriorated, patched, spalled and cracked
stones, including slipped keystones and sagged
stones in the central portico;
(2) if stones mentioned above are to be removed and
replaced, indicate how this would be accomplished
and if the stones above would have to be removed;
(3) take all necessary measures to plan to maintain the
original steryotomy and avoid the use of "dutchman";
le
(4) determine whether in order to eliminate recurrence
of cracks and open joints, provision should be made
for expansion and contraction and indicate how this
would be accomplished;
(5) determine the type and source of stone to be used in
replacement work;
(6) determine whether the restored front should be painted
or otherwise treated;
(7) indicate how walls would be improved structurally
including the keying of present outer and inner faces
of exterior walls;
(8) determine whether underpinning of the existing walls
GERALD R. FORD
is necessary and the extent of such underpinning;
(9) provide for relocating the underground utilities
necessary, for both temporary and permanent use, if
underpinning is necessary.
(10) provide for all necessary temporary exterior and
interior shoring or buttressing, during the restora-
tion period;
(11) indicate rooms which would be vacated and shored during
the restoration and provide a schedule showing the
periods such rooms would be vacated;
- 5 -
(12) indicate the method proposed for avoiding damage to
original art work on interior surfaces of walls
and ceilings if shoring or treatment of the walls
to improve structural quality are recommended.
(13) include provision for temporary accommodations for
those whose quarters must be vacated as a result
of interior shoring during restoration period;
(14) include provision for fenced-in construction site
and necessary buildings thereon and access roads;
(15) provide for storage site for any new stone located
within 25 miles of the Capitol;
(16) establish a schedule of the restoration work--if
more than one stage is recommended, indicate the
number of stages, describe the work to be under-
taken in each stage, and the time required for
each;
(17) provide for replacement of defective door and
window frames and sash;
(18) provide for new flashing at juncture of old and
new work at roof and other necessary junctures;
(19) include provision for scaffolding of exterior for
purpose of obtaining additional measurements,
making models, and executing work of restoration;
(20) include provision for making of models of all carved
work requiring replacement and the taking of
profiles of all moldings requiring replacement;
(21) determine and recommend the type of stone pointing
GERALD R. LEGRARY FORD
to be used in new work;
(22) determine and recommend the method of setting new
stones;
(23) develop fully and make recommendations on the risks
and hazards involved in restoration work and
indicate safety methods to be employed;
(24) make provision for birdproofing all restored sections
of building;
- 6 -
(25) provide for protection, weather and dust proofing
during restoration period;
(26) furnish detailed breakdown of costs, making
allowance, in estimating such costs, for (a)
escalating costs over the restoration period
and (b) a lumpsum amount for professional
consulting services, administrative costs of
the Architect of the Capitol and contingencies;
(27) furnish all necessary drawings to compliment the
written report and to clearly delineate the
scope of the work; and
(28) submit, within six months after date of contract,
a detailed written report (in 50 copies)
containing their findings and recommendations,
and estimates of cost, with particular attention
to the five conditions stated in Public Law 91-
145.
These lists are not intended to be absolutely firm or complete.
We propose, after consultation with the selected firm, to modify,
amplify, and make additions to the same, to the extent necessary to
accomplish, fully, the objectives of Public Law 91-145.
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
April 17, 1970
STUDY OF WEST FRONT OF CAPITOL
Summary to Date
Pursuant to agreement of the Commission for Extension of the
United States Capitol:
The Speaker invited (1) the American Society of Civil
Engineers and (2) the Deans of 19 leading Engineering Schools to
recommend firms or individuals they considered capable of undertaking
the feasibility study ordered by the Congress.
The American Society of Civil Engineers and 16 of the 19
Deans responded. A total of 33 firms or individuals was recommended.
Of the 33 firms, 5 were eliminated from consideration because
they or members of their firm had previously worked on the Extension
of the Capitol Project. Those eliminated from consideration were:
1. Seeley, Stevenson, Value and Knecht
New York, New York
2. Severud, Perrone, Sturm, Conlin and Bandel
New York, New York
3. The Thompson & Lichtner Co., Inc.
FORD
Brookline, Massachusetts
y
4. Meuser, Rutledge, Wentworth & Johnson
GERALD
LIBRARY
New York, New York
5. Robert & Company
Atlanta, Georgia
The Speaker then sent requests for information to the remaining
28 firms. Of the 28, 23 responded, as follows:
19 - interested
4 - declined
23 - Total
- 2 -
Those declining and their reasons therefor are:
1. J. E. Sirrine Co.
Greenville, South Carolina
Did not consider they had experience
and qualification.
2. Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill
Chicago, Illinois
Not in position to request consideration.
3. J. N. Pease Associates
Charlotte, North Carolina
Their experienced personnel fully committed
at this time.
4. Smith, Hinchman & Grylls Associates
Detroit, Michigan
To avoid any possible conflict of interest.
President of firm is President-elect of
American Institute of Architects. A.I.A.
has taken a definite position on West
Front Project.
The 19 firms expressing an interest in being considered are
(listed in order of their response):
1. Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas
New York, New York
2. Albert C. Martin & Associates
Los Angeles, California
3. Dr. O. Zaldastani
GERALD R. LIBRARY FORD
Nichols, Norton & Zaldastani
Boston, Massachusetts
4. Richardson, Gordon and Associates
Pittsburgh and Philadalphia, Pennsylvania
5. The Ken R. White Company
Denver, Colorado
- 3 -
6. Ketchum, Konkel, Barrett, Nickel, Austin
Denver, Colorado
7. Sverdrup & Parcel
St. Louis, Missouri
8. Praeger-Kavanagh-Waterbury
New York, New York
9. Ammann and Whitney
New York, New York
10. John A. Blume & Associates
San Francisco, California
11. Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff
New York, New York and
Kansas City, Missouri
12. Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton
New York, New York
13. Phillips-Carter-Reister and Associates, Inc.
Denver, Colorado
14. H. J. Degenkolb & Associates
San Francisco, California
15. The Perkins & Will Partnership
Chicago, Illinois
16. Brandow & Johnston Associates
Los Angeles, California
17. ABAM Engineers, Inc.
Tacoma, Washington
LIBRARY FORD "y GERALD
18. Whitman, Requardt and Associates
Baltimore, Maryland
19. Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall
Los Angeles, California
- 4 -
All of the 19 firms have stated, in effect, that they have had
no previous connections with proposals to either extend or restore the
west central front of the Capitol, including any expressed predisposi-
tion for or against the extension or the restoration.
OTHER PROPOSALS
One dean (Illinois), while providing names of firms to be
considered, suggested the National Academy of Engineering be requested
to form a panel of experts to advise the Commission (as a "buffer").
One dean (MIT) recommended that the National Academy of
Engineering be requested to form a panel, which would act in an
advisory capacity to the Commission. Site investigation, analysis, and
calculations would be accomplished by "some engineering company" under
direct contract with Commission. Such engineering company would
perform such investigations etc., as considered necessary, under guidance
of the National Academy of Engineering panel.
One dean (Purdue) thought it would be well to have "a well
balanced group of consultants from numerous sources." He proposed a
panel of 9 men (which included a U.S. Government materials consultant).
UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS
The Speaker and/or the Architect of the Capitol have received
GERALD LISRARY R.FORD
requests to be considered from the following unsolicited firms:
Tartar and Kelly, Inc. (et al)
Baltimore, Maryland
(Proposes advisory panel of American Institute of
Architects, Fine Arts Commission, and others
already against extension)
- 5 -
Ferry and Henderson, Architects, Inc.
Springfield, Illinois
(Architects who demolished and reconstructed
the Old Illinois State Capitol)
DCI-Design Consultants
(Submitted by Congressman Bob Wilson)
Vosbeck, Vosbeck, Kendrick & Redinger
Alexandria, Virginia
Architects-Engineers-Planners
DIGEST
A digest of certain information furnished by each of the 19
firms desiring consideration is attached.
FORD LIBRARY y GERALD
LIBRARY
FORD
- 6 -
y
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Washington
NAME OF FIRM
ABAM Engineers Incorporated
HOME OFFICE
Tacoma, Washington
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
19 years
SIZE OF FIRM
30 persons (14 with advanced degrees)
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineering
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Closely associated with constructors; bridges, stadiums, modern housing, ship
piers, warehouses, and modern buildings.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: --
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Specialize in prestressed concrete work.
LIBRARY
- 7 -
FORD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
&
GERALD
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
University of Washington
Duke University
University of Michigan
University of Illinois
NAME OF FIRM
Ammann & Whitney
HOME OFFICE
New York, New York
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
24 years
SIZE OF FIRM
Over 600 employees
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Bridges and highways, large modern buildings, airports and airfields, military
construction, blast resistant structures, communications, and dams.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: --
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Firm is strong in engineering talent. Of 129 principals and key personnel, 116 are engineers.
Of a total force of about 600 individuals, 342 are engineers.
LIBRARY
- 8 -
FORD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
Stanford University
University of California
NAME OF FIRM
John A. Blume & Associates Engineers
HOME OFFICE
San Francisco, California
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
25 years
SIZE OF FIRM
100 plus or minus
KIND OF FIRM
Civil and Structural Engineering
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Site feasibility, planning & site development; harbor and port
structures; research facilities and buildings; industrial
plants & structures; offshore platforms and islands, terminals,
railroads, highways, airports, military installations & under-
ground facilities.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
Their Earthquake Engineering,
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
Earth Science Studies,
Research on Masonry, and
Laboratory and Field Testing might be of use.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Blume elected to National Academy of Engineering in recognition
of pioneering work in structural analysis and design. Note:
Blume was recommended by Dean of Engineering at Stanford
University and Dean of Engineering--University of California.
Professor of Architecture and Chairman of Department of
Architecture, University of California is Architect for Blume
firm.
LIBRARY
FORD
- 9 -
i
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
California Institute of Technology
NAME OF FIRM
Brandow & Johnston Associates
HOME OFFICE
Los Angeles, California
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
25 years
SIZE OF FIRM
40 persons
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Structural Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Consulting structural engineers associated with Los Angeles architects.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Their work with earthquake corrections and standards might be
helpful, they say.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: --
LIBRARY
FORD
CERALD
- 10 -
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
California Institute of Technology
NAME OF FIRM
Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall
HOME OFFICE
Los Angeles, California
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
24 years
SIZE OF FIRM
600 - home & branch offices
KIND OF FIRM
Planning, architecture, engineering, systems and economics.
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Housing, educational facilities, public works, transportation,
defense, aerospace, industrial, commercial, systems, planning
and Land development, economics, manufacturing, process,
public facilities, aerial surveys.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
-
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Engineers for small job -- fluorescent lighting in old
Senate Garage -- for Architect of the Capitol several years
ago.
LIBRARY
FORD
- 11 -
&
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of California
NAME OF FIRM
H. J. Degenkolb & Associates
HOME OFFICE
San Francisco, California
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
30 years
SIZE OF FIRM
28 engineers and draftsmen and 3 secretaries
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Reconstruction and alterations, design of modern office buildings, military facili-
ties, churches, hospitals, foundation structures, garages, and airports, structural feasibility
studies, earthquake studies, reports and consultation.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Earthquake studies might be somewhat related.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: --
LIBRARY
FORD
- 12 -
is
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
NAME OF FIRM
Howard, Needles, Tammen & Bergendoff
HOME OFFICE
New York, N. Y. and Kansas City, Mo.
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
55 years
SIZE OF FIRM
Over 1,200 employees in all locations
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Engineering for dams, tunnels, bridges, highways, airports, underground utilities,
and buildings.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: (see next item)
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT: Deceased senior partner served as consulting engineer to Commission on Renovation
of the Executive Mansion. Advised on matters relating to structural features of the recommenda-
tions for construction.
COMMENT: --
- 13 -
FORD is LIBRARY 076870
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Colorado
NAME OF FIRM
Ketchum-Konkel-Barrett-Nickel-Austin
HOME OFFICE
Denver, Colorado
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
Founded in "early 1940's"
SIZE OF FIRM
50, including draftsmen and supporting personnel
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Modern office buildings, apartments and hotels, hospitals and clinics, commercial
and industrial facilities, airfields and appurtenances, bridges and heavy structures, research
and testing.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: --
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Mr. Ketchum would supervise study.
LIBRARY
FORD
- 14 -
&
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
GERALD
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
California Institute of Technology
NAME OF FIRM
Albert C. Martin and Associates
HOME OFFICE
Los Angeles, California
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
65 years
SIZE OF FIRM
Over 350 persons
KIND OF FIRM
Planning - Architecture - Engineering
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Planning, modern buildings, industrial plants and facilities.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
Association with some old churches, halls, estates, etc.,
but do not indicate extent of their services or whether any
projects were of comparable construction to Capitol.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
An Architect-engineer firm. Detail investigation would be
under direction of structural engineer.
LIBRARY
FORD
- 15 -
is
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
CERALD
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
Harvard University
NAME OF FIRM
Nichols, Norton and Zaldastani, Inc., and 2 other Firms.
HOME OFFICE
Boston, Massachusetts
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
Joint venture for this project
SIZE OF FIRM
Not Known
KIND OF FIRM
(1) Consulting structural engineers; (2) Material testing;
(3) Construction procedures and costs.
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Nichols et al - Consulting Engineers
Perini
- Large construction firm
H. G. Protze - Materials Technologist
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
Perini is the contractor (not Engineers or Architects) for
for rebuilding interior of Parliament Building in Ottawa,
Canada. This project provides for restoring exterior but
rebuilding the interior of the building. This building
was constructed 1859-1867.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
Nichols -- Mr. Norton of this firm (now deceased) was structural
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
engineer of substructure of the National Shrine.
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
Protze -- Material Technologist. National Shrine of
Immaculate Conception, Washington, D. C.
COMMENT:
-
- 16 -
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
Duke University
University of Michigan
FORD LIBRARY CERALD
NAME OF FIRM
Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas
HOME OFFICE
New York, N. Y.
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
85 years
SIZE OF FIRM
650 persons (2/3 professional)
KIND OF FIRM
Engineers, Architects, Planners
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, rapid transit, traffic and parking, ports-
harbors-terminals, canals, water and sewer, security facilities against nuclear blast, buildings
and industrial facilities.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Some experience in foundations, underpinning and strengthening of
buildings.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Would supplement in-house capabilities with experts in stone restoration and other matters as
desirable.
- 17 -
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Illinois
LIBRARY
FORD
NAME OF FIRM
The Perkins & Will Partnership
i
HOME OFFICE
Chicago, Illinois
GERALD
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
Joint Venture for this project
SIZE OF FIRM
Joint venture for this project
KIND OF FIRM
Joint venture includes: engineers, construction firm, university
professor as structural consultant, and soil mechanics and
foundation consultant.
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Varied
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
-
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Submission seems to be built around specialistsin their fields
or teachers, rather than practicing engineers.
- 18 - -
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Colorado
NAME OF FIRM
Phillips-Carter-Reister and Associates, Inc.
HOME OFFICE
Denver, Colorado
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
21 years
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
SIZE OF FIRM
40 - 50
KIND OF FIRM
Engineers, architects, planners, consultants
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Bridges, industrial buildings, viaducts, dams, tunnels, water and sewer plants,
military installations, hospitals, schools, commercial buildings and high-rise office
buildings, structural steel and reinforced concrete frame buildings.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Some experience in investigating older buildings, dating back,
they say, "in the 1800's.' In 1953, made investigation, study, report and design to correct
structural deficiencies in the State Capitol Building at Santa Fe, New Mexico.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Much experience in water plants, dams, tunnels, and high-rise buildings.
- 19 -
1
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
LIBRARY
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
FORD
Rice University
i
University of Michigan
GERALD
NAME OF FIRM
Praeger-Kavanagh-Waterbury (A Division of Madigan-Praeger, Inc.)
HOME OFFICE
New York, N. Y.
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
20 years (42 including predecessor firm name)
SIZE OF FIRM
Over 300 engineers, architects and planners
KIND OF FIRM
Engineers, Architects, Planners
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Professional services, primarily engineering, in connection with public,
institutional, industrial, scientific and defense building facilities.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Two members of firm performed engineering and architectural work in
remodeling of White House. Firm has provided services of significant restorations and
corrections of deterioration of monumental cathedrals, including Cathedral of St. John the
Divine and St. Thomas Church, both in New York.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT: E. H. Praeger, Engineer and Chairman of Board, directed engineering work for White
House restoration. John W. Waterbury, architect and member of firm, was partner to William A.
Delano during the time the latter was consulting architect for the White House Project.
E. H. Praeger was chief engineer on such monumental structures as the Nebraska State House, Los
Angeles Public Library, University of Chicago Chapel, and Church of Heavenly Rest in New York
City.
COMMENT: If the services of E. H. Praeger could be assured for the Capitol study, this firm should
receive serious consideration.
LIBRARY
- 20 -
FORD
&
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
GERALD
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
NAME OF FIRM
Richardson, Gordon and Associates (and others)
HOME OFFICE
Pittsburgh & Philadelphia, Pa.
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
Joint Venture (Richardson et al about 21 years)
SIZE OF FIRM
Richardson - 125 (41 professional)
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Highways, bridges, transportation, industrial structures
and commercial buildings
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
-
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Claim their work in major bridges and heavy construction
relates to wall bearing construction of 1793-1829.
- 21 -
2
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
American Society of Civil Engineers
Duke University
LIBRARY
NAME OF FIRM
Sverdrup & Parcel
FORD
HOME OFFICE
St. Louis, Missouri
GERALD
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
42 years
SIZE OF FIRM
1000 persons
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Bridges, tunnels, railroads, buildings, industrial plants,
research and development, electric power facilities,
urban and regional planning and construction management.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
Some experience in investigation of older buildings
of brick and stone construction (nothing, however,
comparable to Capitol).
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Would use its best talent -- its top executives.
Office in District of Columbia and several projects there
now. Familiar with local area and its requirements.
LIBRARY
FORD
&
- 22 -
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
Duke University
NAME OF FIRM
Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton
HOME OFFICE
New York, N. Y.
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
25 years
SIZE OF FIRM
450 professionals
KIND OF FIRM
Engineers and Architects
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Airports, bridges and viaducts, tunnels, railroads, subways, modern buildings,
city and regional planning, sanitary engineering, dams, soil and foundation engineering,
transportation, parking.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: --
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: --
LIBRARY
FORD
&
- 23 -
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Colorado
NAME OF FIRM
The Ken R. White Company
HOME OFFICE
Denver, Colorado
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
17 years
SIZE OF FIRM
150 persons/130 professionals
KIND OF FIRM
Consulting Engineers, planners and architects.
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK:
Buildings, highways, bridges, industrial plants
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK:
Some reports & recommendations on failures in structures and other
facilities -- nothing apparently comparable to Capitol.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE
COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR
THE CAPITOL PROJECT:
-
COMMENT:
Modern building and heavy industrial.
LIBRARY
FORD
- 24 -
GERALD
DIGEST OF INFORMATION
Firm Recommended for West Front Feasibility Study
RECOMMENDED BY
University of Michigan
NAME OF FIRM
Whitman, Requardt and Associates
HOME OFFICE
Baltimore, Maryland
YEARS FIRM IN EXISTENCE
55 years (present firm, 26 years)
SIZE OF FIRM
300 persons
KIND OF FIRM
Engineers - Consultants
PRINCIPAL LINE OF WORK: Water supply and sanitation, land planning and development, highways and bridges,
industrial and commercial, mechanical and electrical installations, architectural, airports,
valuation of utilities and industrial plants.
ANY WORK COMPARABLE TO OR REQUIRING
SAME CAPABILITIES AS CAPITOL WORK: Mentions in letter some work involving old structures with wall
bearing masonry and brick arches, but this was a minor project (construction cost $120,000) in
their overall work.
MEMBERS OF FIRM WITH EXPERIENCE COMPARABLE TO THAT REQUIRED FOR THE CAPITOL PROJECT: --
COMMENT: Firm is strong in civil engineering personnel.
TATAR AND KELLY INC 520 LIGHT STREET
ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN PLANNING
301 539 7880 BALTIMORE MARYLAND 21202
DEVELOPMENT AND WeekFund BUILDING SYSTEMS
fil
1 MAY 1970
MR. PHILIP L. ROOF, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT; ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL; WASHINGTON
D. C. 20515
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
MR. ROOF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR LETTER OF 24 APRIL 1970.
PLEASE BE ASSURED THAT, AS STATED IN THE SPEAKER'S LETTER OF 9 MARCH 1970, all
INDIVIDUALS CONSTITUTING THE RESTORATION TASK FORCE AS PRESENTED IN OUR JANUARY
1970 PROPOSAL HAVE IN NO WAY BEEN INVOLVED IN PROPOSALS TO EITHER EXTEND OR
RESTORE THE WEST CENTRAL FRONT, NOR HAVE THEY ANY PREDISPOSITIONS FOR OR AGAINST
SUCH PROPOSALS. THIS WAS STATED EMPHATICALLY UNDER "SPECIAL STRENGTHS OF THE
TASK FORCE" ... IN OUR PROPOSAL.
AN ADVISORY PANEL WAS SUGGESTED AS A POSSIBLE METHOD THAT HAS PROVEN SUCCESS-
FUL FOR MELDING THE OPINIONS OF DIVERSE GROUPS MAKING THESE GROUPS PART OF THE
PROBLEM-SOLVING PROCESS, THEREBY ELIMINATING UNDUE PUBLIC CRITICISM AND CON-
TROVERSY. As TO THE SELECTION OF MEMBERS, ONLY IF SUCH A PANEL WERE DEEMED
DESIRABLE WOULD THE PANEL BE ESTABLISHED, AND WE STATED THAT MEMBERSHIP WOULD
BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND SUGGESTION BY THE COMMITTEE FOR EXTENSION.
I HOPE THIS CLEARS UP ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING DISQUALIFICATION. I CAN ASSURE YOU
THAT OUR PROPOSAL WAS BASED ON THOROUGH STUDY OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT. I
CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SECTION ENTITLED "SPECIAL STRENGTHS OF THE TASK
FORCE". WE SUBMIT THAT NO ENGINEERING FIRM ALONE IS QUALIFIED TO GIVE
ADEQUATE ANSWERS TO THE CRITERIA REQUIRED BY THE CONFERENCE agreement."
IN CONCLUSION, MR. LEMESSURIER INDICATED BY TELEPHONE THAT HE HAD RESPONDED TO
THE SPEAKER'S LETTER, BUT IT WAS DURING THE MAIL STRIKE AND HE SAID HE WOULD DO
so AGAIN IMMEDIATELY.
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET WITH YOU ANY TIME.
SINCERELY YOURS,
Smlt. Keep
FOR TATAR & KELLY, INC.; W. BOULTON KELLY, JR.
WBK/DD
CORPORATE DIRECTORS SEYMOUR MACHELL TATAR AIA AIP WILLIAM BOULTON KELLY AIA WILLIAM MEYERS 2ND AIA
DESIGN DIRECTOR LEO D'ALEO AIA ASSOCIATES GORDON McMURRAY AIA ARIBA ROBERT S BERMAN DONALD D SMITH
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
RECEIVED
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
TATAR AND KELLY
APR 28 1970
April 24, 1970
ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND
6979
Mr. W. Boulton Kelly
WBK
Tartar and Kelly, Inc.,
520 Light Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
SMT
MP
Dear Mr. Kelly:
This will acknowledge your letter of April 20, 1970.
As I indicated to you in letter of April 16th, we have received no
response to the Speaker's letter of March 9, 1970, inviting LeMessurier
Associates, Inc., to submit their qualifications for the west front study.
Your submission was received in this office in January and has no
reference to the Speaker's letter of March 9, 1970 and information and
criteria set forth therein; therefore, we have treated your submission
as an unsolicited request along with other such requests received since
the study was ordered by the Congress last December.
However, I feel I should point out that your submission appears to
disqualify itself. One point the Congress made very plain in providing
for the study was that it was to be "completely independent" and carried
out by a firm or individual "with no previous connection with proposals
to either extend or to restore the west central front, including any
expressed predisposition for or against the extension or the restoration
of the west central front" (quoting from the conference report).
In the Speaker's letter of March 9, 1970 to recommended firms, he
pointed out the pertinent provisions of the conference report and closed
with this paragraph:
"In view of the contents of the conference report,
please state also whether you have had any previous
connections with proposals to either extend or restore
the west central front, including any expressed pre-
disposition for or against the extension or restoration
of the west central front."
Each of the recommended invited firms (about 20) being considered by
the Commission has answered this question satisfactorily.
-2-
Your proposal contains no such assurances about the members of the
joint venture proposed and you include provision for an "advisory panel"
made up of the American Institute of Architects, the National Trust, U. S.
Capitol Historical Society, the National Capital Planning Commission and
the Fine Arts Commission of the District of Columbia. It is public knowledge
that several of these organizations have taken definite positions either for
or against the extension or restoration.
Your submission has been brought to the attention of the Members of
the Commission by the Speaker.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Executive Assistant
CC: Le Messurier Associates, Inc.
1711 [G.R.F.[
"West Front Cokmission"
(MCCORMACK, John W.)
re / feasibility studey
April 28, 1970
Honorable John W. McCormack
Speaker
GERALD
U. S. House of Representatives
R.
Washington, D.C.
FORD
LIBRARY
Dear Mr. Speaker,
I have your letter of April 20 concerning the Feasibility Study of
Restoration of West Front of Capitol.
I am pleased to have the Summary which you provided and am looking
forward to a meeting of the Commission for the purpose of making
the decision on the firm to undertake the Study.
Warmest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:mr
The Speaker's Rooms
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
April 20, 1970
guil)
I
Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Minority Leader
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
Subject: Feasibility Study of Restoration of
West Front of Capitol
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Dear Jerry:
This letter is directed to you in your capacity as a
Member of the Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol.
In accord with approval of the Commission, I invited the
American Society of Civil Engineers and the Deans of Engineering of
19 universities throughout the country to consider the nature and
scope of the restoration study of the west central front of the
Capitol, as ordered by the Congress, and to recommend to the Commis-
sion the names of several engineers or engineering firms which they
considered particularly well qualified to undertake the study.
I am sending you herewith two copies of a report contain-
ing the information that has been developed, together with a digest
of data relating to each of the recommended firms which responded.
The report is being forwarded to you now with the hope
that you will have an opportunity to review it and be in a position
to attend a meeting of the Commission to be scheduled promptly for
the purpose of making a decision on the firm to undertake the study.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely yours
John W. McCormack
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Chairman, Commission for Extension of
the United States Capitol
April 20, 1970
Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Minority Leader
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
Subject: Feasibility Study of Restoration of
West Front of Capitol
FORD is LIBRARY CERALD
Dear Jerry:
This letter is directed to you in your capacity as a
Member of the Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol.
In accord with approval of the Commission, I invited the
American Society of Civil Engineers and the Deans of Engineering of
19 universities throughout the country to consider the nature and
scope of the restoration study of the west central front of the
Capitol, as ordered by the Congress, and to recommend to the Commis-
sion the names of several engineers or engineering firms which they
considered particularly well qualified to undertake the study.
I am sending you herewith two copies of a report contain-
ing the information that has been developed, together with a digest
of data relating to each of the recommended firms which responded.
The report is being forwarded to you now with the hope
that you will have an opportunity to review it and be in a position
to attend a meeting of the Commission to be scheduled promptly for
the purpose of making a decision on the firm to undertake the study.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
John W. McCormack
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Chairman, Commission for Extension of
the United States Capitol
is
*
*
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT
WASHINGTON
March 14, 1970
Mr. W. Boulton Kelly
Tatar and Kelly, Inc.
520 Light Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Dear Mr. Kelly:
Thank you for your April 7th communication advising
the Vice President that a member of your group has
been suggested to Speaker McCormack by a dean of one
of the engineering schools contacted for recommenda-
tions.
This new information has been included with the data
you have previously provided.
Sincerely,
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Walter L. Mote
Administrative Assistant to
The President of the Senate
bcc:
The Honorable John W. McCormack
The Honorable Mike Mansfield
The Honorable Carl Albert
The Honorable Hugh Scott
The Honorable Gerald R. Ford
The Honorable J. George Stewart
TATAR AND KELLY INC 520 LIGHT STREET
ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN PLANNING
301 539 7880 BALTIMORE MARYLAND 21202
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING SYSTEMS
7 APRIL 1970
THE HONORABLE VICE PRESIDENT AGNEW
PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES SENATE
1ST & CONSTITUTION AVENUES; WASHINGTON, D. C. 20510
RE: THE TASK FORCE PROPOSAL
FOR THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL WEST FRONT STUDY
(A STUDY OF THE FEASIBILITY OF
ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL RESTORATION)
MR DEAR MR. VICE PRESIDENT, WE ARE PLEASED TO SUBMIT NEW
INFORMATION IN REFERENCE TO THE QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERS OF THE
TASK FORCE IN OUR PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUB-
MITTED FOR YOUR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION LAST JANUARY.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
JOHN W. MCCORMACK HAS REQUESTED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE DEANS
OF SEVERAL ENGINEERING SCHOOLS THROUGHOUT THE NATION. WE ARE
PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THE NAME OF MR. WILLIAM J. LEMESSURIER
(A MEMBER OF OUR GROUP) HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO SPEAKER MCCORMACK,
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
WHO ALSO SERVES AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION FOR EXTENSION OF THE
UNITED STATES CAPITOL.
WE TRUST THAT SUCH INFORMATION WILL BE HELPFUL IN EVALUATING THE
CREDENTIALS OUTLINED IN OUR PROPOSAL.
THANKING YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR INTEREST AND ASSISTANCE IN THIS
MATTER, I REMAIN
SINCERELY YOURS,
W Banton Kelly
FOR T&K, INC.;
W. BOULTON KELLY;
WBK/DD
CORPORATE DIRECTORS SEYMOUR MACHELL TATAR AIA AIP WILLIAM BOULTON KELLY AIA WILLIAM MEYERS 2ND AIA
DESIGN DIRECTOR LEO D'ALEO AIA ASSOCIATES GORDON McMURRAY AIA ARIBA ROBERT $ BERMAN DONALD D SMITH
John W. McCormack
Engene T. Kimmaly
Administrative Assistant
9th Dist.,Massachuertts
Martin Sweig
The Speaker's Rooms
Vegislative Assistant and
Secretary, Washington Office
U.S. House of Representatives
Beston Office:
Washington, D.C.
Weddrol James N. Bartrey
Secretary
February 6, 1970
Honorable Gerald R. Ford
The Capitol
attach
Washington, D. C.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Dear "Jerry":
I am in receipt of your recent letter,
with enclosures, a copy of a letter that you received
from Paul Findley, and other data, in relation to
Earl W. Henderson, Jr. of Ferry and Henderson,
Architects, Springfield, Illinois.
When the members of the Commission for the
Extension of the United States Capitol meet for the
purpose of selecting the consultant, I will call to
the attention of the members of the Commission the
communication of Paul Findley to you in relation to Mr.
Henderson.
With kind regards, I am
GENERAL
"West Front Commission"
(Findley, Paul Hon.)
Re: Ferry and Henderson as
architects
February 4, 1970
Honorable Paul Findley
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Dear Paul,
Many thanks for your letter of January 27 with which was enclosed
the pamphlet on the reconstruction of the Illinois Old State
Capitol.
I was impressed by the report in the pamphlet of the work done
by Ferry and Henderson. I am, therefore, taking the liberty of
forwarding a copy of your letter and the pamphlet to the Speaker
for further consideration.
Warmest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:mh
GENERAL
"West Front Commission"
(McCormack, John W. Hon.)
Re: architect firm of
Ferry and Henderson
February 4, 1970
Honorable John W. McCormack
The Speaker
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
Dear Mr. Speaker:
Enclosed is a copy of a letter and a pamphlet which I have just
received from Paul Findley.
You will note that he is recommending the architectural firm of
Ferry and Henderson for any feasibility study relative to the
West Front.
Warmest personal regards.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford, M.C.
GRF:mh
Encl.
F/Hand to Speaker
with copy of
Paul F. T the
Write Paul.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
COUNTIES:
PAUL FINDLEY
COMMITTEES:
ADAMS
McDoNOUGH
20TH DISTRICT, ILLINOIS
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
BROWN
MORGAN
PIKE
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
CALHOUN
CASS
SANGAMON
GREENE
SCHUYLER
HANCOCK
SCOTT
Congress of the United States
UNITED STATES DELEGATION:
NORTH ATLANTIC ASSEMBLY
JERSEY
ROOM 2444, RAYBURN BUILDING
house of Representatives
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5271
Washington, D.C. 20515
January 27, 1970
The Honorable Gerald R. Ford
Member, Commission for Extension of
the United States Capitol
Washington, D. C.
DERALD FORD LIBRARY
Dear Jerry:
It is my understanding that the Commission is
now considering applications for the proposed feasibility
study on the West Front Restoration. One of my constit-
uents, Earl W. Henderson, Jr., of Ferry and Henderson,
Architects, Springfield, Illinois, was the architect for
the highly successful reconstruction of the Old Capitol
Building in Springfield, Illinois, a structure in which
Abraham Lincoln gave his "House Divided" speech. This re-
construction has been widely acclaimed and it occurred to
me that you might wish to consider Mr. Henderson for the
feasibility study. His firm is in a position to furnish
all required personnel to accomplish the study efficiently
and effectively.
The February issue of Progressive Architecture
Magazine will feature the reconstruction of the Old Capitol
Building as handled by Mr. Henderson. I am attaching his
card in case you may wish to get in touch with him.
Sincerely yours,
lawl
Paul Findley
Representative in Congress
PF:ha
Enclosure