Mr. CAMPIOLI. We have had no meetings with any group of the American Institute of Architects. We understand through the newspapers that a committee of seven architects will be appointed shortly by the institute to deal with the Architect's Office on this project.

The extent of the services that we will use them for at this point is in doubt, since I think neither Mr. Stewart nor anybody in our Office has had any discussion with the AIA or the committees or commissions with respect to the AIA participation.

Mr. STEED. As I understand it, the consultants and consulting arrangements provided for in the bill are separate and apart from the associate architects who actually will do the work of preparing the plans and specifications and the supervision of the construction of the building.

Mr. STEWART. That is right.

Mr. STEED. You have no way of advising us now as to what consultation might consist of with this group?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Since we have had no discussions with anybody up to this time, it is difficult for us to answer that question.

Mr. STEED. Wouldn't this be, if it will be of any help at all, more helpful after the associate architects are employed and they are working with their plans and specifications, and wouldn't their consultation be of more value to you at that point than at any other?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. That may be, Mr. Chairman. I think what we perhaps will have to do is to discuss this matter with the commissions of the Congress under which we have been directed to work, and find out what their intent is as to just what purpose and use will be made of the committee of the AIA.

At this point we don't know whether it involves the approval of designs, or just what it does entail.

Mr. STEED. This act, by its language, gives these two commissions and the joint committee joint authority?

Mr. STEWART. Yes, sir. That is what the law says.

Mr. STEED. Does that create a situation where you have to have unanimous agreement before you can make a move?

Mr. STEWART. That is something that will have to be determined. Mr. STEED. Can one commission veto another and tie things up in a knot?

Mr. STEWART. It is possible.

Mr. STEED. Is there any way you can visualize under this situation where, if you got into a deadlock, you could untangle it in any way? There is no higher court of authority to which you can appeal? Mr. STEWART. That is something I can't answer now.

Mr. STEED. No majority rule sort of situation?

As you see it now, how do you think you will have to do this? Are you going to have to touch base with these three groups at every stage and every step and on every detail? How will it be possible for you to get going?

Mr. STEWART. The way the statute reads, I think I will have to go to these bodies for direction on major matters, such as selection of architects, approval of basic designs and layouts, approval of major contracts, etc.

Mr. STEED. Thinking out loud and supposing, suppose you needed a direction to take a certain step. Suppose two of the commissions

unanimously agreed to authorize you to do that and the third one just did not have a meeting?

Mr. STEWART. I would then have to seek counsel from the leaders or other authorities on what to do. I would be governed by the advice of counsel. It might be necessary to seek advice of the Comptroller General.

Mr. STEED. Have you requested him to look into this and give you guidance?

Mr. STEWART. No, sir; because we have not really entered into this matter yet to that extent.

Mr. STEED. I realize it has been a matter of 2 or 3 days that the bill passed and it is quite early in the thing and you will need more time to develop some of these problems.

Mr. STEWART. For example, if the three commissions affiliated with the Congress of the United States should agree on some matter there is the question whether the group appointed by the American Institute of Architects will have power to upset or effect change in such agreement.

Mr. STEED. I certainly hope not. To give a group of outsiders veto power over the expenditure of public moneys seems to be a rather unwise thing. I don't believe Congress thinks it has abrogated its authority in the way of controlling expenditures of moneys. I suppose we will have to wait and see what develops.

SPACE FOR MADISON MEMORIAL HALL

We are well aware of the fact that Dr. Mumford is hurting for space, and a lot of it. He will be anxious to have any building constructed to do as much as it can to serve his space needs. We are also aware of the fact that the James Madison Memorial Commission has another thing of primary interest, and that is the memorial to James Madison.

Since they are both under the same roof, how will you make a determination of what percentage of this space goes for one purpose and the other?

Mr. STEWART. I would hope that can be determined between the Librarian and the James Madison Memorial Commission, with some assistance from my office.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. That has been tentatively discussed. An area of some 10,000 square feet would be devoted to the James Madison Memorial. Is that correct, Dr. Mumford?

Dr. MUMFORD. 8,000 to 10,000 square feet.

Mr. STEED. The James Madison Memorial Commission could insist on two-thirds of the building or any amount they saw fit, couldn't they? Since you have to have their agreement before you can go ahead, could they, in effect, either get what they wanted or block it. By the same token, if they got too much space the Joint Committee on the Library could buck it, couldn't they?

Dr. MUMFORD. I don't believe they will. We have had considerable discussion with the members of the Commission on this and we have sketched out roughly our concept of what the Madison Memorial Hall might be, and the members of the Commission seem to be in complete agreement on this.

GENERAL FEATURES OF PROPOSED BUILDING

Mr. STEED. Mr. Stewart, I am assuming that at some stage along the way they will look to you, either collectively or separately, for some suggestions and guidance as to what the general scope of this building should be, the number of floors, the amount of space, and things of that sort. What do you visualize you can do in terms of a maximum gain on this particular site and within the amount of funds authorized?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. We have tentatively assumed, in the preparation of this preliminary work before this meeting, that we will have about four levels of structure below Independence Avenue and about eight levels above. Some of those levels above might be stack levels, but a total of 12 levels in all will be involved. This has been worked out in a consultation with the Librarian and his staff.

Mr. STEED. During the debate on the authorization bill, mention was made about the lounge spaces and setbacks of the surface part of the building. What do you think is possible in that area on this site and still leave you enough building to accomplish the maximum benefits we are seeking?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. By using almost 100 percent of the land underground within building lines and by setting back so that the superstructure will not exceed 75 percent of the land above grade, we anticipate we should be able to get some fairly good setbacks on this building, particularly along Independence Avenue.

For instance, we might be able to have about 100 feet from the curb on Independence Avenue and perhaps 50 to 60 feet from the curb on each of the other three streets, which would give us an opportunity to get some lawns and landscape treatment around the four sides of the building.

LIBRARY GROWTH AND REQUIREMENTS TO MEET IT

Mr. STEED. Dr. Mumford, in terms of your space needs, I believe at one time or another you advised the committee that your rate of growth was something like the requirement equivalent of 44,000 square feet a year.

Dr. MUMFORD. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Mr. STEED. Many years have gone by when you have had no extra space but the growth has continued. Now you are bursting at the seams. What do you figure that the space that you will acquire if this building is put up will accomplish in meeting your space needs?

Dr. MUMFORD. On the basis of very rough computations with the number of levels that Mr. Campioli has indicated, we have estimated, again very roughly, that we would get about 85 percent of the nearly 2 million square feet of space that we have projected as needed to relieve present congestion and for growth for some 25 years. When we made this projection in 1960 we were thinking in terms of about 30 years of growth.

I can only guess-it is more than a guess but I cannot say precisely that this would relieve our present congestion and allow growth of somewhere between 20 and 25 years.

Mr. STEED. Then you do not think it is a mistake to put this amount of money into this type of project in terms that it will not give you long-term solution to your space problems?

Dr. MUMFORD. No, sir. I think this is a very great amount of relief, will enable growth for many years to come, and it is well justified.

Mr. STEED. I believe, Mr. Campioli, that you said in the same manner that the east front and the Rayburn Building and other projects. here were done that you will have a model of the proposed building that can be seen and a general concept of how it will appear will be available before you go further?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir.

Mr. STEWART. May I say something, Mr. Chairman, off the record? Mr. STEED. Yes.

(Discussion held off the record.)

Mr. STEED. Dr. Mumford, if you want to enlarge a little on this growth and space problem with which you are faced at this point in the record we shall be glad to have it.

Dr. MUMFORD. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, I do not think there will be any letup in it. It may increase as the developing countries of the world publish more. It may be that as time goes on we will find ways of compressing the storage of materials so that we can restrain the rate of growth some so it will not be accelerated. I cannot promise that this will come about.

As I have said to you in meetings of the Appropriations Subcommittee, it is inevitable that a large research library will grow if it is to continue to fulfill its mission. It must acquire, organize, and service the important publications being issued both in this country and around the world.

This is especially true of the Library of Congress, because we have the most extensive collections of any library in the Nation or in the world.

CONSULTATION WITH LIBRARY

Mr. STEED. Since the Architect of the Capitol is also Architect for the Library of Congress and handles all structural matters for you, I suppose it safe to assume that there will be full consultation with the Library from the standpoint of the Library needs as well as the appearance of the building and these other physical factors.

Dr. MUMFORD. I can say this: In the preliminary planning, which we did back in 1961, there was the closest cooperation and relationship with the Library of Congress on the part of the Architect of the Capitol, his staff, and the architects whom he employed. Our ideas were given very careful consideration and there was complete understanding between the two.

COMPUTERIZING CATALOGING WORK

Mr. STEED. One thing that concerns me is this: As you know, last year and again this year we gave you some expert help to probe what appears to me to be a revolutionary and relatively fine idea of computerizing your cataloging.

Dr. MUMFORD. Yes, sir.

54-434-65-—pt. 3——2

Mr. STEED. I had hoped that if this developed as it promised to that the construction of a new building would give birth to the beginning of that sort of program.

Do you think you are far enough along now to give us any information as to whether that can be done?

Dr. MUMFORD. The objective of that program, Mr. Chairman, is to computerize our bibliographic machinery, special indexes, and so on, so as to give quicker access and greater access in depth. We can have more subject approaches to the material. It will not reduce the size or the volume of physical material.

Mr. STEED. Even so, if you go to the computer you have to have a home for it. I was thinking in terms of physically being able to locate it.

Dr. MUMFORD. Actual space requirements for computer machinery would not be very great. This has been taken into consideration in our thinking for the new building.

PARKING FACILITIES

Mr. STEED. Like everything else, when you build a new facility of this sort, and the people who work there increase in number

Dr. MUMFORD. It takes additional staff.

Mr. STEED. How about parking? This will give you no solution at all for additional parking, will it?

Dr. MUMFORD. In the preliminary calculations which we have made, and again they were rough calculations, provision has been made for parking for several hundred cars. It would give us considerable relief from our present parking situation.

Mr. STEED. That is contemplated in the basement area?

Dr. MUMFORD. Yes, sir.

Mr. STEED. That is to be desired.

Dr. MUMFORD. I think this is absolutely essential because it is an extremely critical situation with us now.

COMPLETION DATE

Mr. STEED. Mr. Stewart, assuming that you are able to cope with the requirement of this resolution and get this project to go ahead, what will be the time schedule as to the finishing of preliminaries, the development of your final plans and specifications, the awarding of a contract, the period of construction, and those elements which would be required?

Mr. STEWART. Mr. Campioli has information available on that point.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I would judge that with a preliminary set of drawings to prepare and obtain the approvals of the various commissions, it would probably take a minimum of 6 months for that work. Then once we receive the approval to proceed with the contract drawings and specifications, we probably would have to allow 18 months for the working drawings and specifications.

Mr. STEED. After that is all ready and you are going to let a contract, how much construction time would you estimate?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I believe it would be at least 3 years.