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.”