Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. ANDREWS. I believe that is two blocks, is it not?
Mr. STEWART. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANDREWS. Where will the building be located, in the center of those two blocks?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I have a plan, Mr. Chairman, which shows the location of the building in relation to its two lots. It is indicated in color on that plan (illustrating].

Mr. ANDREWS. In red?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir. You will notice in that plan that the building sets back farther than the Cannon House Office Building on both the Independence Avenue side as well as the other sides.

Mr. ANDREWS. Will there be a tunnel connecting it with the main Library?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir; a tunnel connecting the main Library of Congress and the annex, and there will also be a tunnel connecting the new Library building and the Cannon Building.

Mr. ANDREWS. How about an underground garage?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. There will be a garage for 340 cars, approximately.
Mr. ANDREWS. Are they planned for use by employees of the library?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir.
Mr. ANDREWS. Will there be parking space around the building?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. No, sir.
Mr. ANDREWS. You have had no bids made on the plans?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. No, sir.

Mr. ANDREWS. What would be your guess as to the ball park figure for the cost of this building?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. We are hugging the maximum, Mr. Chairman. Our associate architects have prepared a preliminary estimate that we do so hare in final form yet. It indicates, however, that they are coming very close to the balance of $74,500,000, including the proposed escalation through the next 3 or 4 years at 3.2 percent and also including architect fees and administrative costs.

Mr. AXDREWS. You are limited to $75 million in the authorization? Mr. HENLOCK. That is correct.

Mr. ANDREWS. What, if any, influence has that had on the plans ? kras enacted sometime back, as I recall.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. As of the moment, if I understand the question correctly. we have only obligated the $500,000. The balance left in the authorization is $74,500,000, which the cost of construction will absorb. This lump sum has served as a limiting factor as to the cost of the building

Mr. ANDREWS. That is your opinion?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. As of the moment. We are using an escalation figure

3.2 percent which from recent performances appears might be low, esmuch as in the last year the escalation figure was around 442

M. ANDREWS. 3.2 percent per year?
V. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir.
Mr. ANDREWS. Through how many years?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. About 4 years, up until 1970 or 1971.

W. ANDREWS. In order to comply with the $75 million authorization ereral years back you are going to have to have around 12 to 15 Fuent additional authorization to stay within those limits?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. No, sir; that escalation figure is included in the $74.5 million.

Mr. ANDREWS. It is?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANDREWS. Did the $75 million authorization have any escalation in it?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. At the time we prepared that figure we allowed for escalation.

Mr. ANDREWS. For how many years?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. Through 1970.

Mr. ANDREWS. How many years would that be from the date of the authorization ?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I believe that was 2 years ago, so that would be 5 years.

Mr. HENLOCK. The Authorization Act was passed in October 1965. Mr. CAMPIOLI. Mr. Chairman, the building as shown on that plan (pointing] extends out underground to the property line. We are occupying the maximum property underground but are setting back above ground.

Mr. ANDREWS. How much of the building under the plan developed will be for book or shelf space, office space, exhibit space, and so on? How does that divide out?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. The program that has been developed by the Librarian can use any or all space for people or books. At this moment I do not believe there is any figure that we can give that would indicate the ratio of people to books. Mr. ANDREWS. How many stories do you plan to have in the building?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Three stories below grade and seven above grade, on Independence Avenue and two stories below grade and eight above grade, on C Street.

Mr. ANDREWS. What is the primary purpose of the building?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. For both collections and office use. The Librarian intends to use the building largely as an office building and then attempt to revert the present two Library buildings to their original use.

Mr. ANDREWS. Is there any shift from what was originally planned? As I recall, it was said the new building would take care of 20 to 25 years' expansion. Is this still a firm prediction?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. The Librarian 'has indicated that the time is shortening because of the delay in getting going with the construction.

Mr. ANDREWS. What is the current outlook for securing approval of the plans?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. We expect the preliminary plans in our office tomorrow and at that time they will be released to the Librarian of Congress and the James Madison Memorial Commission, and we will begin a final review of them ourselves. It is hoped in the matter of about 2 weeks, we may have our comments in the associate architect's hands. As soon as the comments or corrections are made we will then request a meeting with the congressional coordinating committee to obtain their wishes in the matter.

CONSULTATION WITH AIA

Mr. ANDREWS. What has to be cleared with the AIA and what has been done about that?

type of building to be constructed. We had five meetings with the ALA. Some of the meetings had to be repeat meetings because of the lack of attendance on the part of the AIA committee. We are awaiting a copy of their report on this project.

Mr. ANDREWS. What are the objections of the AIA? Do they suggest any alternatives?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I understand the majority of the AIA committee members believes that the program has been too restrictive on the architects. The limitations on the size of the land, maximum amount of moneys authorized by Congress, and the program has resulted in what they consider a building which is too large for the property.

Mr. ANDREWS. They do think this proposed building is too large for the property?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir. Even though it is smaller for the property than most of the House and Senate Office Buildings are in relation to their properties.

Mr. ANDREWS. What authority does the AIA have over the formulation of final plans?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Our only directive from the coordinating committee was to consult with them during the planning stage. That is what we have done.

Mr. ANDREWs. Do you visualize that requests for further funds may come in this session? You have got a lot of committees to clear with before you actually are in a position to ask for construction funds.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. I believe it will depend upon the wishes of the coordinating committee as to whether they wish us to attempt to secure funds this year or wait until next year.

Mr. ANDREWS. Is there to be a model in scale similar to what you have done on the west front proposal ? Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir.

Mr. ANDREWS. If there is to be one, will it come before or after the various clearances ?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. It will be presented to the coordinating committee at the same time as the preliminary drawings and estimates of cost are submitted.

SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS Mr. ANDREWS. Who are the associate architects on the project? Mr. CAMPIOLI. DeWitt, Poor & Shelton and their associates. Mr. ANDREWS. And the fee? Mr. CAMPIOLI. $435,000. Mr. ANDREWS. Based on what? Mr. CAMPIOLI. We arrived at that figure based on the overall cost of the project and we allowed 20 percent of the architects fees for the preliminary work. I believe this figure actually comes to less than 20 percent. Mr. ANDREWS. How did you award that contract?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. It was awarded by direction of the coordinating committee.

Mr. ANDREWS. Did you have a competitive bidding on the contract?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. No, sir. Competitive bidding up until now for professional fees has not been considered ethical in the profession.

Mr. ANDREWS. How did you select this particular firm?
Mr. CAMPIOLI. The coordinating committee made the selection.

Mr. ANDREWS. What do you mean by the coordinating committee? You refer to any number of committees here.

Mr. CAMPIOLI. This is the congressional committee that represents the various committees whose names you read earlier in this hearing.

Mr. ANDREWS. Who makes up the coordinating committee?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Senator Jordan is the chairman. Congressman Burleson is the vice chairman and there are designated members representing the various committees.

Mr. ANDREWS. It is a committee of Members of Congress?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Yes, sir. After the initial meeting of the coordinating committee each of the members of the various full committees was given the recommendations of the coordinating committee to consider. I believe that a vast majority of them approved the recommendations of the coordinating committee.

Mr. ANDREWS. Are you satisfied with the work the architects have done?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Up to the present time the Librarian appears to be satisfied, but we do not have the final drawings and estimates of cost.

WEST FRONT OF THE CAPITOL Mr. ANDREWS. With reference to the west front of the Capitol, you mentioned that there are no funds in this budget for the west front project. What is the status of the detailed preliminary plans and drawings?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. The preliminary plans, drawings, and model have been completed but we are awaiting instructions of the Extension of the Capitol Commission.

Mr. ANDREWS. Do you have any ball park figure as to what it would cost to extend the west front?

Mr. CAMPIOLI. Approximately $35 million. Mr. ANDREWS. When we filed the conference report on this bill last August, the statement of the managers contained some elaboration on the position of the conferees at that time. I think we might insert that statement at this point in the record.

(CLERK'S NOTE.—It appears as part of a larger quotation later in these general opening remarks.)

Mr. ANDREWS. I have a copy of a letter from the Speaker dated January 10 of this year, to all Members of the Senate and House, calling attention to the fact that the scale model, so-called scheme 2 which the special committee selected from three plans, was on display in Statuary Hall and inviting everyone to go and examine the model. (The letter follows:)

THE SPEAKER'S ROOMS,
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Washington, D.C., January 10, 1967. Subject: Scale model-West Front of Capitol.

DEAR COLLEAGUE (SENATOR) : You will recall that the Congress provided funds for preparation of preliminary plans and estimates of cost, including a scale model, and incidental expenses looking to extension of the west central front of the Capitol, in the Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1966, approved October 31, 1965.

The scale model of the entire Capitol, showing the appearance of the building if extended to the west in accordance with Scheme 2 which has been ap proved by the Commission in charge, is on display in Statuary Hall for the information of the Congress and the public.

This location is on the same level as the Senate and House Chambers, so I trust you will take the opportunity to examine the model at your convenience. With kind regards, I am. Sincerely yours,

JOHN W. MOCORMACK, Chairman, Commission for Extension of the United States Capitol.

thegir. A NDREMET. I stood uary,

REACTION TO PROPOSED EXTENSION Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Stewart, what has been the reaction of the Members? How many have seen it? Do you know?

Mr. STEWART. To my own personal knowledge, I know of at least 20 Members that have accompanied me up there to look at it. We have had some Members who have taken the floor of the House to castigate the ones that gave permission to put it in Statuary Hall. It was done under the express permission granted by the Speaker of the House, who has charge of all areas on the House side of the Capitol, one of them being the Statuary Hall area.

May I recite just a little incident in that connection to show you the reaction of some people? Mr. ANDREWS. I wish you would.

Mr. STEWART. I stood there some months ago; that is, probably in the first 2 weeks in January, when one of the Members, a chairman of one of your committees, and I walked over there at his suggestion to look at it. While we were there, three ladies and one man were also there looking at the model. It was amusing to hear what the man's reaction was.

Mr. ANDREWS. A Member of Congress?

Mr. STEWART. No; a visitor who had been bringing groups up to see the model. After he walked around it two or three times he turned to the ladies and said, "Anybody who wants to change that U.S. Capitol and put an addition on is a fool. It should be left just as you see it. It is beautiful.”

That is the impression it made on him. The model showed the proposed extension on it. He couldn't tell the difference.

Mr. ANDREWS. He liked the model ?
Mr. STEWART. Very much.
Mr. ANDREWS. He did not want it changed ?
Mr. STEWART. That is right.

Mr. ANDREWS. He was under the impression the model was what you have today!

Mr. STEWART. That is right. Mr. ANDREWS. Did you get any other public reaction through the press or otherwise?

Mr. STEWART. We have had violent public reaction by one or two of the Members of Congress who seem to think that I had no business putting the model there. As you know, this model was part of the package ordered by the Congress and it was placed in Statuary Hall at direction of the Speaker. Generally the ones who are hard to convince have not yielded very much and the ones who have been in favor of the project from the beginning are still very steadfast in their convictions.

« PreviousContinue »