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
4532353
label
West Front of Capitol Extension: General, 1965-1973 (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4532353
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
West Front of Capitol Extension: General, 1965-1973 (1)
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
4532353
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
12cfe38ff4cdc516
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box J30, folder "West Front Extension: General,
1965-1973 (1)" 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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
Capital Bldg
Commission
File
FORD LIBRARY is GERALD
Data Relating to
CONSTRUCTION, COST, AND AREA
of the
HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS
SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS
U.S. SUPREME COURT BUILDING
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
MEMORANDUM
July 29, 1966
Subject: Ready-reference information on the Senate and House Office
Buildings and the United States Supreme Court Building.
As a result of numerous requests, this compilation has been prepared to
provide ready-reference information on the construction, cost, and area of
the Senate and House Office Buildings and the United States Supreme
Court Building.
The actual costs shown do not include cost of site and furnishings but
do include the following:
Construction cost
Architectural and engineering fees
Test borings and soils analyses
Administrative and miscellaneous costs
The projected costs reflect the actual costs escalated to the estimated
costs of the buildings if their construction were bid in 1964. The escala-
tion factor used is based on the Engineering News-Record Building Cost
Index.
The numbers of photographs reproduced in this document are actually
the numbers of negatives on file in the Office of the Architect of the Capi-
tol. Glossy prints of these photographs, size 8 X 10 inches, may be pur-
chased by title and negative number from the Photoduplication Service,
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540.
J. GEORGE STEWART
Architect of the Capitol
CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
671, 921
Cubic feet
11, 282, 215
Construction period
1904-1907
Additional story
1913-1914
Air-conditioning added
1937
Actual cost
$4, 354, 298. 00
Cost per sq. ft
6. 48
Cost per cu. ft
386
Cost if bid in 1964
25, 666, 761. 00
Cost per sq. ft
38. 17
Cannon House Office Building
Cost per cu. ft
2.27
Photographs:
No. 30676-Entrance-New Jersey and Independence Avenues
No. 30244-Rotunda-From third floor balcony
View of rotunda from third floor balcony
I 1 GERALD LIBRARY
LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
599, 675
Cubic feet
7, 712, 812
Construction period
1930-1933
Air-conditioning added
1937
Actual cost
$6, 979, 797. 00
Cost per sq. ft
11. 64
Cost per cu. ft
90
Cost if bid in 1964
27, 002, 040. 00
Cost per sq. ft
45. 40
Cost per cu. ft
3. 51
Longworth House Office Building
Photographs:
No. 30677-Independence Avenue entrance and New Jersey Avenue side
No. 30242-Loby-From Independence Avenue entrance
View of lobby from Independence Avenue entrance
GERRALO R.FORD VIBRABA
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
2, 375, 000
Cubic feet
35, 266, 000
Construction period
1957-1964
Actual cost
$81, 367, 000. 00
Cost per sq. ft
34. 26
Cost per cu. ft
2.31
Cost if bid in 1964
87, 876, 360. 00
Cost per sq. ft
37.00
Cost per cu. ft
2.49
Photographs:
Rayburn House Office Building as seen from the Capitol Building
No. 28619-Independence Avenue side
No. 30650-Standing committee room-Room No. 2128-(Committee on Banking and Currency)
View of a committee room
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
OLD SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
658, 250
Cubic feet
11, 505, 985
Construction period
1906-1909
First Street wing added
1931-1933
Air-conditioning added
1937-1938
Actual cost
$7, 870, 060. 00
Cost per sq. ft
11. 48
Cost per cu. ft
68
Cost if bid in 1964
40, 516, 159. 00
Old Senate Office Building
Cost per sq. ft
59. 12
Cost per cu. ft
3.50
Photographs:
No. 22828-Entrance-Constitution and New Jersey Avenues
No. 30410-Caucus room-Room No. 318
View of a caucus room
FORD is LIBRARY 9ERALD
NEW SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
712, 910
Cubic feet
10, 182, 600
Construction period
1955-1958
Actual cost
$21, 231, 271. 00
Cost per sq. ft
29. 80
Cost per cu. ft
2.08
Cost if bid in 1964
24, 500, 722. 00
Cost per sq. ft
36. 06
Cost per cu. ft
2.52
New Senate Office Building
Photographs:
No. 16090-Constitution Avenue entrance and First Street side
No. 30409-Standing committee room-Room No. 1202-(Committee on Appropriations)
View of a committee room
FORD LIBRARY & 9ERALD
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT BUILDING
Square feet
392, 737
Cubic feet
8, 007, 700
Construction period
1931-1935
Actual cost
$9, 349, 474. 00
Cost per sq. ft
23. 80
Cost per cu. ft
1. 17
Cost if bid in 1964
35, 714, 990. 00
Cost per sq. ft
90. 94
Cost per cu. ft
4. 46
United States Supreme Court Building
Photographs:
No. 30405-Entrance-First Street
No. 30406-Courtroom
View of Courtroom
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Data Relating to
CONSTRUCTION, COST, AND AREA
of the
HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS
SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS
U.S. SUPREME COURT BUILDING
FORD & LIBRARY 0ERALD
MEMORANDUM
July 29, 1966
Subject: Ready-reference information on the Senate and House Office
Buildings and the United States Supreme Court Building.
As a result of numerous requests, this compilation has been prepared to
provide ready-reference information on the construction, cost, and area of
the Senate and House Office Buildings and the United States Supreme
Court Building.
The actual costs shown do not include cost of site and furnishings but
do include the following:
Construction cost
Architectural and engineering fees
Test borings and soils analyses
Administrative and miscellaneous costs
GERALD FORD LIBRAR,
The projected costs reflect the actual costs escalated to the estimated
costs of the buildings if their construction were bid in 1964. The escala-
tion factor used is based on the Engineering News-Record Building Cost
Index.
The numbers of photographs reproduced in this document are actually
the numbers of negatives on file in the Office of the Architect of the Capi-
tol. Glossy prints of these photographs, size 8 X 10 inches, may be pur-
chased by title and negative number from the Photoduplication Service,
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. 20540.
J. GEORGE STEWART
Architect of the Capitol
CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
671, 921
Cubic feet
11, 282, 215
Construction period
1904-1907
Additional story
1913-1914
Air-conditioning added
1937
Actual cost
$4, 354, 298. 00
Cost per sq. ft
6. 48
Cost per cu. ft
386
Cost if bid in 1964
25, 666, 761. 00
Cost per sq. ft
38. 17
Cannon House Office Building
Cost per cu. ft
2. 27
Photographs:
No. 30676-Entrance-New Jersey and Independence Avenues
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
No. 30244-Rotunda-From third floor balcony
View of rotunda from third floor balcony
LONGWORTH HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
599, 675
Cubic feet
7, 712, 812
Construction period
1930-1933
Air-conditioning added
1937
Actual cost
$6, 979, 797. 00
Cost per sq. ft
11. 64
Cost per cu. ft
90
Cost if bid in 1964
27, 002, 040. 00
Cost per sq. ft
45. 40
Cost per cu. ft
3. 51
Photographs:
Longworth House Office Building
No. 30677-Independence Avenue entrance and New Jersey Avenue side
No. 30242-Lobby-From Independence Avenue entrance
View of lobby from Independence Avenue entrance
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
2, 375, 000
Cubic feet
35, 266, 000
Construction period
1957-1964
Actual cost
$81, 367, 000. 00
Cost per sq. ft
34.26
Cost per cu. ft
2.31
Cost if bid in 1964
87, 876, 360. 00
Cost per sq. ft
37.00
Cost per cu. ft
2.49
Photographs:
Rayburn House Office Building as seen from the Capitol Building
No. 28619-Independence Avenue side
No. 30650-Standing committee room-Room No. 2128-(Committee on Banking and Currency)
View of a committee room
FORD VIBRARY
OLD SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
658, 250
Cubic feet
11, 505, 985
Construction period
1906-1909
First Street wing added
1931-1933
Air-conditioning added
1937-1938
Actual cost
$7, 870, 060. 00
Cost per sq. ft
11. 48
Cost per cu. ft
68
Cost if bid in 1964
40, 516, 159. 00
Old Senate Office Building
Cost per sq. ft
59. 12
Cost per cu. ft
3. 50
Photographs:
No. 22828-Entrance-Constitution and New Jersey Avenues
No. 30410-Caucus room-Room No. 318
View of a caucus room
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
NEW SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
Square feet
712, 910
Cubic feet
10, 182, 600
Construction period
1955-1958
Actual cost
$21, 231, 271. 00
Cost per sq. ft
29. 80
Cost per cu. ft
2.08
Cost if bid in 1964
24, 500, 722. 00
Cost per sq. ft
36. 06
Cost per cu. ft
2. 52
Photographs:
New Senate Office Building
No. 16090-Constitution Avenue entrance and First Street side
No. 30409-Standing committee room-Room No. 1202-(Committee on Appropriations)
View of a committee room
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT BUILDING
YWARN
Square feet
392, 737
Cubic feet
8, 007, 700
Construction period
1931-1935
Actual cost
$9, 349, 474. 00
Cost per sq. ft
23. 80
Cost per cu. ft
1. 17
Cost if bid in 1964
35, 714, 990. 00
Cost per sq. ft
90. 94
Cost per cu. ft
4. 46
United States Supreme Court Building
Photographs:
No. 30405-Entrance-First Street
No. 30406-Courtroom
View of Courtroom
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
M Ford
June 24, 1965
STATEMENT OF J. GEORGE STEWART, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
of
PROPOSED EXTENSION OF THE WEST CENTRAL FRONT OF THE
FORDO & GERALD LIBRARY
UNITED STATES CAPITOL
The Extension of the Capitol Project was authorized by the Act of
August 5, 1955 (Public Law 242, 84th Congress) as amended by the
Act of February 14, 1956 (Public Law 406, 84th Congress), and the
Act of December 30, 1963 (Public Law 88-248, 88th Congress).
This legislation authorized the Architect of the Capitol, under the
direction of the Commission for Extension of the United States
Capitol, composed of the President of the Senate, the Speaker of
the House of Representatives, the minority leader of the Senate,
the minority leader of the House of Representatives, and the
Architect of the Capitol, to provide for the extension, reconstruc-
tion, and replacement of the central portion of the United States
Capitol in substantial accordance with Scheme B of the architectural
plan submitted by a joint commission of Congress and reported to
Congress on March 3, 1905 (House Document numbered 385, Fifty-Eighth
Congress), but with such modifications and additions, including
provisions for restaurant facilities, and such other facilities in
the Capitol Grounds, together with utilities, equipment, approaches,
and other appurtenant or necessary items, as may be approved by said
Commission, and authorized the appropriation of such sums as may be
necessary therefor.
- 2 -
Scheme B of the architectural plan reported to Congress on March 3,
1905, in House Document numbered 385, Fifty-eighth Congress, pro-
vided for extension of the East Central Section of the Capitol
32 feet 6 inches and construction of the Extension in marble; re-
facing the West Central Section of the Capitol in marble; recon-
struction of the West front steps in marble; and sculptural treat-
ment of the East pediment of the House Wing of the Capitol.
At the direction of the Commission, the Architect of the Capitol
engaged by personal service contract, July 10, 1956, the follow-
ing private-practicing architects to furnish the necessary
architectural and engineering services for carrying out the im-
FORD LIBRARY & CERALD
provements authorized: Roscoe DeWitt and Fred L. Hardison,
architects of Dallas, Texas; Alfred Easton Poor and Albert H.
Swanke, architects of New York City; Jesse M. Shelton, architect,
and Alan G. Stanford, engineer, of Atlanta, Georgia. In addition,
John Harbeson, architect of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Arthur
Brown, architect of San Francisco, California, and Henry R.
Shepley, architect of Boston, Massachusetts, were engaged, by
contract, as architectural consultants for the project.
The architects and consultants submitted preliminary plans and
estimates of cost for carrying out the improvements authorized
by the enabling legislation, and the Architect of the Capitol
submitted a report on these plans and specifications to the
- 3 -
Commission for the Extension of the United States Capitol in
August 1957, and the preliminary plans and estimates were formal-
ly approved by the Commission at a meeting, February 21, 1958.
The Architect's report was printed, in full, in the Congressional
Record of August 30, 1957.
These plans and estimates, proposed in lieu of a complete refac-
ing of the West Central Section of the Capitol with marble, that
the West Central Section be extended and the new extension be
constructed of marble; leaving the major portion of the old sand-
stone walls as interior walls, the same as was done in the case
of the East Front Extension.
FORD if LIBRARY GERALD
The central section of the United States Capitol was constructed
of Acquia Creek sandstone, which is not a durable material and
has deteriorated through the years, notwithstanding that effort
was made to preserve the sandstone through numerous and frequent
painting of the exterior stone. One of the prime objectives of
the 1905 report was to replace the sandstone exterior with a
durable material.
Although the 1905 report proposed refacing the West Central Front
with marble, the Commission, vested with authority by the Acts of
August 5, 1955 and February 14, 1956 to carry out the 1905 proposal
with such modifications and additions as the Commission may approve,
- 4 -
approved the preliminary plans proposed by the Architect of the
Capitol, his associate architects and consultants, which, as
stated, provided for remedying conditions on both the East Front
and the West Front by means of extensions to the East and West
and construction of the new extensions in durable marble.
In approving the preliminary plans, the Commission authorized the
Architect of the Capitol to proceed with contract plans and speci-
fications for the East Front Extension only, leaving further de-
cisions with respect to the West Front Extension and its inclusion
in the construction program for later action.
As we all know, the East Central Front has been extended and re-
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
constructed in marble and the work has been completed for several
years now.
In the interim, Congress amended the enabling legislation, by the
Act of December 30, 1963, Public Law 88-248, 88th Congress, and
authorized the Architect of the Capitol, under the direction of
the Commission for the Extension of the United States Capitol,
prior to any appropriations being provided for extension, recon-
struction, and replacement of the West Central Portion of the
United States Capitol, to obligate such sums as necessary for the
employment of nongovernmental engineering and other necessary ser-
vices and for test borings and other necessary incidental items
- 5 -
required to make a survey, study and examination of the struc-
tural condition of such West Central Portion, to make reports of
findings, and to make recommendations with respect to such remedial
measures as may be deemed necessary, including the feasibility of
corrective measures in conjunction with extension of such West
Central Portion. An appropriation of $125,000 for such engineer-
ing studies was provided by Congress. Act.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
The engineers authorized to be employed were to make their own
study, survey, findings and recommendations, independently of the
studies and recommendations made by the Architect of the Capitol,
his associate architects and consultants, and submitted to Congress,
in report of August 1957.
The Commission for the Extension of the United States Capitol
authorized and directed the Architect of the Capitol, March 6,
1964, to enter into a personal service contract with Thompson and
Lichtner Company, Inc., of Brookline, Massachusetts, for making a
survey, study and examination of the structural condition of the
West Central Portion of the United States Capitol, extending from
the House Connection to the Senate Connection, and of adjacent
terrace walls, including examination of test pits, soil borings,
and cores of wall construction, together with a report of findings
and recommendations for remedial measures deemed necessary. The
contract, as authorized, was entered into March 13, 1964.
- 6 -
This is a well-established company that has been in existence
since 1896 and is an engineering firm that specializes in struc-
tural materials and stone masonry construction. Their practice
over a long period of years has embraced consultation, design,
supervision and research in practically all branches of engineer-
ing. Their consultation services on other projects have involved
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
decisions of a far-reaching nature affecting the safety of the
structures through their foundations and structural design, the
cost of structures through analyses of most economical design and
methods of construction, and through supervision, inspection, and
test. Among buildings for which this firm has served as consult-
ants for reconditioning, comparable in construction to the United
States Capitol Building, are the Historic Trinity Church in Boston;
the Historic Park Street Church also in Boston; the State Prison in
Boston constructed in the early 1800's.
Under their contract, the Thompson and Lichtner Company was required
to make a detailed examination of the entire exterior face and
selected areas of the interior face and interior of the building
walls, so as to determine the condition of the sandstone and other
construction. This company was also required to prepare plans and
specifications and layouts for test pits, soil borings, and cores of
of wall construction; to make all tests of the soil samples and
core borings necessary to determine soil bearing values, settlement
- 7 -
analyses, lateral earthpressures, and foundation and structural
analyses; and to make reports of their findings to the Architect of
the Capitol, together with recommendations with respect to such
remedial measures as deemed necessary, including recommendations as
to (1) whether the existing wall, if found deficient, can be repair-
ed in its present condition; (2) whether the existing wall can be
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
refaced with marble in its present location; (3) whether remedial
action requires extension of the West Central Front and its recon-
struction in marble; or (4) whether any other means of preservation
is deemed feasible and advisable.
The total cost of the surveys, studies, examinations and tests,
test pits, core borings, and all other work done under the $125,000
appropriation amounted to $102,892. Of this amount, $31,500 was ex-
pended for engineering and consultant services, and $71,392 for ex-
ploratory core drillings, test pits, and soil borings.
The Thompson and Lichtner Company completed its report and submitted
its recommendations and the report and recommendations are now in the
hands of the Commission. This company has found the West Central
Front of the Capitol to be in seriously deteriorated condition and
recommends that remedial measures be taken through extension of the
West Central Front and the construction of such extension in marble.
At this point, I might state that although preliminary plans were
prepared in 1957 for the West Front Extension, these plans can no
- 8 -
longer be used as they were predicated upon and tied in with the
proposed construction of a large underground garage beneath the
East Capitol Plaza and provided for tunnels to be constructed
under the connecting wings from the East to the West Fronts pro-
viding for underground deliveries, service, and other access
purposes between the East and West Fronts, whereas new delivery
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
and service facilities must now be provided and confined to the
West Front since no action is now pending or appears likely in
the near future with respect to the construction of the proposed
underground garage and related facilities. The plans should also
be modified in accordance with the findings contained in the
Thompson and Lichtner report.
Doctor Miles N. Clair, President of the Thompson and Lichtner
Company, is present at this hearing, and I would suggest that
the Commission call upon him as the next witness.
[1965]
Questions Re: repairing The Capitol
GERALD LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
1. What are the estimated costs for each of the four proposals to
repair the west central portion of The Capitol?
2. Ask for more detailed information on recommendation 10, page 8, Vol.I,
regarding rebuilding retaining walls foundations at both wings
"to provide adequate frost protection."
3. Exactly how urgent is the need for repair? will the west central
portion collapse?----if so, what would cause it to do S0?---
4. Would preventative maintenance through the years prevented the
present condition of the west wall?
5/ How far would the building be extended to the west?
6. Would the historic appearance of The Capitol be materially altered?
7. Re: recommendation 18, page 10: Question the necessity of making
drawings of the building for maintenance purposes?-- why drawings
as compared to a regular inspection and a detailed list of conditions?
tis
Capitol's West Front
SIR: Seldom do I have the opportunity to check your
gullibility, but in your editorial "Crumbling Capitol"
June 7, 1965, I have a perfect example of the baloney
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
you buy and feed to the public as being your considered
opinion.
Aproximately eight years ago, I had the opportu-
nity to examine the foundations under the Capitol and
12
found them to be in very good condition. The only dete-
11
10
rioration apparent was not in the foundation but was in
the exterior walls. It may be true that technically the
foundation walls do not meet the District Building Code
145
requirements, but then the Pyramids in Egypt probably
don't either. You don't give our forefathers much
7 E
5L
credit, but the facts are that they did an exceedingly
9P
13 H.
fine job.
The crowning blow is your logic when you state that
5th--
40
since the East Front needed replacement it is logical
6W,
that the West Front does also. The East Front recon-
12 Cli
14 Ce
struction was a political football and you know it.
13 Le
7Ju
Part of the Capitol is referred to as being a "very
8 Ch
ancient structure." Have you ever been to Europe?
SMI
3 Bl(
S. G. Granger.
1 Lit
2 Ort
Kensington.
11 Wa
Star 6/22
42
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
WASHINGTON, D.C.
May 7, 1965
Honorable Gerald R. Ford, Member
Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol
United States Capitol
Washington, D. C.
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
My dear Mr. Minority Leader:
I am transmitting, herewith, copy of the report on the condition
of the West Front central section of the United States Capitol, prepared
and submitted to me by The Thompson and Lichtner Company of Brookline,
Massachusetts.
This report confirms our previous findings that the West Front
central section of the Capitol, constructed of Aquia Creek sandstone, is
in a seriously deteriorated condition and that remedial measures should be
taken without further delay. After weighing various remedial proposals,
The Thompson and Lichtner Company concluded that the most practical,
economical, and satisfactory solution to the problem is to extend the West
central section of the Capitol and to reconstruct the extended section in
marble, leaving the existing exterior walls as interior walls, in
substantially the same manner as was done in the case of the extension of
the East central section of the Capitol in 1958-1961.
I have sent a copy of this report to the Speaker as Chairman of
the Commission and am, today, sending copies to the other members of the
Commission.
By way of background information, authorization was provided in
the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1964, for the employment of non-
governmental engineering and other necessary services and for test borings
and other necessary incidental items required to make a survey, study and
examination of the structural condition of the West central section of the
United States Capitol, to make reports of findings, and to make
recommendations with respect to such remedial measures as may be deemed
necessary, including the feasibility of corrective measures in conjunction
with extension of such West central portion.
Hon. Gerald R. Ford
- 2 -
May 7, 1965
With the approval of the Commission for Extension of the United
States Capitol, I entered into a personal service contract with The
Thompson and Lichtner Company of Brookline, Massachusetts, March 13, 1964,
for furnishing the engineering services required for the survey, study and
examination of the structural condition of the West central section of the
Capitol, extending from the House Connection to the Senate Connection, and
of adjacent terrace walls, including examination and analyses of test pits,
soil borings, and cores of wall construction, together with a report and
recommendations. This firm is well-qualified for the investigative
studies and examinations which they were required to make.
Under their contract, The Thompson and Lichtner Company was
required to make a detailed examination of the entire exterior face and
selected areas of the interior face and interior of the building walls of
the West central section of the Capitol, and examination of terrace walls
parallel and adjacent to the building walls, so as to determine the
condition of the sandstone and other construction. This company was also
required to prepare plans and specifications and layouts for test pits,
soil borings, and cores of wall construction; to make all tests of the
soil samples and core borings necessary to determine soil bearing values,
settlement analysis, lateral earth pressures, and foundation and
structural analyses; and to make reports of their findings to the
Architect of the Capitol, together with recommendations with respect to
such remedial measures as deemed necessary.
All work required of The Thompson and Lichtner Company has been
completed and the next step that remains to be taken is for the
Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol to decide what
action they wish taken upon the recommendations contained in the report
and, in the event of the approval of the recommendations contained in the
report, to thereafter direct me to request the necessary appropriations
to carry out such recommendations.
I have advised the Speaker that I am now ready to meet with the
other members of the Commission at any time he wishes to call a meeting of
the Commission.
Sincerely yours,
George Stewart Stewant
FORD & LIBRARY GERALD
Architect of the Capitol
Member, Commission for Extension of
the United States Capitol
May 7, 1965
Honorable Gerald R. Ford, Member
Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol
United States Capitol
Washington, D. C.
My dear Mr. Minority Leader:
I am transmitting, herewith, copy of the report on the condition
of the West Front central section of the United States Capitol, prepared
and submitted to me by The Thompson and Lichtner Company of Brookline,
Massachusetts.
This report confirms our previous findings that the West Front
central section of the Capitol, constructed of Aquia Creek sandstone, is
in a seriously deteriorated condition and that remedial measures should be
taken without further delay. After weighing various remedial proposals,
The Thompson and Lichtner Company concluded that the most practical,
economical, and satisfactory solution to the problem is to extend the West
central section of the Capitol and to reconstruct the extended section in
marble, leaving the existing exterior walls as interior walls, in
substantially the same manner as was done in the case of the extension of
the East central section of the Capitol in 1958-1961.
I have sent a copy of this report to the Speaker as Chairman of
the Commission and am, today, sending copies to the other members of the
Commission.
By way of background information, authorization was provided in
the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1964, for the employment of non-
governmental engineering and other necessary services and for test borings
and other necessary incidental items required to make a survey, study and
examination of the structural condition of the West central section of the
United States Capitol, to make reports of findings, and to make
recommendations with respect to such remedial measures as may be deemed
necessary, including the feasibility of corrective measures in conjunction
with extension of such West central portion.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
Hon. Gerald R. Ford
- 2 -
May 7, 1965
With the approval of the Commission for Extension of the United
States Capitol, I entered into a personal service contract with The
Thompson and Lichtner Company of Brookline, Massachusetts, March 13, 1964,
for furnishing the engineering services required for the survey, study and
examination of the structural condition of the West central section of the
Capitol, extending from the House Connection to the Senate Connection, and
of adjacent terrace walls, including examination and analyses of test pits,
soil borings, and cores of wall construction, together with a report and
recommendations. This firm is well-qualified for the investigative
studies and examinations which they were required to make.
Under their contract, The Thompson and Lichtner Company was
required to make a detailed examination of the entire exterior face and
selected areas of the interior face and interior of the building walls of
the West central section of the Capitol, and examination of terrace walls
parallel and adjacent to the building walls, so as to determine the
condition of the sandstone and other construction. This company was also
required to prepare plans and specifications and layouts for test pits,
soil borings, and cores of wall construction; to make all tests of the
soil samples and core borings necessary to determine soil bearing values,
settlement analysis, lateral earth pressures, and foundation and
structural analyses; and to make reports of their findings to the
Architect of the Capitol, together with recommendations with respect to
such remedial measures as deemed necessary.
All work required of The Thompson and Lichtner Company has been
completed and the next step that remains to be taken is for the
Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol to decide what
action they wish taken upon the recommendations contained in the report
and, in the event of the approval of the recommendations contained in the
report, to thereafter direct me to request the necessary appropriations
to carry out such recommendations.
I have advised the Speaker that I am now ready to meet with the
other members of the Commission at any time he wishes to call a meeting of
the Commission.
Sincerely yours,
GERALD FORD NIBRARY
J. George Stewart
Architect of the Capitol
Member, Commission for Extension of
the United States Capitol