View
223
Download
7
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Historic Sculpture Master Plan
Citation preview
Cover Letter for the
Report to the Los Alamos County Council, the Fuller Lodge/Historic
District Advisory Board, and the Art in Public Places Board
by Nancy R. Bartlit, Chairman
February 10, 2010
The Historical Sculptures Master Plan Committee conveys to the Los Alamos County Council
its report, after review and approvals from the Fuller Lodge Advisory Board on January 6, 2010
and the Art in Public Places Board on February 10, 2010. This report includes:
the “Master Plan Proposal to Select Historic Sculptures to Represent Five Eras of
Los Alamos History,” and
the “Recommendations Regarding Location of Oppenheimer and Groves
Sculptures Report.”
The Committee has met weekly since July 20, 2009 until January 4, 2010, with the assistance
of Stephani Johnson, Director of Community Services, and her staff. We appreciate the
opportunity to develop, on behalf of the Council and the Arts in Public Places Board,
recommendations and guidelines for location of historic statues. This process was lengthy and
comprehensive, with consultation of Richard McIntyre, Director of the Parks Department, and
maps to locate utilities which could influence final recommendations. County Councilor Ralph
Phelps, liaison to both boards and our committee, provided key encouragement and guidance.
The Committee was inspired by the steps taken by the Art in Public Places Board to begin the
Historic Sculptures project by asking the council to hire a sculptor to create life-sized statues of
J. Robert Oppenheimer, the first laboratory director under the Manhattan Project, and Major
General Leslie R. Groves, of the U.S. Army Corps who oversaw the Manhattan Project. Using
the report of 2006 of the Economic Development through Art Committee, we adopted many
H I S T O R I C A L S C U L P T U R E S M A S T E R P L A N C O M M I T T E E
of its recommendations for goals, strategy, and statues. In addition to listing sculptures which fit
historic sites in the downtown area and Historic District, we included possible outside funding
sources for the County to consider to amplify Art in Public Places funds.
One component not addressed by the Committee was how to plan ahead for dedication of
the first two statues sometime in 2010, which could be an excellent opportunity to draw the
community together with others who have interest in the Manhattan Project. A comprehensive
effort to involve the Oppenheimer Memorial Committee, the Light Opera, the Historical
Society, history teachers and students, political leaders, military associations, and living relatives
who reside in the region, could be foreseen to assist the Art in Public Places Board.
The Master Plan has two phases, one five year plan, and one for the second five years. Also
included is a suggestion of a statue of historic interest to both Los Alamos and Santa Fe. Besides
the specific persons or generic statues identified, we have made several other recommendations
concerning signage of the Historic District and ways to connect the two museums. We hope
these ideas will increase enjoyment of the downtown, as we encourage statues be crafted in
fitting and entertaining poses, and that this plan will add pleasure and beauty around Fuller
Lodge, Ashley Pond, the Historic Walking Tour, and along Central Avenue.
Mentioned in this letter are articles in the local newspaper which have featured the work of the
Committee and support in the Albuquerque newspaper of the proposed Manhattan Project
National Historical Park. If this Park becomes a reality, support for, and perhaps supplemental
funding for statues from this historic era, could be expanded.
NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT HISTORIC STATUES
“Living History” photo, Los Alamos Monitor, Wednesday, August 12, 2009, p. 3.
“Living History: The famous among us,” by Katy Korkos, Los Alamos Monitor, August 13, 2009, p. l.
“Council clears way for Oppenheimer statue,” Los Alamos Monitor, October 24, 2008, p. 1.
“Committee polishes sculpture series,” Los Alamos Monitor, Tuesday, December 29, 2009. p 1&2.
“Council Oks historic statues,” Los Alamos Monitor, Friday, January 9, 2009, p. 1.
“Historic Park A Fine Idea,” Albuquerque Journal, Santa Fe/North, Wednesday, December 30, 2009, p. 3.
H I S T O R I C A L S C U L P T U R E S M A S T E R P L A N C O M M I T T E E
Master Plan Proposal
to Select Historic Sculptures to Represent
Five Eras of Los Alamos History
from
The Historical Sculptures Master Plan Committee
January 13, 2010
INTRODUCTION
GOAL
The goal of this project is to bring life and immediacy to the
Los Alamos downtown and historical area through accurately and
meaningfully presented life-size, historic bronze statues.
This master plan develops a 5–10 year plan for these life-size
sculptures to be located in the downtown area. As part of the project,
the Historical Sculptures Master Plan Committee (HSMPC) also was
to accomplish the following two tasks:
1. Documentation of the reasons for the selections including
historical context, and
2. Identification of potential funding sources.
The sculptures identified in this report have significant historical
context and excellent visibility in all of the proposed locations.
The HSMPC used the criterion “defined route of flow” in its
considerations to ensure that sculptures would be placed to draw
visitors from the science museum to the historical museum, and
vice versa, avoiding obscure locations. The existing boundaries
for the downtown master plan and for our Art & Culture
District (the Los Alamos Creative Culture District) are more
than adequate to contain proposed sculpture sites. In fact, all
the currently proposed sites are contained by the historical
walking tour route, bounded by Trinity Drive and Nectar
Street on the south and north, and Oppenheimer Drive
and 15th Street on the west and east.
While meeting weekly since July 20, 2009, the
Committee diligently researched, interviewed historians
and persons who experienced past eras, and sought
answers from the expertise of our members. We balanced
a concern for what historic stories would be enjoyed by
observers and the historic structures which influenced our choices.
| one |
We hope these suggestions will beautify the downtown and enhance
cultural events. We applaud the dedication of Stephani Johnson,
Los Alamos County Community Services Director, to make our task
easier and wish success as she assists the Art in Public Places (APP)
Board to review our recommendations. We also appreciate the help
of County Councilor Ralph Phelps for his guidance and key ideas.
The APP Board has already received County Council approval for
the J. Robert Oppenheimer and Major General Leslie R. Groves
sculptures, created by Santa Fe artist Susanne Vertel, which are
recognized to be the first step in achieving these goals of the Master
Plan. Attached to this report is the HSMPC’s “Recommendations
Regarding Location of Oppenheimer and Groves Sculptures
Report,” November 2, 2009, which selects three locations as
finalists for this pair, recommending Site 6. In anticipation of the
completion of these statues, the attached report develops guidelines
which can be used, not only for the first two statues, but also more
broadly to site future historic statues.
STRATEGY
To attract people into the Historic District in a way that the public art
would stimulate the imagination of viewers in order to understand
the five historic eras of the Pajarito Plateau of Los Alamos County.
This project also addresses the Council’s Strategic Goal #4G:
“Diversify the Economy/Revitalize White Rock and
Los Alamos Downtowns by increasing number of visitors
coming to and through Los Alamos,” and
Newly adopted Downtown Plan Element #6 which “supports
the efforts of the Fuller Lodge/Historic Districts Board and
Historical Society to bring a series of sculptures of local
historical figures to the downtown.”
This project incorporates the earlier efforts of the Fuller
Lodge/Historic Districts Advisory Board, the Los Alamos
| two |
Historical Society, and the Art in Public Places subcommittees
who prepared the Economic Development through Art
report of 2006.
PROPOSED COST
At this time, the sculptures identified probably can be commissioned
for a price between $60,000 to $80,000 per statue, dependent
on materials cost. The exception to these estimates is in the first
era identified, the Ranch School. The recommended sculpture for
this era includes a pack animal or horse and therefore will likely
be more costly. Funding for the sculptures could come through a
combination of APP budgeting and through solicitation of private
donations or grants. The Committee encourages the County to
assign sustained responsibility for overseeing financial solicitations
as part of the plan.
Historic Statues Master Plan for First Five Years
Please note that the Committee’s recommendations are listed in the priority order
that we suggest they be purchased and installed.
PHASE I
A. Manhattan Project Era (1943–1947)
Statues: J. Robert Oppenheimer and Major General Leslie R. Groves (contracted 2009–2010).
Location: At Fuller Lodge (Site 6). (Refer to Location report
attached to this report.)
Possible Funding Sources (PFS): County Funds–APP
Budgeted Funds.
B. Ranch School Era (1918–1943)
Statue: Boy Scout leading a horse, a Scout riding a horse, or leading
a pack animal with the famous Los Alamos diamond hitch. Scouts
| three |
are in shorts, high knee socks, and chaps. Suggest a generic Boy
Scout unless a family wishes their loved one to be a model and makes
a substantial donation. A special dedication could coincide with the
Boy Scouts celebrating their centennial in 2017. Many photos as
resources are in the Historical Society’s archives.
Location: Northeast corner of Ashley Pond, in the direction
where the horses were stabled.
PFS: Family members of former/current Boy Scouts and possible
endorsement/promotion by the Boy Scouts of America.
C. Homestead Era (1880–1943)
Statue: Hispanic male Homesteader planting or holding beans
(e.g. Bences Gonzales, son-in-law of the Romero Family, cook
for the Ranch School, and also worked at LASL). We recommend
contacting the Romero family first if Bences is selected to represent
their heritage. Many photos of Bences and Homesteaders working
in the fields can be found in the Historical Society’s archives.
Location: Near the Romero Cabin in the Historic District,
northeast of Fuller Lodge.
PFS: Descendants of Gonzales and/or Romero Families; Pajarito
Plateau Homesteaders Association.
| four |
Homesteader
D. Manhattan Project Era (1943–1947)
Statue: U.S. Army WAC (Women’s Army Corps) and U.S. Army SED (Special Engineer Detachment). Generic models of both
female and male, with woman holding slide rule or placed in her
pocket. Couple could be preparing to attend movie theater. (Possible
models are Jean and Winston Dabney, both Master Sergeants, who
married at the end of the War.)
Location: On Central Avenue, perhaps in front of CB Fox, site
of a former movie theater.
PFS: WWII commemorative organizations.
E. Cold War Era (1947–1990):
Statue: Norris Bradbury, second director of the Los Alamos
Scientific Laboratory (LASL) for 25 years, and also key leader in the
Trinity Test success. Member of the U.S. Naval Reserve, architect
of the modern Lab. All new Lab hirees were invited to his home to
welcome them.
Location: Bradbury sitting on a bench in front of the U.S. Post
Office which was built while he was the Lab director. (FL/HD AB
plans to re-nominate the post office building for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places.)
PFS: Family support; WWII commemorative organizations.
F. Ancestral Pueblo Era (1150–1550 A.D.; ancestral village 1225 A.D.)
Statue: Woman coiling a pot.Location: North end of ancestral pueblo village in Historic District.
PFS: National American recognition/heritage grants; local Native
American pueblos’ development corporation partnerships.
OPPORTUNITY WITH CITY OF SANTA FE AND THEIR APP BOARD
Manhattan Project Era (1943–1947)
Statue: Dorothy McKibbin, a Santa Fean who was “Gatekeeper”
to all who were sent to “The Hill” during WWII and until her
retirement in the 1960s. The famous 109 E. Palace Avenue was
| f ive |
the Manhattan Project’s office in Santa Fe. The original gate from
Palace Avenue is in the Los Alamos Historic Museum.
Location: City of Santa Fe, possibly by the gate of 109 E.
Palace, perhaps in the courtyard where her old office was. If the
Manhattan Project Historical National Park becomes a reality,
the historic interconnection between Los Alamos and Santa Fe
would be reinforced.
PFS: Joint funding with the City of Santa Fe and Progress through
Partnership monies if approved by the County Council.
Benefit to Los Alamos County: Having this statue beside or within
the historical courtyard of Dorothy’s Santa Fe office, where a plaque
already describes how Santa Fe was a “gateway” to Los Alamos during
WWII, would explain the connection of the two cities then and would
draw visitors to visit Los Alamos.
Historic Statues Master Plan for Second Five Years
PHASE II
A. Ranch School Era (1918–1943)
Statue: Peggy Pond Church, daughter of Ashley Pond, known
eloquent author and poet, loved living at the Ranch School. Her
husband, a school master, taught at the school and two sons attended
the school. The Church family is actively engaged in local history,
attending events of historical nature, and sharing their memories.
Location: At the end of Bathtub Row and Peach Street corner on the
Historic Walking Tour, near the home in which she, Fermor Church,
and their three boys resided.
PFS: Family and friends.
B. Manhattan Project Era (1943–1947)
Statue: Deak Parsons, U.S. Naval Academy graduate and Admiral,
was second in command to J. Robert Oppenheimer during the
| s ix |
Yesterday, in a canyon
beyond Guaje, I saw
a deer flee through the
pines. I heard the wind
on a mesa beyond
stride furiously from
the mountain. I saw
swift clouds darken
the sun. I heard the
advancing rain.
EXCERPT FROM “YESTERDAY”
PEGGY POND CHURCH
Manhattan Project. He was in charge of all ordnance, and directed
Project Alberta on Tinian Island. He armed Little Boy while Enola
Gay was in flight. He was raised in Fort Sumner, NM, and brought
Norris Bradbury to Los Alamos.
Location: Admiral Parsons’ family lived in the Church home on the
north section of Bathtub Row, but he worked in the technical area
surrounding Ashley Pond. His location could be near the Ice House
Memorial or near Fuller Lodge.
PFS: Family; U.S. Navy local veterans; WWII
Commemorative organizations.
Statue: George Kistiakowsky, a Ukrainian-born Harvard chemist
and explosive expert, insisted on a lens-type implosive device to
explode the plutonium bomb. He was a key figure in designing the
Trinity Test bomb’s firing mechanism.
Location: In front of the Red Cross Building along the Historic
Trail on Bathtub Row where he lived.
PFS: WWII commemorative organizations; Ukrainian
heritage organizations.
C. Cold War Era (1947–1990)
Statue: James L. Tuck, a British scientist in the British Tube Alloys
Project (code name), was sent to Los Alamos to assist the Manhattan
Project. His research on the “lens system” of detonation proved vital
to the success of the Trinity Test. Active in community affairs for
years, he was instrumental in keeping Ashley Pond as a pond. His
similar action also kept Fuller Lodge from destruction, after the
Atomic Energy Commission took down the Big House in which the
Boy Scouts and Manhattan Project scientists slept.
Location: Manhattan Project Ice House Memorial on the south side
of Ashley Pond, possibly sitting on one of the walls of the exhibit.
PFS: WWII commemorative organizations.
Statue: Jean Nereson, one of the longest serving teachers in
Los Alamos County, arriving during the Manhattan Project and
teaching for 50 years. Jean inspired and kept in touch with the
| seven |
It is impossible to
overestimate the value
which Captain Parsons
has been to the project.
DR. J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER
| eight |
children of the Manhattan Project scientists, influencing their lives.
Location: Near Central School site, west of Mesa Public Library.
PFS: Past students; Greek heritage organizations.
Statue: Stan Ulam, co-inventor of the hydrogen bomb who lived
in Bathtub Row’s Spruce Cottage. He also invented the important
Monte Carlo Method.
Location: [Along the Historic Walking Tour, near Spruce Cottage.]
PFS: Family; Polish heritage organizations.
Statue: Nick Metropolis, a computer calculations expert, he
invented an important Monte Carlo algorithm. Along with John
von Neumann, Richtmyer, Fermi, and Percy King, the FERMIAC
was developed as an ingenious analog device to implement studies in
neutron transport.
Location: To be determined.
PFS: Family, Greek heritage organizations.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Statue Presentations: The Committee recommends that the historic
sculpture bases have a design similarity, that they be placed at ground
level, that written, historic interpretation accompany the statue, and
that they be lit at night. (See attached location report.)
Signage in the Historic District: The Committee sent a suggestion
to the Fuller Lodge/Historic Districts Advisory Board to replace
the concrete signage in the Historic District to a more appropriate
design for persons to find destinations. Most stakeholders in the area
agree that it would be desirable to remove the present concrete signs
and replace them with a more appropriate, historic style. Such signs
would improve readability to find the museum and art center, and
correct organizational names.
| nine |
The Committee also recommends that the Historic District borders
be “signed” when collaboration of those working on heritage tourism
recommend an appropriate style.
Possible Funding Sources: The Committee encourages the county
to assign to a specific economic development staff, or consultant, the
responsibility of developing private funding suggested in this report
to supplement the public budget for historic statues.
Manhattan Project National Historical Park Designation: The
National Park Service study of Manhattan Project Sites released
in November 2009 discusses the possibility of Los Alamos being
included in a future Manhattan Project National Historical Park with
the cities of Oak Ridge, TN, and Hanford, WA. Since the majority
of visitors to Los Alamos already come to learn Manhattan Project
history, this designation could increase interest in, and outside
funding for, the Manhattan Project and Cold War historic statues
under Phase II.
Sidewalk Enhancement: The idea of medallions in the sidewalks
(with bas relief profiles of historic figures along Central Avenue
as a beginning, e.g. Otto Frisch, Hans Bethe, Enrico Fermi,
and Niels Bohr of the Manhattan Project Era) might be a more
affordable way of recognizing other historic figures, and could
lead people from the Bradbury Science Museum to the Historical
Museum and Historic District.
RESOURCES
The Los Alamos Historical Society archival collections
for all the eras.
The Los Alamos National Laboratory’s archival collections
and historic preservation research on the Homesteaders,
World War II, and the Cold War.
The Atomic Heritage Foundation web site.
| ten |
HISTORICAL SCULPTURE SITING CRITERIA
The following criteria and weightings were developed for siting the
Oppenheimer/Groves sculptures. The committee would encourage
their usage for future historic sculpture sitings.
As sites were considered, they were automatically removed from consideration if anyof the following unsafe conditions were met: 1) the site would be a potential traffic hazard or a hazard to people; 2) it would be an obstruction in emergency situations;3) was situated in a winter snow removal area, or 4) if there were deemed to be too many existing utilities (water, sewer, gas, electrical or data).
1. Historical Context: (25% weighting) Sculpture sites should have a strong
historical association with their proposed locations. An example would be the
Minuteman Sculpture at the North Bridge in Concord.
2. Visual Context: (25% weighting) Visual context includes whether: the setting
makes for a good photo opportunity; it fits in with and enhances the setting in
which it is placed; and adds to the ambiance of its surroundings. Sculpture sites
should be compatible with the feeling and setting of the existing Los Alamos
Historic District (aka, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory National Historic
Landmark District (NHL District)) and should not detract from those attributes
that make the properties eligible for inclusion in the NHL District.
3. Visibility: (15% weighting) Sculpture site should be placed in areas visible to
pedestrians and passersby and consideration should be given to sight lines.
4. Defined Route or Flow: (15% weighting) Sculpture site should be part of a
defined and interpreted route — a series that leads the visitor from one sculpture to
the next. An example of such a defined route is the existing downtown walking tour.
5. Security: (10% weighting) Sculpture site should not put sculpture at undue risk
for vandalism or theft.
6. Upkeep: (10% weighting) The sculpture site should not cause excessive
maintenance work or hinder area upkeep.
| e leven |
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Nancy Bartlit, Chair, Author and Member FL/HD BoardHelen Baran, past Member FL/HD BoardLinda Deck, Director, Bradbury Science MuseumHedy Dunn, Museum Director, Los Alamos Historical SocietyEllen McGehee, LANL Historic Preservation Liaison for Cultural Resources TeamKaty Korkos, Members Services Coordinator, Chamber of CommerceBrian Hurshman, Sparkplug Studio, who donated the graphic design format of these reports.
EX-OFFICIO NON-VOTING MEMBERS
John Hofmann, Chair, APP BoardRon Wilkins, Chair, FL/HD BoardStephani Johnson, Director, Community Services, Los Alamos County
Recommendation Regarding
Location of Oppenheimer and Groves Sculptures
for
Members of the Art in Public Places BoardMembers of the Fuller Lodge/Historic Districts Advisory Board
from
Nancy Bartlit, Chair, Historical Sculptures Master Plan Committee
November 2, 2009
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to offer three (3) options for a location
for the J. Robert Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves sculptures
which are intended to stand side-by-side. The Oppenheimer statue
is currently being created by artist Susanne Vertel.
BACKGROUND
At the County Council meeting of October 21, 2008, the Council
approved “the recommendation of the Art in Public Places Board
regarding the purchase and placement of an historic sculpture of
Oppenheimer [to] be placed between the Historic Museum and
Fuller Lodge among the trees; and the contract of this sculpture be
returned to Council for final approval.”
Subsequently, at their January 6, 2009 meeting, the Council
approved the contract with Ms. Vertel, but asked the Art in Public
Places Board to consider moving the sculpture closer to Central
Avenue in the Fuller Lodge area. At that same meeting, Councilor
Gibson suggested that the location of the Oppenheimer sculpture
be considered as part of a larger plan for locations of future
historic sculptures.
After that meeting, members of the Art in Public Places Board
and the Fuller Lodge/Historic Districts Advisory Board met to
discuss the formation of a committee to create a Master Plan for
the location of both the Oppenheimer and Groves sculptures,
as well as locations for future historic sculptures. Therefore, the
creation of the Historic Sculptures Master Plan Committee whose
charge was to “develop a 5 – 10 year master plan for sculptures
to be located in the downtown area which included the existing
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory National Historic Landmark
District (NHL District). The sculptures will be life-size, realistic
representations of individuals (e.g. Oppenheimer, Groves, and
Bradbury) or groups (e.g. homesteaders, Boy Scouts) that have
| one |
There are children
playing in the streets who
could solve some of my
top problems in physics,
because they have modes
of sensory perception
that I lost long ago.
J. ROBERT OPPENHEIMER
played a significant role in the history of our community. The plan
will provide context for future proposals to Council and does not
represent a commitment to future action.”
DISCUSSION
The Committee has met weekly (with the exception of the Labor
Day and Columbus Day holidays) since July 20, 2009. The
members have focused their initial efforts on decisions related
to the location criteria of the historical sculptures with special
attention to the location for the Oppenheimer and Groves
sculptures, as they are the first to be purchased. The Committee
considered both privately and publicly owned sites. Six criteria for
ranking any potential sculpture site have been discussed and agreed
upon. These criteria address critical issues in sculpture placement
and the Committee recommends that these criteria be used to
select locations for sculptures in the future.
The remaining historical sculpture siting criteria, which are placed
in order of importance, include:
1. Historical Context: Sculpture sites should have a strong
historical association with their proposed locations. An
example would be the Minuteman Sculpture at the North
Bridge in Concord.
As sites were considered, they were automatically removed from
consideration if any of the following unsafe conditions were met: 1) the
site would be a potential traffic hazard or a hazard to people; 2) it would
be an obstruction in emergency situations; 3) was situated in a winter snow
removal area, or 4) if there were deemed to be too many existing utilities
(water, sewer, gas, electrical or data).
| two |
2. Visual Context: Visual context includes whether: the
setting makes for a good photo opportunity; it fits in with
and enhances the setting in which it is placed; and adds to
the ambiance of its surroundings. Sculpture sites should
be compatible with the feeling and setting of the existing
Los Alamos Historic District (aka, Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory National Historic Landmark District (NHL
District)) and should not detract from those attributes that
make the properties eligible for inclusion in the NHL District.
3. Visibility: Sculpture site should be placed in areas visible to
pedestrians and passersby and consideration should be given
to sight lines.
4. Defined Route or Flow: Sculpture site should be part of a
defined and interpreted route — a series that leads the visitor
from one sculpture to the next. An example of such a defined
route is the existing downtown walking tour.
5. Security: Sculpture site should not put sculpture at undue
risk for vandalism or theft.
6. Upkeep: The sculpture site should not cause excessive
maintenance work or hinder area upkeep.
At the Committee meeting of August 10th members tested the
proposed criteria by visiting eight possible locations for the statues.
After the visits, Committee members were asked to come to the
next meeting with their top three (3) sites identified.
At the August 31st meeting, Committee members
toured the remaining sites and commented on
the pros and cons of each. After discussion on the
remaining sites, Committee members chose what
are called Sites 1B, 5B and 6 (photos are attached
of each site). Following are the comments on each
site by Committee members. It should be noted that
with regard to the Historical Context criterion, all
three sites provide an excellent location.
| three |
Fuller Lodge
1B
5B
6
Between the Trees at Historical Museum and Fuller Lodge (Site 1B)
1) Historical Context: The sculptures have a strong historical
association with this location. This is because both J. Robert
Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves visited and ate at Fuller
Lodge, while Groves stayed at the guest cottage, currently known
as the Historical Museum. They also would have walked the path
from Fuller Lodge to their offices. 2) Visual Context: Placement
here would meet the compatibility requirements. The sculptures
would not detract from the attributes of the District, but in fact,
add to the ambience of the surroundings. 3) Visibility: Although
this location would lend itself to visibility by pedestrians who visit
Fuller Lodge, the Historical Museum, or take advantage of the
Historical Walking Tour, it is likely that in this location, passersby
on Central Avenue would not readily see them. 4) Defined Route or
Flow: Placement of the sculptures in this area would be ideal in that
the site lies between two (2) stops on the downtown walking tour —
the Red Cross Building and the Historical Museum. 5) Security:
This location meets this criterion in that the sculptures would be
| four |
site 1B
placed within the trees between Fuller Lodge and the Historical
Museum. In this location traffic would not be impeded, nor would
the sculptures lend themselves to vandalism, especially in view of
the fact that lighting is recommended to be installed in whatever
location is chosen. 6) Upkeep: Placement in this location would not
cause excessive maintenance or hinder area landscaping.
Central Avenue and Bathtub Row Intersection (Site 5B)
1) Historical Context: The sculptures have a strong historical
association with this location. 2) Visual Context: This location,
as well, is compatible with the Historic District. When other
sculptures are installed as part of a Master Plan, this location could
reinforce that each individual sculpture is part of a recognizable
set and/or series. 3) Visibility: The visibility from Central Avenue
is excellent in this location. 4) Defined Route or Flow: This location
would eventually become part of a defined and interpreted route
as more of the historic sculptures are installed per the Master Plan
| f ive |
site 5B
that is being created by the Committee. It is not currently part of
the downtown walking tour, although this site would be ideal for
those visitors who walk down Central Avenue from the Bradbury
Museum to Fuller Lodge and the Historical Museum. 5) Security:
If this site is chosen, the sculptures should be placed in such a way
that they will not interfere with the site distance requirements of
the motoring traffic. Since this location is part of a large grassy
area well off of the sidewalks, the two will not impede pedestrian
traffic either. Since this location is on a well-traveled corner, both
by pedestrians and motorists, the chance for vandalism or theft is
much reduced. 6) Upkeep: As in the proposed location noted above,
this location would not cause excessive maintenance or hinder area
landscaping and could be lighted at night.
Central Avenue at South Wing of Fuller Lodge (Site 6)1) Historical Context: The sculptures have a strong historical
association with this location in that Fuller Lodge and the Big
| s ix |
site 6
House were the hubs of daily life. 2) Visual Context: This site is very
like the above-mentioned site and this location is compatible with
the Historic District. When other sculptures are installed as part
of a Master Plan, this location could reinforce that each individual
sculpture is part of a recognizable set and/or series. 3) Visibility: The
visibility is excellent in this location with the southern wall of the
wing of Fuller Lodge in the background. 4) Defined Route or Flow:
Again this site is similar to the previously mentioned site, as this
location would eventually become part of a defined and interpreted
route as more of the historic sculptures are installed per the Master
Plan that is being created by the committee. It is not currently part
of the downtown walking tour, although this site would be ideal for
those visitors who walk down Central Avenue from the Bradbury
Museum to Fuller Lodge and to the Historical Museum in the
Historical District. 5) Security: Placement in this location will not
create safety hazards for pedestrians or the motoring traffic. This
location is part of a large grassy area very near sidewalks thereby
making it very accessible to pedestrian traffic without impeding the
traffic. This location faces a well-travelled corner (Central Avenue
and 20th Street), used both by pedestrians and motorists, so the
chance for vandalism or theft is much reduced. 6) Upkeep: Since
there are utilities in this area, care should be taken to ensure that
the sculpture is placed well away from the utilities. This location
would not cause excessive maintenance or hinder area landscaping.
continues
| seven |
COMMITTEE MEMBERSNancy Bartlit, Chair, Member FL/HDABHelen Baran, past Member FL/HDABLinda Deck, Director, Bradbury Science MuseumHedy Dunn, Museum Director, Los Alamos Historical SocietyEllen McGehee, LANL Historic Preservation Liaison for Cultural Resources TeamKaty Korkos, Services Director, COCBrian Hurshman, Sparkplug Studio
EX-OFFICIO NON-VOTING MEMBERSJohn Hofmann, Chair, APP BoardRon Wilkins, Chair, FL/HDAB Board Stephani Johnson, Director, Community Services, Los Alamos County
RECOMMENDATION
Based on our consideration of these criteria, we recommend the
above-mentioned sites in this order:
1. Central Avenue at the South Wing of Fuller Lodge (Site 6),
2. Central Avenue and Bathtub Row Intersection (Site 5B), and
3. Between the Trees at Historical Museum and Fuller
Lodge (Site 1B).
COMMITTEE MEMBERSNancy Bartlit, Chair, Member FL/HDABHelen Baran, past Member FL/HDABLinda Deck, Director, Bradbury Science MuseumHedy Dunn, Museum Director, Los Alamos Historical SocietyEllen McGehee, LANL Historic Preservation Liaison for Cultural Resources TeamKaty Korkos, Members Services Coordinator, Chamber of CommerceBrian Hurshman, Sparkplug Studio
EX-OFFICIO NON-VOTING MEMBERSJohn Hofmann, Chair, APP BoardRon Wilkins, Chair, FL/HDAB Board Stephani Johnson, Director, Community Services, Los Alamos County
| eight |
How the Sites Ranked(on a scale of 1 to 100)
SITE 6 5B 1B
RATING 87.9 83.9 82.6
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Servicehttp://www.nps.gov/history/NR/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_8.htm#determining
“Understanding the Aspects of Integrity”
LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. The relationship between the property and its location is often important to understanding why the property was created or why something happened. The actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is particularly important in recapturing the sense of historic events and persons. Except in rare cases, the relationship between a property and its historic associations is destroyed if the property is moved. (See Criteria Consideration B in Part VII: How to Apply the Criteria Considerations, for the conditions under which a moved property can be eligible.)
DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. It results from conscious decisions made during the original conception and planning of a property (or its significant alteration) and applies to activities as diverse as community planning, engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Design includes such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials.
A property’s design reflects historic functions and technologies as well as aesthetics. It includes such considerations as the structural system; massing; arrangement of spaces; pattern of fenestration; textures and colors of surface materials; type, amount, and style of ornamental detailing; and arrangement and type of plantings in a designed landscape.
Design can also apply to districts, whether they are important primarily for historic association, architectural value, information potential, or a combination thereof. For districts significant primarily for historic association or architectural value, design concerns more than just the individual buildings or structures located within the boundaries. It also applies to the way in which buildings, sites, or structures are related: for example, spatial relationships between major features; visual rhythms in a streetscape or landscape plantings; the layout and materials of walkways and roads; and the relationship of other features, such as statues, water fountains, and archeological sites.
SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Whereas location refers to the specific place where a property was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historical role. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space.
Setting often reflects the basic physical conditions under which a property was built and the functions it was intended to serve. In addition, the way in which a property is positioned in its environment can reflect the designer’s concept of nature and aesthetic preferences.
The physical features that constitute the setting of a historic property can be either natural or manmade, including such elements as:
Topographic features (a gorge or the crest of a hill);Vegetation;Simple manmade features (paths or fences); and
Relationships between buildings and other features or open space.
These features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the property, but also between the property and its surroundings. This is particularly important for districts.
MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The choice and combination of materials reveal the preferences of those who created the property and indicate the availability of particular types of materials and technologies. Indigenous materials are often the focus of regional building traditions and thereby help define an area’s sense of time and place.
A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance. If the property has been rehabilitated, the historic materials and significant features must have been preserved. The property must also be an actual historic resource, not a recreation; a recent structure fabricated to look historic is not eligible. Likewise, a property whose historic features and materials have been lost and then reconstructed is usually not eligible. (See Criteria Consideration E in Part VII: How to Apply the Criteria Considerations for the conditions under which a reconstructed property can be eligible.)
WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans’ labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. Workmanship can apply to the property as a whole or to its individual components. It can be expressed in vernacular methods of construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated configurations and ornamental detailing. It can be based on common traditions or innovative period techniques.
Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of a craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic or prehistoric period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or national applications of both technological practices and aesthetic principles. Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery. Examples of workmanship in prehistoric contexts include Paleo-Indian clovis projectile points; Archaic period beveled adzes; Hopewellian birdstone pipes; copper earspools and worked bone pendants; and Iroquoian effigy pipes.
FEELING Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property’s historic character. For example, a rural historic district retaining original design, materials, workmanship, and setting will relate the feeling of agricultural life in the 19th century. A grouping of prehistoric petroglyphs, unmarred by graffiti and intrusions and located on its original isolated bluff, can evoke a sense of tribal spiritual life.
ASSOCIATION Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s historic character. For example, a Revolutionary War battlefield whose natural and manmade elements have remained intact since the 18th century will retain its quality of association with the battle.”
Recommended