The following responses proceed in the order of the questions in the
original application:

**[Prerequisite B, Owner Concurrence]{.underline}**

***The signature by Mr. Zander is not dated. Please provide a dated
signature page.***

A revised signature page is attached to this response.

**[Prerequisite C, Willingness to Discuss Protective
Measures]{.underline}**

***The statement added to the signature text by the owner of the Johnson
Wax building raises questions as to whether the owner is, in fact,
willing to enter into such discussions. If we are unable to hold such
discussions, this property may not be a viable component of the
application.***

The owner has indicated their intention to go forward with these
discussions and simply is reserving that right that each property owner
has to withdraw at a later date should they choose to do so.

**[Prerequisite G, Stakeholders]{.underline}**

***Please send a copy of the list of stakeholders in the original
application, annotated to indicate those from whom you have submitted
support letters since the original application was submitted, those who
have promised to send letters, those who have been contacted and have
not responded, and those, if any, who have not yet been contacted.***

The stakeholders supporting this nomination whose letters were not
included with the original application but are included with this
response are listed below.

**[Arizona]{.underline}**

State Senator Carolyn Allen

State Representative John Kavanagh

Mayor of Scottsdale Mary Manross

**[California]{.underline}**

Congressman Adam Schiff

State Senator Carole Migden

State Assemblymember Jared Huffman

Mayor of Pasadena Bill Bogaard

Mayor of San Rafael Albert Boro

Mayor of Los Angeles Antonio R. Villaraigosa

California Office of Historic Preservation

Marin County Civic Center Conservancy

**[Illinois]{.underline}**

Governor Rod Blagojevich

State Representative Barbara Flynn Currie

State Senator Don Harmon

State Representative Deborah Graham

**[New York]{.underline}**

Governor Eliot Spitzer

Lt. Governor David Paterson

US Senator Charles Schumer

New York City Landmarks Commission

**[Oklahoma]{.underline}**

Governor Brad Henry

Lt. Governor Jari Askins

US Senator James Inhofe

Congressman John Sullivan

State Senator John Ford

State Representative Steve Martin

Mayor of Bartlesville Ron Nikkel

Oklahoma Historical Society

Bartlesville Chamber of Commerce

C.J. Silas, Price Tower Arts Center Board of Trustees

**[Pennsylvania]{.underline}**

Lt. Governor Catherine Knoll

US Senator Robert Casey, Jr.

US Senator Arlen Specter

Congressman Bill Shuster

Congressman Jason Altmire

Congressman Phil English

Congressman John Murtha

State Senator Richard Kasunic

Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission

David DeLong, Emeritus Professor of Architecture, University of
Pennsylvania

**[Wisconsin]{.underline}**

Governor Jim Doyle

Lt. Governor Barbara Lawton

Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin

Congressman Paul Ryan

Congressman Ron Kind

State Representative Terese Berceau

State Senator John Lehman

State Representative Robert Turner

State Senator Dave Schultz

Mayor of Racine Gary Becker

Mayor of Madison Dave Cieslewicz

Town Board, Town of Wyoming

Village of Spring Green President, Greg Prem

Spring Green Chamber of Commerce

Wisconsin Historical Society

Taliesin Preservation, Inc.

The following stakeholders have been contacted. The sites and the
Conservancy are still pursuing the obtainment of support letters.

**[Arizona]{.underline}**

Governor Janet Napolitano

US Senator Jon Kyl

US Senator John McCain

Congressman Harry Mitchell

State Representative Michele Reagan

**[California]{.underline}**

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

Lt. Governor John Garamendi

US Senator Barbara Boxer

US Senator Dianne Feinstein

Congresswoman Diane Watson

Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey

State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas

State Assembly Member Kevin de Leon

State Senator Jack Scott

State Assembly Member Anthony Portantino

**[Illinois]{.underline}**

Lt. Governor Pat Quinn

US Senator Barack Obama

US Senator Richard Durbin

Congressman Bobby Rush

Congressman Danny Davis

State Senator Kwame Raoul

Mayor of Chicago Richard Daley

Chicago Alderman Leslie Hairston

Village Board of Trustees of Oak Park

Chicago Commission on Landmarks

Landmarks Illinois

Unity Temple Restoration Foundation

Illinois Historic Preservation Agency

**[New York]{.underline}**

US Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton

Congressman Jerrold Nadler

State Senator Jonathan Bing

State Assembly Member Liz Krueger

Mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg

New York State Historic Preservation Office

**[Oklahoma]{.underline}**

US Senator Tom Coburn

**[Pennsylvania]{.underline}**

Governor Edward Rendell

**[Wisconsin]{.underline}**

US Senator Russell Feingold

US Senator Herb Kohl

State Senator Fred Risser

State Representative Steve Hilenberg

Frank Lloyd Wright Wisconsin

Neither the 12 site administrators nor the Conservancy identified
stakeholders that would be opposed to the nomination of Wright sites to
the World Heritage list.

**[General]{.underline}**

***Please provide an explanation of how and why these 12 properties were
chosen from among all the nationally significant Frank Lloyd Wright
buildings. Although the second part(s) of the Description section does
give an indication of what each property exemplifies, an overall
explanation is needed. Please include the methodology (i.e., who was
included in the discussions, how the choice was made) as well as the
reasoning.***

The process of choosing the twelve buildings exemplifying Frank Lloyd
Wright's artistic genius and extraordinary contribution to modern
architecture and culture took place over a period of two years. The list
was compiled by a committee of leading Wright scholars and restoration
architects appointed by the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy. The
committee included Neil Levine, Emmet Blakeney Gleason Professor of
History of Art and Architecture, Harvard University, chair; David G. De
Long; Emeritus Professor of Architecture, University of Pennsylvania;
Jack Quinan, Professor of Art History, University of Buffalo (State
University of New York); and John G. Thorpe, A.I.A. Oak Park, Illinois,
restoration architect who has worked on some 60 Frank Lloyd Wright
buildings. Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, Director of Archives, Frank Lloyd
Wright Foundation, served as a consultant.

The committee began by looking broadly at the architect's entire oeuvre
and established a list of approximately sixty buildings considered
worthy of further study and discussion. That list was soon reduced to
about thirty buildings of which two-thirds comprised an A group and
one-third a B group. These buildings were located on a chronological
grid, defined by decade, in order to ensure that no works of
significance would be overlooked and that each work would be compared
with ones similar in kind. Applying criteria based on typological,
spatial, and structural innovation, historical significance and
influence, poetic expression, symbolic meaning, relationship to site,
and social value and purpose, the approximately twenty buildings of
group A were subjected to further scrutiny and ultimately reduced to a
list of twelve works that the committee believes represents the fullest
and most compelling achievement of Frank Lloyd Wright as an architect as
well as some of the greatest works of the art of architecture of the
twentieth century.

In its deliberations, the committee gave careful consideration to the
long and distinguished legacy of Wright scholarship while at the same
time taking into account the most recent research resulting from the
opening of the Frank Lloyd Wright Archives in the later 1980s, which has
clarified the sequence and dating of many of the architect's buildings
and in turn affected their interpretation. The committee did not allow
considerations of National Historic Landmark status nor requests for
inclusion by building owners to affect its decisions. The committee then
consulted with Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer; the list of buildings chosen by
the committee received his full support.

While there are many other Wright buildings that are nationally and
internationally recognized, the final list includes only those that the
committee members believe are truly and unequivocally of outstanding
universal value.

**[2.b. History and Development]{.underline}**

***Robie House: Please elaborate on the \"international protests\" of
its demolition and the \"international committee\" formed to raise
funds. Who was involved in these efforts, and what was the scope of the
international role?***

The Robie House was initially threatened in 1941 when the Chicago
Theological Seminary (CTS) decided to tear it down in favor of a new
building that would better suit their needs. CTS had owned and operated
the Robie House since 1926, using it primarily as a dormitory, a
function never intended by Frank Lloyd Wright. Several sources note that
Wright involved himself in saving the building at this time, and that
other leading international architects (including Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe, Ludwig Hilberseimer, and Walter Peterhans) and museum directors
rallied to keep the Robie House standing. A successful committee to
preserve the Robie House was led by Chicago area architect William F.
Deknatel. That same year, a round-table discussion group, led by
Henry-Russell Hitchcock and composed of prominent American professors
and curators of architecture, met to organize support for the
preservation of historic architectural monuments, noting the possible
demolition of the Robie house as a "catastrophe" and issuing a call to
action.

The proposed 1941 demolition was forestalled, possibly interrupted in
part by America's involvement in WWII and the resulting impact on the
availability of building materials. However, the perilous future of the
Robie House continued to evoke strong responses from well-known
academics, curators, and architects over the following years. In
correspondence to Chicago architect Alfred Shaw from 1951, architect and
curator Philip Johnson expressed his concern, as well as that of MoMA
Director of Collections Alfred Barr, over a rumor that CTS was again
attempting to destroy the Robie House.

In 1957, the Chicago Theological Seminary once more publicly proposed
tearing down the Robie House. Ironically, this news came on the tail of
the Robie House being recognized by an esteemed panel of architects in
*Architectural Record* as the most significant house of the previous
fifty years by an esteemed panel of architects. Upon learning of
then-CTS president McGiffert's plans to replace the Robie House with a
new dormitory, architects and Chicago aldermen alike were propelled to
action. These included G.E. Kidder-Smith, who sent out telegrams to
"important politicians, historians, college presidents, architects,
etc." to rally support, and Leon Despres, Hyde Park Alderman who
subsequently organized a committee on preserving historic architecture,
headed by chief officer of the Art Institute of Chicago, Daniel Catton
Rich. In a recent oral history Despres notes that Tom Stauffer, a
professor and architectural historian, was instrumental in rallying
support as well, as he "got architects in western Europe to telephone
and cable and write about what a terrible thing this was that Chicago
was destroying the Robie House." Again, Frank Lloyd Wright revisited the
Robie House in order to bring widespread attention to its fate and
several committees were formed to mobilize action. Again William
Deknatel became involved in committee work to save the Robie House, in
addition to the architectural historian William S. McDonald, who chaired
the newly formed Committee to Preserve the Robie House. An "alert
committee" was also formed as a joint effort between the AIA and the
Society of Architectural Historians with Earl H. Reed, chairman of the
AIA Committee for the Preservation of Historic Buildings, as head.
Additional action to save the Robie House from destruction came from
Charles Nitschke, architect and editor of the *Architectural Record*,
who encouraged a letter-writing campaign, and Vincent Scully's
architecture students at Yale, who also contributed to letter-writing
campaigns. William Hartmann, architect with Skidmore Owing and Merill,
worked with Deknatel and contacted I.M. Pei, who was working for Webb
and Knapp at the time. Ultimately, William Zeckendorf of Webb and Knapp
bought the Robie House in December, saving it from demolition.

In addition to being named the most significant house of the years
1907-1957 by *Architectural Record*, 1957 also saw the Robie House
designated as a landmark by the Chicago Commission of Architectural
Heritage and as the "House of the Century" by *House and Home* magazine.
On the heels of the Robie House being saved from imminent destruction,
its value in the context of American and international architecture was
reaffirmed by leading architects and writers, including poet Carl
Sandburg, whose "Ode to the Robie House" was published in the February
1959 issue of *Interiors*. In subsequent years, committee work
strengthened as efforts to preserve the building were put in place. The
Robie House Committee (later the Committee for the Preservation of Robie
House), chaired by Ira J. Bach, Chicago City Planning Commissioner, was
organized in late 1962 and included a long list of notable Chicagoans
and influential international architects and academics such as: Sigfried
Giedion, Bertrand Goldberg, Walter Gropius, Edgar Kaufmann, Jr., Lewis
Mumford, Mies van der Rohe, and William Wurster.

**[2.c. Boundary]{.underline}**

***It appears that each property is proposed with the boundaries the
same as its National Historic Landmark (NHL) boundary. However, for some
of the properties, particularly Taliesin in Wisconsin, the Marin County
Civic Center, and the Guggenheim Museum, it might be worthwhile to
consider whether the NHL boundary includes features not critical to the
universal values, and which could form part of a buffer zone. An
absolute determination is not necessary at this time, but please
consider and discuss to the extent possible. The Guggenheim has not yet
been through a complete NHL review, so we do not have a clear sense
about the impact of the addition.***

The Conservancy will conduct a thorough review of each site with the
respective property owner(s) to determine the boundaries and whether
certain buildings/features should be excluded and considered part of the
buffer zone.

***More discussion is needed on the evolution of the Marin County Civic
Center and the addition to the Guggenheim Museum and how they affect
integrity / authenticity (Question 3.d.).***

[Marin County Civic Center]{.underline}

The idea of Wright as the architect for the Marin County project only
came up at the end of the county's interview process. Moreover, Wright
agreed to be interviewed by the committee only after he was assured the
formal interview process had concluded. They met in late April 1957.

Although published accounts vary, according to Neil Levine in his
comprehensive *The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright*, Wright returned
to San Francisco in late July of 1957 to sign the contract and see the
site for the first time. Several months were spent analyzing space needs
and the program, a process in which former apprentice Aaron Green was
significantly involved. Sketch plans for the project were generally
complete by late December. Preliminary plans as well as a site master
plan were presented to the Board of Supervisors on March 25, 1958 and
approved a month later. In the early fall a model and detailed drawings
of all of the proposed buildings and supporting facilities were
complete. When Wright died in April 1959 only the working drawings
remained to be completed. Construction of the first phase commenced in
February 1960. Two and one half years later the Administration was
complete and the second phase, which included the Hall of Justice, was
started in May 1966 and completed in January 1970.

[Guggenheim Museum]{.underline}

No, the Conservancy does not feel the 1992 Gwathmey Siegel addition
compromises the Wright design to the extent that it should not be
included in this nomination. It is true the original Gwathmey Siegel
plan for the Guggenheim addition was criticized for being cantilevered
too far forward and for challenging rather than supporting the Wright
structure. However, the firm dramatically scaled down its building
program in response to the criticism and the design was approved through
rigorous review by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission.
While not ideal, it is nevertheless a relatively sensitive discreet
addition derived from a buffer tower proposed by Wright in 1951. The
addition does not compete with or diminish the impact of the original
structure; the interior rotunda and the views from up and down Fifth
Avenue retain their historic integrity.

***The mention of the second floor of Hollyhock House that was completed
by Rudolph Schindler is confusing and needs to be better explained. On
page 24, the Schindler Terrace is a contributing resource for the NHL
designation. Was the decision made to omit the feature in the WH
application because it is a joint work with Schindler or because of its
present state of preservation following the Northridge Earthquake?***

According to Kathryn Smith, *Frank Lloyd Wright, Hollyhock House, and
Olive Hill* (1992), the second floor bedrooms were left incomplete
during Wright\'s time as architect and were only completed c. 1925 by
Schindler (p. 194). It is unclear whether this includes things like the
fireplace or not. As for the Little Dipper: the foundations were begun
under Wright in 1923 but work was abandoned after only some of the
foundation walls were completed. In 1925, Schindler and Neutra
redesigned the plan completely, but used the existing foundation walls
to create a wading pool and pergola (very different from what Wright
intended) (also p. 194). Therefore, it was the Conservancy's decision to
omit the terrace from its application.

**[3.a. Criteria]{.underline}**

***Criterion i: We question the statement that Wright's use of the
cantilever is \"unprecedented.\" At the least, this statement should be
based on specific references.***

This is a misreading of the text. The sentence reads.*" The use of the
cantilever **to create dramatic spatial effects was unprecedented**,
resulting in the dramatic imagery of the Robie House, Fallingwater, the
Guggenheim Museum, and the Marin County Civic Center."* To be sure, the
use of the cantilever was not unprecedented, however, we standby the
assertion that the use of the cantilever to create dramatic spatial
effects both to the extent and as early as Wright did, was indeed
unprecedented.

***The current text under Criterion i and under the "proposed statement
of outstanding universal value" could be applicable to many of Wright's
buildings, not just the 12 included in this application. The addition of
the general statement requested above may help with this.***

**[3.b and c. Outstanding Universal Value and Comparison]{.underline}**

***In addition to the general statements regarding the body of Wright's
work, it would be useful to add to the comparison specific buildings by
other architects, as well as by Wright (in reference to the General
comment) that could be compared to the 12 buildings presented here in
terms of relative significance.***

In response to this question, we will deal with each of the twelve Frank
Lloyd Wright properties in chronological order. We will first compare
the Wright building with others by the same architect that are similar
in date, type, or other important characteristics but were thought to be
less significant in overall terms of quality or value. We will then note
buildings by other architects to which the Wright design might
fruitfully be compared.

*Unity Temple* (1905-08) is the earliest of Wright's buildings included
in our nomination. The only other comparable built design by Wright of
the period, which is to say, a building intended for public use and of a
scale beyond that of a private house, is the Larkin Building in Buffalo,
New York (1903-06). Unfortunately, it was demolished in 1950. Had that
not been the case, Unity Temple would certainly still have been
nominated based on its innovative development of architectural space,
its abstract expression of religious purpose, and its progressive use of
materials. One can point to parts of earlier Wright buildings, such as
the two-story studio added to his Oak Park House in 1897-98 and the
double-height Assembly Hall at the Hillside Home School (1901-03) as
precedents for the main auditorium of Unity Temple, although neither of
these stands on its own as a design equal to the later structure.

A number of buildings both in the United States and in Europe deserve
mention alongside Unity Temple. First and foremost, perhaps, is the
Secession Art Gallery in Vienna by Joseph Maria Olbrich (1897-98), which
is often thought to have influenced Wright despite the fact that the
latter's own Oak Park studio was exactly contemporary with the Viennese
building. Both the Secession Gallery and Unity Temple share a geometric
abstraction of form and a conventionalization of decoration, although
the Wright building has a much more spatially developed and integrated
plan. As a religious structure based on a modified Greek cross plan,
Unity Temple can be related to McKim, Mead and White's Madison Square
Presbyterian Church in New York (1903-06), Otto Wagner's Church of St.
Leopold, Am Steinhof, Vienna (1905-07), and Bernard Maybeck's First
Church of Christ Scientist, Berkeley, California (1910), although all
three of the latter designs are much more eclectic in form and
inspiration. From the point of view of the use of the new material of
reinforced concrete, one can point to Anatole de Baudot's Church of St.
Jean de Montmartre, Paris (1897-1905) as well as Auguste Perret's Garage
Ponthieu (1905) and Théâtre des Champs-Elysées (1911 - 13), both also in
Paris, all three of which, however, use concrete in a more traditional
manner of framing. Echoes of Unity Temple can be seen in the later First
Unitarian Church in Rochester, New York, by Louis Kahn (1959-63) and in
Jørn Utzon's Bagsvaerd Church, Copenhagen (1976). A contemporaneous
parallel to Unity Temple's use of abstract geometry to articulate
interior space is evident in Charles Rennie Mackintosh's slightly later
library addition to the Glasgow School of Art (1907-09).

The *Robie House* (1908-10) is the culmination of a series of
residential designs by Wright that begins with the Winslow House in
River Forest, Illinois (1893-94) and includes the Heller House, Chicago
(1896-97), Dana House, Springfield, Illinois (1902-04), Willits House,
Highland Park, IL (1902-03), Martin House, Buffalo, New York (1903-06),
Cheney House, Oak Park, Illinois (1903-04), and Coonley House,
Riverside, Illinois (1906-09). None of these earlier buildings, however,
achieves the same degree of formal integrity or expressive power as the
Robie House, which for almost a century has been seen as the icon of
Wright's concept of the precedent-setting, early modern Prairie House.
Moreover, it is difficult to find examples of other architects' work
comparable to it. Wright's mentor Louis Sullivan's Bradley House,
Madison, WI (1908-09), Marion Mahony and Walter Burley Griffin's R.
Mueller House, Decatur, Illinois (1910-12), and Purcell, Feick and
Elmslie's Bradley House, Woods Hole, Massachusetts (1911-12), are all
good examples of the spread of the so-called Prairie Style. A comparable
search for a new residential form, with much more overt reference to
traditional Japanese construction, can be seen in the Gamble House,
Pasadena, California (1908) by Charles and Henry Greene.

There is little in the way of residential architecture in Europe that
truly parallels the Robie House. Works in the Arts and Crafts manner
like C. F. Voysey's Broadleys, Lake Windermere, England (1898-1900) show
certain tendencies toward simplification of form and elimination of
historic ornamentation that predict Wright's achievement. Mackintosh's
Hill House, Helensburgh, Scotland (1903), while traditional in its
exterior massing, utilizes geometrical motifs to give a sense of
openness to its interior space. And Adolf Loos's Steiner House, Vienna
(1910), although entirely different from the Robie House in terms of
materials and general composition, seems equally to point the way toward
certain tendencies in modern architecture of the 1920s.

No doubt in large part due to its very personal meaning for Wright,
*Taliesin* (begun 1911) has few if any immediate parallels in the
architect's other work of the period, much of which tends toward the
formal and symmetrical in contrast to the naturalism of his Wisconsin
house. Of extant structures, only the Allen House in Wichita, Kansas
(1917), can be compared with Taliesin, at least at the level of
planning. A similar uniqueness is evident when one looks beyond Wright's
work to that of others. Eliel and Loja Saarinen's country house and
studio, Hvitträsk, Lake Vitträsk, Finland (1901-23), though comparable
in terms of its rural setting and casual planning, is folkloric and
eclectic in its forms. On the other hand, if one considers Taliesin's
later role as the central focus of Wright's teaching establishment known
from 1932 on as the Taliesin Fellowship, both Walter Gropius's Bauhaus,
Dessau, Germany (1924-26), and the Saarinens' Cranbrook School and
Academy of Art, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan (begun 1925-27), can be
viewed as institutional, if not strictly architectural, parallels.

*Hollyhock House* (1919-21) is another of Wright's creations that is
highly unusual. Its formal planning and layered composition can be
compared with the architect's earlier Midway Gardens, Chicago (1913-14)
and Imperial Hotel, Tokyo (1913-22), both of which have been destroyed.
Its use of Precolumbian Amerindian forms can be seen in the architect's
nearly contemporaneous German Warehouse, Richland Center, Wisconsin
(1916-21). And its emphasis on regional adaptation to Southern
California finds a close parallel in Irving Gill's work of the period,
especially his Clarke House, Santa Fe Springs, California (1919-21),
planned like Hollyhock House around an enclosed central patio court.
Gill's earlier work in a kind of modernized Spanish Mission style is
most prominently displayed in his Bishop's School, La Jolla, California
(1910-16). Perhaps because of its regionalistic focus, it is difficult
to think of a work comparable to Hollyhock House in European
architecture of the period. On the other hand, the continuous roof
garden circuit of the structure certainly predicts Le Corbusier's use of
the idea in his canonic Villa Savoye, Poissy, France (1928-30). What
remains apart from most other work and very special to Hollyhock House,
however, was its architect's ability to impart a romantic, poetic
quality to a quintessentially modern design.

The *Millard House* (1923-24) is one of a group of concrete block houses
Wright built in the Los Angeles area between 1923 and 1925. These
include the Storer (1923-24), Freeman (1924-25), and Ennis (1924-25)
Houses, all in the city of Los Angeles. The Millard House, in Pasadena,
is the first of the group, the prototype, if you will, as well as the
most historically important and beautifully related to its landscape
setting of the four. In addition it is the best preserved and least
altered of the four houses.

The Millard House shares with a number of works by Irving Gill, for whom
Wright's son Lloyd had worked, and by Rudolf Schindler, who worked under
Wright on Hollyhock House, an interest in extending the possibilities
for the use of reinforced concrete. Gill's Banning House in Los Angeles
(1911-13; destroyed) and Women's Club, La Jolla (1912-14) employed a
"tilt-slab" method of construction that Schindler adapted for his King's
Road House in Los Angeles (1921-22). Schindler went on to employ a more
conventional reinforced concrete frame structure for his Lovell Beach
House, Newport Beach, California (1925-26). Wright's Millard House, by
contrast, experimented with a novel use of relatively thin concrete
blocks interwoven with steel rods to create a textile-like shell
enclosing the interior volumes.

The Millard House was early on compared with Le Corbusier's Citrohan
House project (1922) by Henry-Russell Hitchcock. By virtue of its cubic
form as well as its experimentation with a standardized method of
construction using ideally prefabricated elements, the Wright house can
be related to Le Corbusier's La Roche/Jeanneret Houses, Paris (1923-25),
and Stein/de Monzie House, Garches, France (1927-28). It can also be
related to Gerrit Rietveld and Truus Schröder's coeval Schröder House,
Utrecht, Netherlands (1923-24), despite the obvious differences between
the integral decoration of its concrete blocks and the de Stijl
character of the Schröder House's geometric planes of primary colors.

*Fallingwater* (1934-39, including carport and guest house) is another
of Wright's works that remains nearly without peer. Its integral
relationship with its landscape setting and its use of roughly laid
stone for its vertical walls recalls Taliesin, a reference that was no
doubt intentional on the architect's part. A more distant precedent for
Fallingwater's incorporation of moving water can be seen in Wright's
project for House C for the Doheny Ranch Development, Los Angeles
(1923). However, no other Wright structure from the later 1920s or early
1930s prepares one for Fallingwater.

In representing a move on the architect's part toward the more planar
and purist forms of the so-called International Style that had evolved
during the mid- to later 1920s, Fallingwater can be fruitfully compared
to such prominent examples of that movement as Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe's Tugendhat House, Brno, Czech Republic (1928-30), Le Corbusier's
Villa Savoye (1928-30), and Wright's former employee Richard Neutra's
Lovell "Health" House, Los Angeles (1928-29). In terms of its dramatic
use of cantilevering, Fallingwater should be related to Hans Scharoun's
Schminke House, Lobau, Germany (1932-33), just as its use of rough
masonry in a modern context should be compared to Le Corbusier's similar
experiments at the De Mandrot House, Le Pradet, France (1930-31), and
Villa Le Sextant, La Palmyre-les-Mathes, France (1935). Slightly later
houses that can be compared with Fallingwater on the basis of an
intimate or dramatic connection to the natural conditions of the site
should include Alvar Aalto's Villa Mairea, Noormarkku, Finland
(1938-39), and George Howe's Fortune Rock (Fargo House), Mount Desert
Is., Maine (1937-39). Among Wright's own works that pick up ideas from
Fallingwater are the Pew House, Shorewood Hills, Wisconsin (1938-40),
Sturges House, Brentwood Heights, California (1939-40), and Affleck
House, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan (1941).

In contradistinction to Fallingwater, a one of a kind design for a very
wealthy client, the *Jacobs House* (1936-37) was built with the express
intention of providing a model typological solution for a moderate cost
residence for a family of modest means. And it was entirely successful
in that effort, thus resulting in a series of commissions over the
following years in which Wright essentially adapted the so-called
Usonian system to different sites, climates, and family needs. While
there are many excellent houses that issued from this extraordinary
invention, the Jacobs House remains the primary and exemplary one in all
regards and has consistently been referenced by historians, critics and
architects as such. Still, one should mention just a few of the other
Wright Usonian designs of note. These include the Hanna House, Palo
Alto, California (1936-37), Goetsch-Winckler House, Okemos, Michigan
(1939-40), Lewis House, Libertyville, Illinois (1939), and Baird House,
Amherst, Massachusetts (1940). In addition, it is important to point to
the Willey House, Minneapolis, Minnesota (1932-34), as a precursor of
the Usonian design of the Jacobs House, predicting a number of its
critical features.

Wright was not alone in the United States in developing a modern house
for a middle-class clientele, although he was clearly at the forefront
of the movement and perhaps more rigorous than most in creating a
repeatable system of construction and design elements. Other architects,
often influenced by Wright, whose work can be compared with his in this
regard include William Wurster, Harwell Hamilton Harris, Bruce Goff, and
Richard Neutra. In the post-World War II era, the concept became much
more widespread as both Wright and other modern architects expanded
their residential practices well beyond what had been thought possible
prior to 1945. In Europe, however, the idea of an architect devoting
him- or herself to the creation a freestanding, single-family house type
for a client of modest means in the decades both before and after World
War II was almost unheard-of. Architects like Le Corbusier, Gropius,
Scharoun, Mart Stam, Werner Moser, and others focused on social housing
in large apartment blocks or planned estates. It was only after the war,
and very often still only in the United States, that people like Gropius
and Marcel Breuer were able to devote themselves to some degree to the
kind of problem to which Wright offered a very early and powerful
solution in the Jacobs House.

The *Johnson Wax Company* headquarters (1936-39; 1943-50), designed at
the same time as the Jacobs House, could not be more different in terms
of program, scale, or structural characteristics. As a corporate
headquarters for a major company, it represents one of Wright\'s few
buildings in the area of commercial architecture and has no real
analogue in his work other than the much earlier and no longer extant
Larkin Building. It is not only incomparable in this regard; it is also
quite unique in its form, materials, structure, space, and accommodation
to programmatic requirements. It gave a new face and meaning-what
Sigfried Giedion described at the time as a form of \"luxury\"-to the
corporate place of business. Being outside an urban center, it eschewed
the typical skyscraper formula for corporate headquarters prior to World
War II; and being entirely dedicated to administrative (and later
research) purposes, the Johnson Wax building bears very little
relationship in terms of program to such facilities as the earlier Van
Nelle Chocolate Factory, Rotterdam (1927-30), by J. A. Brinkman and L.
C. van der Vlugt, with Mart Stam, or the many factory/office complexes
designed in the 1930s by Albert Kahn, such as his Burroughs Adding
Machine Company, Plymouth, Michigan (1936) and Glenn L. Martin Aircraft
Plant, Middle River, Maryland (1937). It would be more fruitful to look
for parallels to Wright\'s achievement in the Johnson Wax Company
headquarters in the post-World War II era, when corporations moved to
the suburbs and built campuses like Eero Saarinen\'s General Motors
Technical Center, Warren Michigan (1949-55), and Skidmore, Owings &
Merrill\'s Connecticut General Insurance Company, Bloomfield,
Connecticut (1955-57).

*Taliesin West* (begun 1938) is, like the earlier Taliesin, a complex of
a very special sort, created for the architect's own personal needs and
according to a program written entirely by himself. Built in the desert
on what was then unincorporated land well beyond any urban development,
the plan as well as the materials and methods of construction were
worked out directly in relation to site conditions with a result that
was, and still is, startlingly original. The only real precedent for the
design in Wright's work was the temporary desert camp the architect
built for himself and his staff at the foot of the South Phoenix
Mountains in 1929 to serve as a base for working on the short-lived San
Marcos in the Desert Hotel project. Named Ocatilla, the camp disappeared
after just a few years of existence.

Wright reused the structural walling system of "desert rubble stone"
developed for Taliesin West in a number of subsequent residential
designs, the first and most notable of which was the Pauson House,
Phoenix, Arizona (1939-41), destroyed in a fire in 1942. The diagonal
planning technique used at Taliesin West was adapted for the campus plan
of Florida Southern College, Lakeland, Florida (begun 1938). Comparable
to Taliesin West on a programmatic level, the Florida campus never
achieved the same coherence as a total design nor did its individual
buildings, which suffered significantly from problems in construction
funding, ever command the national and international acclaim that almost
immediately accrued to Taliesin West.

Few building complexes can be cited as comparable to Taliesin West
either in the national or international arenas. The one that immediately
comes to mind is the campus for the Illinois (originally Armour)
Institute of Technology, Chicago (begun 1939-42) by Mies van der Rohe.
Different in almost every significant way from Taliesin West, it stands
as an urban, high tech, almost classical alternative to Wright's
exurban, extremely low tech, asymmetrical design. At the other extreme
from IIT is Wright's former student Paolo Soleri's Arcosanti, Cordes
Junction, Arizona (begun 1970), still in the process of being built as a
utopian community in the desert north of Taliesin West and in part based
on the model of Wright's fellowship ideal.

The *Guggenheim Museum* (1943-59) was, like the Johnson Wax Company
headquarters, an unusual commission for Wright, in this case being for a
major national and international cultural institution in the nation's
largest city and in one of the most prominent locations in one of the
most elegant sections of that city. Aside from the much earlier Imperial
Hotel, no commission of this significance had come Wright's way before.
And Wright rose to the occasion with a design whose originality and
influence is still apparent and being felt today. Other important
commissions for public buildings followed, such as the First Unitarian
Church, Shorewood Hills, Wisconsin (1946-52), and Beth Sholom Synagogue,
Elkins Park, Pennsylvania (1953-59), but none of the resulting designs
can be said to rank with the Guggenheim in terms of outstanding
universal value.

One of the most unusual aspects of the Guggenheim, its circular plan and
shape, was predicted in the Johnson Wax headquarters as well as in the
Roux Library built at Florida Southern College in 1941. Wright went on
to use the circular plan in a number of residences, the first and most
notable of which was the (second) Jacobs House, Middleton, Wisconsin
(1943-48). He also got to build the Morris Shop, San Francisco (1948-49)
using the interior spiral ramp of the museum during the period the
museum plans were on hold. At the time, the Morris Shop received great
publicity, but as soon as the Guggenheim was constructed, the store's
celebrity and historical significance understandably waned. Compared to
its parent, it was in effect a small child. Wright also adapted the
spiral plan for the house for one of his sons, David Wright, Phoenix,
Arizona (1950).

In comparing the Guggenheim Museum to the work of other architects,
there are two levels on which this can be done---the first is that of
program, i.e., the reconceptualization of the museum for the display of
modern art; and the second that of form, i.e., the building as a kind of
free-form sculptural object in itself. Both of these issues became
important to architects in the 1950s, and the Guggenheim therefore
stands as an early stage in these developments, notwithstanding the fact
that New York's Museum of Modern Art, by Philip Goodwin and Edward
Durrell Stone (1938-39), one of the first museums devoted exclusively to
modern art, preceded it by a few years. Le Corbusier built three museums
in the 1950s and 60s, the Museum of the City, Ahmedabad, India
(1952-58); the National Museum of Western Art, Tokyo (1956-59); and the
Museum of Chandigarh, India (1962-68). All are based on a square spiral
plan that goes back to a project for a Museum of Unlimited Growth,
Philippeville, Algeria (1939), and ultimately to a project for a Museum
of World Culture, Geneva (1928-29). In its later iterations, the plan
was intended to allow for growth and expansion outward and, unlike
Wright's Guggenheim, did not impact the pattern of circulation or have
any significant effect on modes of display, which remained fairly
conventional.

Wright's spiral Guggenheim likewise had a long prehistory in his own
work, going back to his 1924-25 project for the Strong Automobile
Objective and Planetarium, near Dickerson, Maryland (1924-25). In
Wright's case, by contrast, the spiral was always instrumental in
determining circulation as well as display techniques. A different
approach to the question of designing the modern museum was taken by
Mies van der Rohe, whose Cullinan Hall addition to the Museum of Fine
Arts, Houston (1954-58), followed by his New National Gallery of Art,
Berlin (1962-68), established the type of a universal space in which
paintings were hung on white walls or on freestanding, sometimes
floating, panels. The Guggenheim proposed a clear alternative, placing
the works of art in isolated niche-like settings along a prescribed,
sequential path of movement.

Perhaps most important about the Guggenheim is the fact that it defined
the modern museum as a place of sociability, cultural tourism, even
entertainment, and did this in large part through its original, iconic
sculptural form executed in poured reinforced concrete. In this regard,
it was part of a larger movement in American and European architecture
of the period, prominent examples of which include Oscar Niemeyer's
Chapel of St. Francis of Assisi, Pampulha, Brazil (1943-46), Le
Corbusier's Chapel of Notre-Dame-du-Haut, Ronchamp, France (1950-55),
Eero Saarinen's TWA Terminal, JFK Airport, New York (1956-62), and Jørn
Utzon's Opera House, Sydney, Australia (1955-73). The modern museum as
cultural landmark and tourist destination point continues to show an
indebtedness to Wright's work in such recent buildings as Frank Gehry's
Bilbao Guggenheim, Bilbao, Spain (1991-97).

The *Price Tower* (1952-56) was Wright's only design for a freestanding
skyscraper that got built. Following a principle he developed in the
late 1920s that countered the typical orthogonal structural frame, be it
steel or concrete, with a central mast from which the floors were
cantilevered, the Price Tower occupies a special place in the
all-important history of this American contribution to modern building
types. Wright's earliest ventures in the field followed essentially from
his mentor Louis Sullivan's ideas about treating the structural frame as
a form-determining factor. A clear line can be drawn from Sullivan's
Wainwright Building, St. Louis (1890-91), to Wright's projects for the
San Francisco Call Building (1913) and the National Life Insurance
Company Building, Chicago (1924-25). The reorientation of Wright's
thinking occurred with the St. Mark's-in-the-Bouwerie Towers project,
New York (1928-30), where the central mast idea was first proposed.
Projects for Chicago and Washington, DC, followed this but never got off
the drawing boards. The Johnson Wax Research Tower, which was added to
the original administration building complex in 1947-50, differed from
the earlier St. Mark's and later Price Tower in using the circular
module of the existing structure. In his adaptation of the original
geometry of the New York design to its site and program in Oklahoma,
Wright made a significant and forward-looking change in turning the
building into a mixed-use structure, combining duplex apartments with
single-story commercial space and altering the exterior treatment to
reveal these functional shifts.

The Price Tower came at a moment when modern architects were beginning
to dominate the field of commercial design for the first time. There are
therefore many important structures that one could compare with it,
although few are as unusual. Among the many significant skyscrapers in
the immediate post-World War II period are Pietro Belluschi's Equitable
Building, Portland, Oregon (1948), Skidmore, Owings & Merrill's Lever
House, New York (1950-52), I. M. Pei's Mile-High Center, Denver,
Colorado (1954-55), Mies van der Rohe and Philip Johnson's Seagram
Building, New York (1954-58), L. Belgiojoso, E. Peressuti and E.
Rogers's Torre Velasca, Milan (1956-57), and Hentrich & Petschnigg
Phoenix-Reinohr Office Tower, Dusseldorf (1957-60). While the BPR
Velasca Tower departed from the typical glass box of the period, one has
to turn to Bertrand Goldberg's Marina City, Chicago (1964-67) to find a
design that truly resembles the Wrightian prototype in structural and
organic terms.

The *Marin County Civic Center* (1957-70) was Wright's last major design
and only government commission to get built. As a structure conceived in
direct relationship to the automobile and highway and employing a
central skylit mall to organize the flow of interior space, the Marin
County Civic Center is as extraordinary and path-breaking a design as
Wright ever created. None of the architect's later work, be it the Beth
Sholom Synagogue, the Annunciation Greek Orthodox Church, Wauwatosa,
Wisconsin (1955-61), or the many houses he did in the 1950s compares
with the civic center in importance or quality. It is indeed rare,
except for certain suburban corporate headquarters, to find any
buildings of the period that relate to the natural and man-made
landscapes as Marin County does.

Among the buildings of a comparable program and symbolic aspiration to
which the Marin County Civic Center might be related are Le Corbusier's
Palace of Justice and Palace of Assembly, Chandigarh (1951-55; 1951-62),
his Maison de Culture et de la Jeunesse, Firminy-Vert, France,
(1959-65), and Oscar Niemeyer's various government buildings along the
Monumental Axis and around the Plaza of the Three Powers in Brasilia
(1956-60). Finally, one could add to this list Alvar Aalto's Civic
Center, Seinäjoki, Finland (1958-87).

**[4.a. State of Preservation]{.underline}**

***Regarding planned repairs that are noted, the funding situation to
accomplish them should be** **indicated.***

[Unity Temple]{.underline}

The Master Restoration Plan for Unity Temple, completed this year, calls
for major interior and exterior work. The concrete structure will be
repaired, helping to secure the long-term future of the building
envelope. A "green" geothermal heating, cooling, and ventilating system
will be installed to replace the existing inefficient system. Art glass
will be restored and interior surfaces will be systematically returned
to their original condition in accordance with an accurate analysis of
paint colors and finishes.

Funding was received from Landmarks Illinois for the completion of the
Master Restoration Plan. The State of Illinois Department of Commerce
and Economic Opportunity funded a \$1 million project in 2001 to repair
and replace the deteriorated concrete eaves, and has provided major
funding for the completion of construction drawings for the geothermal
system. The National Trust for Historic Preservation recently approved
funding for the restoration of interior surfaces. To date, Unity Temple
Restoration Foundation has raised more than \$3.3 million to complete
projects throughout the building and will embark on a capital campaign
in the near future.

[Frederick C. Robie House]{.underline}

The exterior work described in the initial application is being
completed this year.

The forthcoming repair projects will focus on the interior restoration
of the house. The dining room prow has been restored as a model for the
remaining interior restoration work. The Frank Lloyd Wright Preservation
Trust is in the midst of a capital campaign to raise \$4 million to
complete the restoration. Sources of major funding for completed
projects have included grants from the National Park Service, the
National Trust for Historic Preservation, the State of Illinois, the
Pritzker Foundation, and contributions by members and friends of the
Frank Lloyd Wright Preservation Trust. Proceeds from membership fees,
tours, bookshop sales and educational programs also support the
restoration. To date, \$4 million has been raised and successfully
spent.

[Taliesin]{.underline}

The restoration and management plan will be completed by the end of
2007. In preparation for this, a funding council and public relations
council have been hired to complete and expedite the feasibility study
for the upcoming capital campaign which Taliesin Preservation, Inc.
(TPI) and the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation will embark upon within nine
to 12 months. TPI has a successful track record of obtaining funds to
complete projects at Taliesin. (Please refer to page 40 in the original
application for a detailed list of projects completed by TPI.) Most
recently, TPI was successful in raising \$1.14 million in private
funding to match a Save America's Treasures grant. The \$2.8 million
project was completed in June 2005.

[Hollyhock House]{.underline}

The city has applied for a Proposition 40 grant for \$2.5 million of the
\$5 million cost for the restoration and seismic retrofitting of
Hollyhock House. The Los Angeles City Council President and the Mayor of
Los Angeles prioritized the city's grant requests and has made the
restoration/retrofitting of Hollyhock House the city's number one
funding priority. The remaining \$2.5 million will be matched by seismic
bond funds which are already allocated to Hollyhock House.

The \$75,000 funding needed for the Historic Structures Report for
Residence "A" has been obtained through the City of Los Angeles
Community Redevelopment Agency. The money should be available August
2007; the report will be completed by April 2008.

Successful 2007 fundraising efforts include: a \$250,000 west lawn
restoration, a private donation of three rugs (dining room and two for
the porch) representing an approximated \$20,000 donation, and \$2,500
for interior interpretation.

[S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Administration Building and Research
Tower]{.underline}

All maintenance and upgrades mentioned for the S.C. Johnson buildings
are fully funded within the company's annual budget.

[Taliesin West]{.underline}

As mentioned earlier under Taliesin, in preparation for an upcoming
capital campaign, the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation hired a fundraising
council and public relations council in August 2006 to conduct a
feasibility study; the study should be concluded by the end of 2007. The
Foundation also created a new position in 2007: Vice President/Campus
Planning, Restoration, and Development. This position will manage the
development and execution of a master plan for restoring and managing
the buildings, land, and infrastructure of both Taliesin and Taliesin
West. Potential candidates are being interviewed now; the position
should be filled by August 2007.

Recent fundraising efforts at Taliesin West include: an Arizona State
Parks Grant for \$53,100, of which private funds matched this grant to
bring the total funds raised to \$100,000 for the restoration of the
drafting studio; a City of Scottsdale grant of \$500,000 for the
restoration of Wright's living quarters and a Save America's Treasures
grant.

[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]{.underline}

Funds for the restoration have been raised; the preservation work is
currently underway and expected to be complete in late 2007.

**[4.b. Factors Affecting the Property]{.underline}**

***Robie House: Is there any potential development related to the
seminary site north of the building?***

The seminary is retaining the existing apartment building and is in the
process of developing the building into a conference center. The
seminary has also agreed to retain the existing green space between the
two buildings.

***Price Tower: What is the current status of the plans discussed
earlier for a major addition?***

Only schematic drawings were ever developed; no contractual agreement
has been established with Zaha Hadid Architects. The plans have been
tabled but may be revisited in the future.

**[5.a. Ownership]{.underline}**

***Guggenheim Museum: is the owner the Foundation (as listed) or the
Museum (signator)?***

The Foundation is the owner. However, the Museum Director does have the
authority to sign on the Foundation's behalf. The amended signature page
with this statement is included in this response.

***The question on public vs. private organizations as owners may have
been misinterpreted. For example, the foundations are likely to be
private organizations, as may also be the case with the University of
Chicago. The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, however, may be a public
entity. Please clarify in each case.***

[Unity Temple]{.underline}

Unity Temple Unitarian Universalist Congregation -- Private Non-Profit

[Frederick C. Robie House]{.underline}

University of Chicago -- Private Non-Profit

[Taliesin]{.underline}

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation -- Private Non-Profit

[Hollyhock House]{.underline}

City of Los Angeles -- Government Owned

[Alice Millard House]{.underline}

David Zander -- Private

[Fallingwater]{.underline}

Western Pennsylvania Conservancy -- Private Non-Profit

[Herbert and Katherine Jacobs House]{.underline}

James M. Dennis -- Private

[S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Administration Building and Research
Tower]{.underline}

S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. -- Private Corporation

[Taliesin West]{.underline}

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation -- Private Non-Profit

[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]{.underline}

Solomon R Guggenheim Foundation -- Private Non-Profit

[The Price Tower]{.underline}

Price Tower Arts Center -- Private Non-Profit

[Marin County Civic Center]{.underline}

Marin County Board of Supervisors -- Government Owned