Request for Information #2

Answer: Historic New England (HNE) staff and their consultant gave a brief overview of the property’s history, pointed out some key site characteristics such as the area around the garage and the view shed to house, and answered some questions which are noted below. A tour of Gropius House was then offered, and participants could explore the property as needed.

Answer: The existing visitor center is constructed as a “box within a box”: a freestanding, self-supporting structure that does not impact or alter the original garage. The historic garage remains intact as built, with California redwood clapboard over framing, and the exterior clapboard exposed on the interior face. The original roll-up garage doors remain operable and are lowered daily when the visitor center is closed.

Answer: Yes. Questions asked during the walkthrough are included within this RFI response or were already answered in RFI response #1.

Answer: The walkthrough did not include any areas that are not normally accessible during a standard tour of the property. The site walk focused primarily on the area surrounding the garage, and the main house portion of the tour was consistent with what is typically available during regular open hours. At this time, no additional walkthroughs are planned, but respondents may tour the property during normal open hours. Virtual tours are also available at the resources section of www.gropiuscompetition.info.

Answer: At this time, the sign-in sheet will not be shared. It was collected solely for internal competition administration purposes and will not be used going forward.

Answer: There was some confusion about the site walk date. RFI Response #1, which included clarification regarding the site walk date, was distributed via email to all individuals who had registered for the competition or submitted RFIs by December 19th. The response was also posted publicly on the competition landing page at www.gropiuscompetition.info. Individuals who had not registered or submitted RFIs by that date would not have received the email notification and would have needed to refer to the website for updates.

Answer: There is no setback requirement from the easement path. See RFI Response #1 document regarding property line setbacks.

Answer: The competition is focused on the design of a new restroom building and visitor center (if applicable). While teams may include limited supplemental site or landscape concepts as they relate directly to the proposed building, broader exploration of site circulation, particularly at the outer limits of the property, is not within the scope of the competition and is discouraged.

Answer: The 24’-6” radius circle is intended to be diagrammatic rather than prescriptive, and the competition area is generally flexible. Proposals are encouraged to locate the building in the general vicinity of the existing garage, either extending partially up the driveway toward the house, toward the street, or to the rear of the garage, all on the east side of the driveway. While alternative siting ideas located closer to the house or west of the driveway may be explored, these areas of the property are especially sensitive, and placement outside the general area near the garage is discouraged.

Answer: The competition radius is flexible. See question #9.

Answer: While inventive proposals that carefully respect key views from the street to the house may be considered, construction on the west side of the driveway, opposite the existing garage, is generally discouraged.

Answer: The provided site section is a guideline to be used, but it can be edited as needed by respondents to convey design intent and for graphic consistency.

Answer: For garage dimensions see the PDF labeled “Building Floor Plans and Elevations” as well as the CAD file of the garage, both located in the “resources” section of www.gropiuscompetition.info.

Answer: There are no structural or construction drawings of the garage available. See previous RFI responses regarding garage floor plans.

Answer: Original framing plans or detailed roof documentation for the garage or visitor center are not available as part of this competition. Please refer to the prior RFI response regarding available floor plans. The existing roof is a recently replaced bitumen and gravel roof system. As part of the competition, proposals may alter the roof and its materials. The exterior clapboard material is California redwood.

Answer: The garage was built concurrently with the main house and shares architectural characteristics with the main house, including building materials. It is a contributing structure to the historical significance of the site. More information can be found in the Conservation Management Plan which is included in the “resources” section of www.gropiuscompetition.info.

Answer: The garage has a pitched roof with scuppers on the building’s rear elevation. No documentation is available.

Answer: The design of the restroom is a required component of the competition. Inclusion of a visitor center is optional and is not required if the existing garage and visitor center are not part of a team’s proposal. However, if a proposal includes alterations to the existing garage, particularly if restroom functions are incorporated within the garage, then the need to address the visitor center should be considered as part of the overall design.

Answer: Designers may propose pathways, landscaping, and parking areas to the extent that they are directly related to and adjacent to the proposed restroom building. Interdisciplinary submissions are encouraged, but these elements should remain secondary to the building design, which is the primary focus of the competition.

Answer: Yes. The restroom may be detached or positioned independently of the existing garage. Proposals are encouraged to place the building within the general vicinity of the garage area, but incorporation of the garage structure into a given design is not required.

Answer: The visitor center function may be rebuilt or redesigned; however, the original garage structure itself may not be demolished or fully rebuilt. As an original, contributing element of the historic site, the garage must be preserved. Sensitive alterations to the garage are acceptable. See related RFI responses in the RFI Response #1 document.

Answer: The storage is intended to use for paper materials (e.g., files) and for-sale items (e.g., books and hats).

Answer: Select alterations to the garage façades, particularly to existing openings, may be permissible. Respondents should refer to RFI Response #1 for additional guidance on historic considerations and the extent of allowable garage modifications.

Answer: Yes—as long as a visitor center can serve the same functions at roughly the same size as the current structure, its layout and square footage can be modified.

Answer: While height limitations are currently subject to Town of Lincoln zoning, respondents may propose whatever height they see fit for the optimal design. Historic New England may ultimately pursue zoning waivers, as needed.

Answer: The overhang is a defining architectural feature of the existing garage, and proposals that would eliminate or fully obscure this element are discouraged. Limited interventions that respect and preserve the visual expression of the overhang may be considered, but new volume or coverage should not compromise its legibility.

Answer: No—the project does not even need to include the garage at all. See previous responses herein regarding competition area.

Answer: No—showers are not part of the scope of work. See “configuration” under “The Competition” section of www.gropiuscompetition.info.

Answer: An accessible, ADA-compliant path of travel is required to serve the restroom and visitor center. An accessible connection to the main house from the bathroom and visitor center is not required as part of this competition. Site grading and broader accessibility connections beyond the immediate building area are outside the scope of work.

While the Gropius House may never meet full ADA code compliance without loss to character defining features, it is Historic New England’s philosophy to strive for the highest level possible. Visitor services, such as the visitor center and bathroom should meet the highest level of code compliance. At the visitor center we provide access to 360 degree digital tours of the house as well as binders of printed photos to those who can’t participate in full or partial tours. Reserved parking is currently available at both the visitor center and next to the house to overcome circulation issues with the gravel driveway. Temporary and reversible improvements are always being considered to enhance access to the house.

Answer: See question #29.

Answer: See question #29.

Answer: The main house is supplied by Town of Lincoln public water supply. The garage and portable toilet do not have water connections. It is expected that the new restroom would be served by the existing site water connection.

Answer: The garage currently does not have plumbing.

Answer: The sanitary line from the main house leads to a septic tank and leaching field noted on the survey posted at the “resources” section of www.gropiuscompetition.info. There is no public sewer connections from the site.

Answer: See RFI Response #1 document regarding the site septic system.

Answer: Utility routs and locations are noted in the .DWG version of the site survey found in the “resources” section of www.gropiuscompetition.info.

Answer: Historic New England has previously completed archaeological investigations on the site. Prior to any new construction, an additional archaeological study would be commissioned as part of project implementation. No specific protected archaeological areas are identified within the competition site at this time.

Answer: No hazardous materials have been identified.

Answer: No geotechnical information is available.

Answer: See RFI Response #1 document regarding the wetland buffers.

Answer: See RFI Response #1 document and question #43 herein regarding site visitor counts.

Answer: Yes—plumbing fixture counts have been verified against peak visitor loads. For larger events, additional capacity will be provided through portable toilets.

Answer: The recent annual visitation to the site is as follows: 2025: 7,559; 2024: 7,657; 2023: 7,123.

Answer: Submissions are in the format of a single collated PDF, with drawings sized and scaled to Arch D and narrative sized to 8.5” x 11” (see question #50 herein for more formatting information). Submissions may include as many PDF pages as needed to convey design intent, and are not limited to five pages.

Answer: Each of the key submission requirements requested (cover sheet, narrative, site plan, floor plans, building sections, building elevations, site sections, and renderings) should be on its own page. Building sections and elevations may be combined onto a single page.

Answer: Yes—exterior elevations are required. They may be included on their own page or on the same page as the building sections.

Answer: Yes—axonometric drawings, diagrams, or sketches can be included.

Answer: Yes—traditional or hand drawings and sketches may be used instead of digital renderings, so long as they are submitted in PDF form.

Answer: Teams may submit as many renderings as they would like to convey their design intent, and may submit more than 5 pages, as needed.

Answer: Respondents must submit a single, consolidated PDF. Drawings should be composed at Arch D (24″ × 36″), oriented landscape, and drawn to scale, with plans and elevations scaled to 1/4″ = 1′-0″ when printed at full size (100%). The PDF must also be legible when printed at 11″ × 17″ (landscape) at 50% scale. No separate files or alternate layouts are required.

Answer: Yes—the scale can be modified. See question #50 for regarding scale.

Answer: Orientation must be landscape.

Answer: There are no requirements around font and font color.

Answer: There is no requirement to include the assigned entrant number on each board. As long as submissions are provided as a single PDF, the competition organizers will manage submission organization and maintain anonymity.

Answer: The cover page and narrative should be combined with the drawings. All submissions should be within a single combined PDF document. Administrators will separate the cover sheet from the rest of the document to ensure anonymity.

Answer: The narrative must be separate from the drawings but should be included in the single collated PDF package provided by the respondent.

Answer: There is no page or length limits to the narrative, nor to the overall submission.

Answer: The submission must consist of all pages combined into a single PDF, and cannot include multiple PDF documents.

Answer: Including a video file is beyond the base requirements of this competition, but we welcome supplemental materials including video files, photographs of models, etc., so long as they are able to be included into the single collated PDF document (e.g., an MP4 file).

Answer: Yes—team members can be added after initial registration but only through an additional registration process. see RFI Response #1 for more information on additional registrants.

Answer: Yes—teams may re-register and don’t need to rescind prior registration.

Answer: Yes. Each entry requires a separate registration. Multiple submissions from the same team or individual must each have their own registration number and will be judged independently.

Answer: Respondents must follow the file naming conventions in the registration email sent to them. As teams are judged anonymously, file names are used only by competition administrators and are not seen by jurors.

Answer: Team identification should occur only in the file name, cover page, and the optional team description. Team identification should in no way appear on any drawings nor on the submission narrative.

Answer: No–each submission must be assigned a unique entrant number. All entries are judged anonymously, and multiple submissions, even if prepared by the same individual or team, will be evaluated independently.