[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE FUTURE OF
THE NATIONAL MALL
=======================================================================
OVERSIGHT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, FORESTS
AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
__________
Serial No. 110-71
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
42-475 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Chairman
DON YOUNG, Alaska, Ranking Republican Member
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan Jim Saxton, New Jersey
Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Elton Gallegly, California
Samoa John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas Chris Cannon, Utah
Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Jeff Flake, Arizona
Islands Stevan Pearce, New Mexico
Grace F. Napolitano, California Henry E. Brown, Jr., South
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Carolina
Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona Luis G. Fortuno, Puerto Rico
Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
Jim Costa, California Louie Gohmert, Texas
Dan Boren, Oklahoma Tom Cole, Oklahoma
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Rob Bishop, Utah
George Miller, California Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania
Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts Bill Sali, Idaho
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon Doug Lamborn, Colorado
Maurice D. Hinchey, New York Mary Fallin, Oklahoma
Patrick J. Kennedy, Rhode Island Adrian Smith, Nebraska
Ron Kind, Wisconsin Robert J. Wittman, Virginia
Lois Capps, California Steve Scalise, Louisiana
Jay Inslee, Washington
Mark Udall, Colorado
Joe Baca, California
Hilda L. Solis, California
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, South
Dakota
Heath Shuler, North Carolina
James H. Zoia, Chief of Staff
Rick Healy, Chief Counsel
Christopher N. Fluhr, Republican Staff Director
Lisa Pittman, Republican Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, FORESTS AND PUBLIC LANDS
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona, Chairman
ROB BISHOP, Utah, Ranking Republican Member
Dale E. Kildee, Michigan John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii Chris Cannon, Utah
Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado
Islands Jeff Flake, Arizona
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey Stevan Pearce, New Mexico
Dan Boren, Oklahoma Henry E. Brown, Jr., South
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Carolina
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon Louie Gohmert, Texas
Maurice D. Hinchey, New York Tom Cole, Oklahoma
Ron Kind, Wisconsin Bill Sali, Idaho
Lois Capps, California Doug Lamborn, Colorado
Jay Inslee, Washington Robert J. Wittman, Virginia
Mark Udall, Colorado Don Young, Alaska, ex officio
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, South
Dakota
Heath Shuler, North Carolina
Nick J. Rahall, II, West Virginia,
ex officio
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Tuesday, May 20, 2008............................ 1
Statement of Members:
Grijalva, Hon. Raul M., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona........................................... 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 2
Statement of Witnesses:
Akridge, John E. ``Chip,'' III, Chairman, Trust for the
National Mall.............................................. 41
Prepared statement of.................................... 43
Cogbill, John V., III, Chairman, National Capital Planning
Commission................................................. 17
Prepared statement of.................................... 19
Feldman, Judy Scott, Ph.D., President, National Coalition to
Save Our Mall.............................................. 33
Prepared statement of.................................... 35
Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes, a Delegate in Congress from the
District of Columbia....................................... 2
Prepared statement of.................................... 4
O'Dell, Margaret, Superintendent, National Mall and Memorial
Parks, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior................................................... 6
Prepared statement of.................................... 8
Spitzer, Arthur B., Legal Director, American Civil Liberties
Union of the National Capital Area......................... 29
Prepared statement of.................................... 30
Tregoning, Harriet, Director, Office of Planning, Government
of the District of Columbia................................ 12
Prepared statement of.................................... 14
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON ``THE FUTURE OF THE NATIONAL MALL''
----------
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, D.C.
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m. in
Room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Raul M.
Grijalva [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Grijalva, Bishop, Kildee, Holt,
Brown, Sarbanes, and Inslee.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE RAUL M. GRIJALVA, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. The Subcommittee on
National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands will come to order.
The agenda today and the hearing is about the future of the
National Mall.
Let me, at the outset, welcome all of you here. Thank you.
As this meeting comes to order and Memorial Day approaches, it
is fitting that we are holding this hearing on the future of
the National Mall, while we pause to remember the American
heroes who gave the last full measure of devotion. The war
memorials of World War I, II, Korea, and Vietnam will be on the
minds of all Americans.
Also on our minds will be the words and deeds of those
great Americans who have transcended their individual
accomplishments to become institutions unto themselves:
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt.
Recently, the National Mall was named one of the seven
wonders of America. But it is more than just a wonder. The
National Mall is part of our national identity and serves as
our national front yard. Its appearance reflects our collective
pride as Americans.
We can hope that the Mall's memorials, museums, and open
space will inspire visitors and future generations of Americans
to their own greatness. But these hopes will not be realized if
the condition of the Mall fails to inspire.
This is a critical time in the history of the National
Mall. Currently, four different entities are in the midst of
planning efforts that will directly impact the Mall, in some
cases over the next 50 years or more. And with such an
important and visible symbol of America at stake, it is
important that these groups and all others interested and
affected work together collaboratively to get the planning job
done correctly.
I am pleased to have Congressman Eleanor Holmes Norton. She
has joined us today to share her thoughts and concerns for
these various plans. And I look forward to her joining us on
the dais after her testimony and being part of this hearing.
I am also pleased to welcome the National Park Service, the
National Capital Planning Commission, the Government of the
District of Columbia, and several advocacy groups to this
hearing to share their collective vision for the Mall.
We thank the witnesses very much for their time and effort
to be here today. And with that, let me turn to our
distinguished colleague, Ms. Norton, for her testimony.
Welcome. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Grijalva follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Raul Grijalva, Chairman,
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands
As Memorial Day approaches, it is fitting that we are holding this
hearing on the ``Future of the National Mall.'' While we pause to
remember the American heroes who gave the ``last full measure of
devotion,'' the war memorials for World Wars I and II, Korea and
Vietnam will be on the minds of all Americans. Also on our minds will
be the words and deeds of those great Americans who have transcended
their individual accomplishments to become institutions unto
themselves--Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt.
Recently, the National Mall was named one of the seven wonders of
America--but it is more than just a wonder. The National Mall is part
of our national identity and serves as our national front yard--its
appearance reflects our collective pride as Americans. We can hope that
the Mall's memorials, museums and open space will inspire visitors and
future generations of Americans to greatness of their own. But these
hopes will not be realized if the condition of the Mall fails to
inspire.
This is a critical time in the history of the National Mall.
Currently, four different entities are in the midst of planning efforts
that will directly impact the Mall, in some cases for the next fifty
years or more. And with such an important and visible symbol of America
at stake, it is important that these groups and all other interested
and affected parties work collaboratively to get the planning job done
correctly.
I am pleased that Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton has joined us
today to share her thoughts and concerns for these various plans and I
look forward to her joining us on the dais after providing her
testimony. I am also pleased to welcome the National Park Service, the
National Capitol Planning Commission, the Government of the District of
Columbia and several advocacy groups to this hearing to share their
collective vision for the Mall. We thank the witnesses very much for
their time and effort to be here today.
I would now like to recognize Ranking Member Bishop for any opening
statement he may have.
______
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, A DELEGATE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Chairman Grijalva. I very
much appreciate your holding this hearing today. This hearing
will seem like the time to many who follow the work on the
Mall, because it is the first time that there has been a
hearing on the National Mall in memory of this now two-mile
strip, which we hope to see expanded 700 acres.
Twenty million people come. They have all heard of the
National Mall, and when they go there, what they see we all
should be ashamed of. It is a barren, dull place where they mow
the lawn, and nothing else. It is essentially a passthrough.
For more than a dozen years I have been trying to improve
the Mall. Your hearing is especially valuable to us in drawing
attention to the place where essentially the constituents of
Members of Congress come. So the 20 million people who come,
some of them are my constituents, but most of them are
constituents of my colleagues. And so your title here, the
Future of the Mall, I think encompasses what we need to focus
on.
I have my own view. I appreciate, I would very much
appreciate that if we could move from this hearing to a markup
of the Mall Revitalization and Redesignation Act. What it does
is simply codify what you will hear from the National Planning
Commission on its framework. It has been working on it now for
a couple of years so that they would have the ability to expand
the Mall.
We are not simply talking about this two-mile place. They
already, indeed, have allowed memorials to go into the far
reaches of what is not considered the Mall, but the Mall
doesn't have an official designation. My bill for the first
time would name the Mall, and it would give the NCPC the
capacity to designate and expand what the Mall is so that when,
in fact, people come and you want them to go where we now call
the Mall, they will understand that is a part of the Mall,
because we really don't have anything named for monuments and
the like in the Mall, and you can't even get on the Mall, or
what we call the Mall today, without an Act of Congress.
This is our most treasured and best-known site perhaps, but
no site is more neglected, no site is more undervalued.
Mr. Chairman, I want to focus, since the National Capital
Planning Commission and the other agencies are here, I am going
to focus on the part of my bill that I think would be easiest
to implement.
I think we have to deal with the disgrace that the Mall is
right now, so the second part of my bill is a low-cost way to
make the Mall people-friendly. I introduced the bill after some
jazz musicians were with me so that people could see that there
was lots of free entertainment. They would come during
lunchtime and during the evenings so that people could be
sitting at decent tables, no hard benches. Low-cost tables,
free entertainment from string quartets to poetry readings, to
have lunch in the open with no real fast food.
But I have focused on this near-term way, knowing full well
that the total makeover that the Mall deserves is many years
away, given the PAYGO Rules, given the many priorities of the
Congress. This is a low-cost way to make the Mall into
something that is not essentially a disgrace.
Mr. Chairman, today it is raining. For the visitors who
would come here, there is no shelter in the Mall. You had
better hope that one of the museums is open. And the terrible
humidity of Washington which will soon be upon us, don't look
for shade unless you can find a tree, which of course you will
not always find, and hope for a bench under that tree.
I mean, these are the kind of amenities. And I do not need
to say that you had better hope that the museums are open if
you have to use the restroom.
Here is a place that we grandly call the Mall, and there
are no amenities, no identity, though we give it an official
identity, no names whatsoever. There is no great national park
that suffers from this kind of neglect.
So Mr. Chairman, I am asking that we move forward with my
bill. My bill codifies what you will hear from the National
Capital Planning Commission. I worked closely with them in
designing that part of the bill.
And the second part of the bill tries to rescue the Mall
from the neglect that I think our constituents would be
surprised to see when they came here, because it takes the
first steps to give the Mall its due after decades of neglect
and indifference. It tries to breathe life into the Mall at
virtually no cost to the taxpayers.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Norton follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton,
a Delegate in Congress from the District of Columbia
I am very grateful to you Mr. Chairman and to the subcommittee for
this hearing, the first we have had on the two-mile 700 acre strip of
land, informally called the Mall, since I began working to improve the
National Mall a dozen years ago. Because it is in my district, I have
taken a special interest in the Mall and have introduced several Mall
and Mall-related bills that I am seeking to move forward to passage.
This hearing entitled ``The Future of the Mall'' relates particularly
to the Mall Revitalization and Redesignation Act that I introduced in
October 2007. I am requesting that the subcommittee mark-up this low-
cost bill at an early mark-up. In addition, I have introduced two bills
necessary for the Smithsonian Institution. As you know the majority of
Smithsonian museums have the Mall as their front yard, and will play an
integral role in increasing the life and vitality on the Mall. In fact,
the Smithsonian's Jazz in the Sculpture Garden is a prototype of the
lively performing art I would like to see more of throughout the Mall.
H.R. 4098, The Smithsonian Modernization Act, would bring the
Smithsonian into this century by giving it a governing board that meets
modern standards and whose members are free and equipped to raise
urgently needed funds. H.R. 5424, The Smithsonian Free Admission Act,
is important to preserve the long-standing requirements and tradition
of access to Smithsonian museums and exhibits without admission
charges.
The National Mall is one of the nation's best known and most
treasured sites, and it is also Washington's most neglected and
undervalued. The Mall lacks everything that a majestic natural wonder
deserves, from an official identity to necessary amenities. My bill:
(1) authorizes the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) to
officially designate and expand the boundaries of the Mall, and (2)
requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit a plan to enhance
visitor enjoyment and cultural experiences within 180 days of passage
of the bill. I worked closely with NCPC and other agencies in framing
the Mall designation and expansion section of the bill, in keeping with
its National Capital Framework Plan. However, H.R. 3880 would not only
give the NCPC the responsibility for designating and expanding the
Mall, it also would meet the vision of many of us and of the District
of Columbia for an expanding Mall to specific, named sites. The bill
gives the NCPC the necessary flexibility to both expand and designate
the Mall area, as appropriate, for the first time since its creation
Let me begin with the section of my bill that is easiest to
implement now. The twenty million visitors annually to the Mall should
not have to wait for the long term makeover of the Mall it must have
before it becomes more than a mowed but battered lawn bereft of even
restrooms. H.R. 3880 requires near-term action now to erase barren and
disgrace of today's Mall and make it people-friendly. I introduced the
bill on the Mall with world class musicians playing jazz to help make
the point that tourists and workers downtown should be able to walk to
the Mall and hear terrific music, or have other appropriate, free
entertainment--from string quartets to poetry readings--perhaps during
lunch at attractive tables where sandwiches and good--not fast--food
are available. Although bordered by internationally famous cultural
institutions, the Mall itself has been reduced to a lawn with a few--
too few--ordinary benches and a couple of fast food restaurants. In
writing this bill, I was compelled to recognize today's reality that
funds to make the Mall the 21st century destination it deserves to
become are simply not available, and will not become available until
the deficit and other priorities make room. The Mall needs, and must
get, a total makeover for the 21st century that would be worthy of
L'Enfant vision for the city he planned and the MacMillan plan that is
largely responsible for the space between the Capitol and the Lincoln
Memorial. However, preparing for the future must not stand in the way
of moving now to begin to do what we can to rescue this space from its
present condition, damaged by heavy use and often no more than a pass-
through, despite its magnificent potential.
With the necessary imagination, a plan to make the Mall an inviting
place with cultural and other amenities envisioned by the bill is
achievable now. What I have envisioned in H.R. 3880 would do no more
than make the Mall presentable and pleasant for visitors. At very
little cost, the Mall would no longer lack the most basic amenities
appropriate to such an area including restrooms, shelter and informal
places to gather and interesting places to eat. Today, when it rains,
there are no places to stay dry on the Mall and when the humidity
reaches sky high, there are few places to rest and have a cold drink.
These are disgraceful conditions for a place that is grandly called
``The National Mall.'' The NCPC is already working on the other section
of my bill's requirements for an expansive 21st century definition of
the Mall. Frustrated at continually fighting off proposals for new
monuments, museums, and memorials, on the crowded Mall space, I asked
the NCPC to devise a mall presentation, and in 2003, Congress amended
the Commemorative Works Act to enact the NCPC's designation of a no-
build-zone where no new memorials may be built without an act of
Congress. This action was helpful in quelling some but by no means all
of the demand from groups for placement on what they view as the Mall.
Recognizing the need for more sites, the NCPC and other federal
agencies have been devising a National Capital Framework Plan that has
already identified sites near the Mall which are suitable for new
memorials, including East Potomac Park, a part of the Mall area that is
seldom visited or viewed as integral to the more familiar space between
the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial; Banneker Overlook, the grounds
around RFK Stadium, the Kennedy Center Plaza site and the new South
Capitol gateways. Five new prestigious memorials are scheduled for such
sites, including the Eisenhower Memorial and the U.S. Air Force
Memorial.
Just as important, residents of the city region and should be able
to find expanded space for fun and games beyond the cramped space
between Third street and the Lincoln Memorial. I appreciate that NCPC
works closely with the District of Columbia in designating off-Mall
sites for new monuments, but the country needs to understand that these
are not off-Mall, but part of the official Mall, as my bill would make
clear. The District has long welcomed the expanded Mall into our
neighborhoods, enhancing the work of the District of Columbia
government and local organizations, such as Cultural Tourism that
offers historic tours of District neighborhoods and all the while,
helping to develop local tourism that is vital to the city's economy.
The off-Mall sites for monuments complement the creation of entire new
neighborhoods now underway near the Mall, particularly the District's
re-development of the Southwest waterfront and my own SE Federal Center
legislation, now taking shape as The Yards, a mixed use public private
development and waterfront park.
The Mall Revitalization and Designation Act is the first step in an
effort to finally focus the Congress on the necessary steps to give the
Mall its due after decades of neglect and indifference. H.R. 3880
begins at the beginning--defining officially for the first time what we
mean by the Mall, allowing for expansion of its natural contours, and
taking the first steps to breathe life into a space that is meant for
people to enjoy.
______
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, Congresswoman. And one of the
ironies today I think the staff would just tell me, they were
debating this hearing to be held here or to be held on the
Mall. And sometimes you are better lucky than good, because it
is raining today.
Let me turn to our Ranking Member, Mr. Bishop, for any
comments he may have. No? OK.
And I personally have no questions. And like I stated
earlier, I would be pleased if you would join us at the dais
for the rest of the hearing. And let me turn to Mr. Bishop if
he has any questions.
Mr. Bishop. Just thank you for your presence. I will waive
any questions.
Mr. Grijalva. Mr. Holt.
Mr. Holt. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to thank our
colleague for the diligence with which she looks after not just
the people of the District of Columbia, the nation's capitol,
but also the appearance of our nation's capitol. And I thank
you.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. And we will be pleased
if you would join us at the dais.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank you
especially for your generosity in inviting me to sit with you
in Subcommittee today.
Mr. Grijalva. Let me now welcome the second panel, please.
[Pause.]
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. Now we will welcome the
second panel, and begin with Ms. Peggy O'Dell, Superintendent,
National Mall and Memorial Parks, National Park Service,
Department of the Interior.
Superintendent, welcome. And I look forward to your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF PEGGY O'DELL, SUPERINTENDENT, NATIONAL MALL AND
MEMORIAL PARKS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
Ms. O'Dell. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.
Bishop and members of the committee.
I am Peggy O'Dell; I am the Superintendent of the National
Mall and Memorial Parks, and I have been with the National Mall
for six months now, just having arrived from my previous
assignment in St. Louis. It is an honor to be joining the
National Mall during this critical time of National Mall
planning.
The National Mall planning process began in July of 2006,
and it has been a very highly collaborative process. The
planning team consists of Park staff and representatives from
19 cooperating agencies, such as GSA, the Smithsonian, the
Architect of the Capitol, and representatives of my panel
members, NCPC and the DC Department of Planning.
Several public comment periods and public meetings have
been held at each step of the planning process, as well as
online opportunities to track the plan and to comment by email.
The first newsletter and the scoping process generated
5,000 comments from the public, which told the National Park
Service what the public wanted to see for the future of the
National Mall. It fell into four major categories.
They wanted to see us improve the overall appearance of the
National Mall. They wanted us to provide better signage. They
want more and cleaner restrooms. And they want better variety
in visitor facilities, such as food and beverage.
The second newsletter summarized this public comment that
was received during scoping, and identified planning principles
that were developed by the Park staff and cooperating agencies.
The third newsletter described a no-action alternative and
three draft alternatives. We asked the public to tell us how
they would mix and match elements from each of the three draft
alternatives to complete a picture of the next vision for the
National Mall.
Those three draft alternatives were focused on major
categories of use that goes on at the National Mall and needs
to be continued, focused on historic landscape and education.
The second alternative focused on a welcoming civic space for
gatherings and events and high-use levels. And the third
alternative focused on open space, urban ecology, recreation,
and healthy lifestyles.
Twenty thousand comments were received after those
alternatives were released, and it reinforced the need for the
National Mall to remain a premiere site for First Amendment
activities, and it identified the elements of each one of the
alternatives that the public viewed as important to see as part
of the final-draft alternative National Mall plan.
The planning team is currently working through a process to
draft a preferred alternative, taking into consideration all of
the public comment that we have had and all of the research
that has gone into looking at similar sites around the country
and the world. We anticipate producing a draft preferred
alternative and a draft environmental impact statement this
year, the goal, of course, being that the National Mall set a
standard for excellence for public spaces.
Transportation for the National Mall is a separate planning
effort that began prior to the National Mall plan, but we see
it eventually becoming a part of the overall vision for the
National Mall.
Many improvements have been made in operations and
management in the park as this planning process has progressed.
We have examined best practices and management standards for
similar sites around the country and the world. We have
completed inventory and condition assessments of site
furnishings and plant materials. We have conducted cultural
landscape inventories. We conducted an assessment of the 2007
Cherry Blossom Festival and the Fourth of July celebration so
that we can make improvements for the 2008 festivals.
We are involved in solid waste and recycling studies, and
demonstration projects for recycling are underway. We also have
a turf management demonstration project that is underway in the
grass panels from Third Street to Seventh Street.
We are also very fortunate to have received the Centennial
Challenge Project for the National Mall. With the generous
contribution from the Trust for the National Mall and the
Congressional appropriation, we will be able to improve signage
on the National Mall for park visitors.
We also have received 41 additional seasonal employees as a
result of the Centennial funding, and that will result in
cleaner restrooms, more frequent trash pickup, and more rangers
to interact with the public on a daily basis.
Chairman Grijalva and Mr. Bishop and all committee members,
as a member of the National Park Service, I would like to thank
you for your support for that Centennial initiative. It is
going to make a big difference for visitors in this park this
summer, and we are very excited to see that happen.
This concludes my oral presentation this morning. I would
like to submit my full testimony for the record. I am very
happy to answer any questions that you might have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. O'Dell follows:]
Statement of Margaret O'Dell, Superintendent, National Mall & Memorial
Parks, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, it is my pleasure to
appear before you today to discuss the future of the National Mall and
the planning efforts underway with our National Mall Plan.
The National Mall--the great swath of green in the middle of our
capital city and stretching from the foot of the United States Capitol
to the Potomac River--is America's civic stage. For more than 200 years
it has symbolized our nation and its democratic values, which have
inspired the world. ``We the People'' come here to celebrate our rights
and freedoms, our history and culture, our unity and diversity, and our
way of life.
The origins of the National Mall are as old as the capital city
itself. The open space and parklands envisioned by Pierre L'Enfant's
plan, which was commissioned by President George Washington, created an
ideal stage for national expression of commemoration, remembrance,
celebration, observance and public assembly. The National Mall and its
grounds are of great historic significance and interest. The National
Mall contains some of the oldest protected park lands in the National
Park Service dating from the 1790's.
At the beginning of the 20th century in response to increasing
development that was diminishing the character of this public space,
Congress created the McMillan Park Commission to produce a plan for the
Nation's Capital which would recall L'Enfant's formal design and
protect the heart of the Nation's Capital. The McMillan Plan restored
the National Mall's historic sweep and framed it with impressive
museums and monuments that today celebrate our nation's achievements,
heroes and most significant events.
The National Park Service (NPS) was given the responsibility for
management of the National Mall by the Act of March 3, 1933 and
Executive Order 6166 (1933), which transferred oversight of all Federal
parkland in the District of Columbia to the NPS. The National Mall
extends from the grounds of the United States Capitol west to the
Potomac River, and from the Jefferson Memorial north to Constitution
Avenue. Over the years there have been varying definitions of the
National Mall, some due to differences in the actual land mass. This
boundary definition is the commonly accepted one and is used by the
NPS. It is home to the great symbols of our country--national icons
such as the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial and the Jefferson
Memorial. It also includes the Vietnam Veterans, Korean War Veterans
and World War I and II Memorials, as well as lesser known memorials to
American heroes, such as the 56 Signers of the Declaration of
Independence and John Paul Jones. The National Mall also boasts
beautiful open spaces such as the Tidal Basin where the blossoming of
thousands of cherry trees heralds spring.
Present and Future Uses of the Mall
Millions of people visit the National Mall each year. The National
Mall must function efficiently and flexibly at many levels--as the
highly symbolic visual setting for our government; as part of the
city's circulation and transportation networks; as the location of the
nation's primary memorials and museums; and as the stage for national,
regional, and local events and activities including organized sports
such as softball and other recreation for city residents.
The demands on the National Mall are constant and wide-ranging.
Each year there are over 3,000 applications for public gathering
permits, resulting in more than 14,000 event-days. These events include
public demonstrations in connection with First Amendment rights; annual
celebrations such as the National Cherry Blossom Festival, Veterans
Day, Memorial Day, Presidential memorial birthday celebrations, the
Smithsonian Institution American Folklife Festival, Black Family
Reunion, and the National Fourth of July Celebration; concerts and
cultural programs; hundreds of events such as solar technology
displays, book fairs, public employee recognition events, the laying of
commemorative wreaths, reenlistment ceremonies, weddings, school group
musical performances, as well as one-time events such as state funerals
or home building displays for Hurricane Katrina victims; annual
marathons and races benefiting various causes, and hundreds of
recreational league sports. We want people to use and enjoy the Mall.
These activities are appropriate and encouraged. Yet, the resulting
wear and tear damages trees and turf, creates a less-than-desirable
appearance of the historic landscape, and provides continual
maintenance challenges.
The message our visiting public is sending is clear. The value and
fundamental purposes of the National Mall are clear. It is the symbol
of our nation and its values; it is an essential location for First
Amendment demonstrations; and it is an American pilgrimage destination
where people come to understand our history, culture, heroes, values
and way of life. In safeguarding the opportunities to participate in
this history and to express a voice under the First Amendment, it is
the NPS's responsibility also to manage the National Mall in a way that
can respond to increased visitation and use and accommodate suggested
improvements such as improved health of the landscape and grounds, and
improvements to restrooms, food services, bicycle facilities, and
signs/maps.
Status of the National Mall Plan
The great public open spaces of the Nation's Capital are managed
primarily by the NPS through National Mall & Memorial Parks, a unit of
the National Park System, an area of approximately 650 acres. A current
management plan does not exist for this area, which contains
concentrations of our nation's memorials, cultural treasures and
museums. The NPS is currently engaged in developing a National Mall
Plan to guide its activities through the coming years.
The National Mall Plan is a long-range vision plan focused on
improvements related to public use, health, appearance and preservation
of the historic National Mall and Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic
Site. The planning process involves significant participation by
approximately twenty cooperating agencies with review, jurisdictional
or operating authority within the study area. Robust civic engagement
will continue to ensure all Americans are provided with information and
the opportunity to participate in planning a revitalized and more
beautiful future for our nation's grand and symbolic civic spaces. The
NPS has held a series of cooperating agency workshops leading to the
development of alternatives and has held public meetings to discuss the
alternatives. These meetings and additional development work will lead
to issuing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement this year. A Final
Environmental Impact Statement should be released by the middle of
2009. The consultation process pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act is also underway with more than 30 consulting
parties involved.
The National Mall Plan will provide the vision for a significant
private/public partnership to restore the National Mall. This process
has already begun. The NPS and our authorized fundraising partner, the
Trust for the National Mall, are working together to begin improving
signs and wayfinding in the National Mall, one of the first approved
Centennial Initiative projects. The NPS has developed two public
engagement video products, using donations by project media partner
Discovery Communications.
The vision plan will be formed by continual conversation with
others in order to address management standards and best practices in
standards of care, turf/tree management, benchmark standards, and
events management. A number of NPS or consultant studies have been
completed or are underway to provide information for planning, with
some of the findings already translating into action. The following
studies have been completed:
Local and National/International Best Practices studies
for managing heavily used and historic landscapes and related Turfgrass
Management.
Inventory and Condition Assessment: Site Furnishings and
Plant Materials
Cultural Landscape Inventories: the Mall, Union Square,
Constitution Gardens
Public Scoping Comments Report
Events Assessments--2007 National Cherry Blossom Festival
and 2007 Independence Day
White papers--History, Legal Considerations, Issues and
Objectives of Planning, Glossary
Additionally, the following three studies are currently underway:
Solid waste and recycling studies and demonstrations
projects
Turf management demonstration projects
National Mall Plan standards for landscape and
maintenance
Some of the cooperating agencies, the Architect of the Capitol, the
District of Columbia Office of Planning, the U.S. Commission of Fine
Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission, and the NPS, have
published a brochure, Planning Together for Central Washington, on
coordinated vision plans, common objectives and priorities. Some of
these partners also have planning and projects underway.
Public Participation
The scoping process began with a symposium, scoping newsletter and
public meetings. During the four-month public comment period, 5,000
comments were received. They came in from every state in the union.
Scoping typically generates far fewer comments. A second newsletter
summarized public comment and included planning principles developed by
the cooperating agencies. When it was determined that the plan needed
to include an Environmental Impact Statement, additional public
meetings were held. There continues to be good media announcement of
public meetings. Public comment helped cooperating agencies and the NPS
develop a range of alternatives. Highlights were shared with the public
in an alternatives newsletter and additional public meetings were held.
The NPS has provided extensive public information regarding this
planning process--Federal Register notices were published on January 16
and September 6, 2007 and the plan was announced at a press conference
on November 1, 2006; assorted media reports and releases have been
issued and a public symposium was held on November 15; meetings were
held in January 2007 and again in January 2008. The NPS established a
dedicated planning website at www.nps.gov/nationalmallplan and an e-
mail address at nationalmallplan@nps.gov. Newsletters have been posted
online and distributed to visitors at events and by park rangers.
Around 24,000 comments have been received from individuals in all
states.
The NPS is continuing to work with professional and other
organizations to provide accurate planning information via their
websites, e-mails and magazines. We have provided tours to highlight
planning issues to symposium participants and organizations and to
media writing articles about the plan, including a youth reporter from
Scholastic Magazine.
First Amendment Uses
From the inception of this plan in July 2006, First Amendment
demonstrations were identified as a fundamental purpose that must
continue to occur on the National Mall. The First Amendment defines an
essential right of citizens and the National Mall Plan in no way
proposes to infringe upon that right.
During the second public comment period, the NPS received around
17,000 comments related to First Amendment demonstrations. Newsletter 3
described alternative ways of managing events to reduce their impact.
It became apparent that some commenters assumed the terms ``event'' and
``demonstration'' could be used interchangeably. For the most part,
commenters were unaware of the difference between these types of
gatherings and assumed that the NPS was seeking to restrict First
Amendment demonstrations or confine them to specific locations. Nothing
could be farther from the truth.
The NPS is proud to be able to have a venue for demonstrations that
exemplify a core value of our nation--Freedom of Speech as enshrined in
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. As stated
repeatedly during planning, it is a fundamental purpose of the National
Mall to remain as our national civic stage--and the court systems have
reaffirmed this purpose.
The Code of Federal Regulations regulates uses on the National Mall
and the NPS will continue to adhere to these regulations as planning
for the National Mall continues. The Code of Federal Regulations (36
CFR 7.96(g) defines the following terms:
The term ``demonstrations'' includes demonstrations, picketing,
speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services
and all other like forms of conduct which involve the
communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in
by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect,
intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers. This term
does not include casual park use by visitors or tourists which
does not have an intent or propensity to attract a crowd or
onlookers.
The term ``special events'' includes sports events, pageants,
celebrations, historical reenactments, regattas,
entertainments, exhibitions, parades, fairs, festivals and
similar events (including such events presented by the National
Park Service), which are not demonstrations under the previous
definition, and which are engaged in by one or more persons,
the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to
draw a crowd or onlookers. This term also does not include
casual park use by visitors or tourists which does not have an
intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers.
The NPS is not considering any alternatives that are not in keeping
with the First Amendment and federal regulations. Consistent with 36
CFR 7.96, demonstrations and other First Amendment activities would
continue to be permitted throughout the park on a space available,
first-come first-served request basis. Consideration is being given to
help improve venues for events and demonstrations; however,
demonstrations would not be limited to specific areas, and
demonstrators would not be prohibited from erecting stages or from any
exercise of First Amendment rights that are currently enjoyed by
demonstrators on the National Mall. Two of the alternatives would
increase space available for demonstrations. At no time has the NPS
entertained the possibility of limiting First Amendment demonstrations
to specific areas. The NPS has communicated this at public meetings,
through updating the public planning website and has undertaken a mass
e-mailing when commenters have provided their e-mail address. At the
request of some Members of Congress, the NPS has also drafted a
response to constituent concerns stating that we will be protecting
First Amendment rights.
Improving Visitor Amenities on the National Mall
Based on an evaluation of comments and present conditions NPS is
considering a variety of ways to make the National Mall a more
comfortable, convenient, enjoyable and welcoming space. Currently NPS
is designing new directional and orientation signs for pedestrians that
are coordinated with the city's wayfinding system. Within the National
Mall Plan, pedestrian circulation alternatives address surfacing, new
walks, width of walks, crosswalk improvements and pedestrian bridges or
tunnels. There are over 1,600 public parking spaces along park roads
throughout the National Mall, and 117 parking spaces for people with
disabilities. Alternatives related to vehicular circulation explore
metered parking, underground parking, parking lot or road revisions,
additional parking for visitors with disabilities, and improvements to
tour bus drop-offs. The NPS is providing additional bicycle facilities
and the alternatives look at separate bicycle routes or lanes.
Public comments indicate that additional services are desired--
visitor facilities may be hard to find, others lack a common identity
to make them readily apparent, and some are outdated and difficult to
maintain. The NPS is currently planning the relocation of the
Washington Monument food and gift concession to allow for the
construction of the National Museum of African American History and
Culture and three alternative locations are under review. Public
comments also indicate that more variety in commercial visitor services
is desired. Food service is offered at refreshment stands and mobile
carts, and gifts are available at some locations. However, studies at
other sites suggest that commercial services should be used to
strengthen the identity of the NPS as well as the message of
stewardship and education. The National Mall Plan looks at different
types of food service that could provide not only relaxing experiences
but also offer opportunities for additional programs and performances.
Comments also state that restrooms are insufficient for demand and
not located near food service outlets. Park furniture is inadequate at
various times; it does not address the needs of groups, is not focused
on views, and lacks enough shaded seating in the summer. While the
Smithsonian Institution's Arts and Industries Building is not under the
NPS's management, it has been suggested as a good site for a welcome
center for the National Mall. Using the historic building for visitor
services (food, restrooms, theater and exhibits) as well as for staging
certain events in a climate-controlled venue, could take the pressure
off other Mall resources. This facility is also being proposed as a
site for a Latino Museum. The NPS will continue to follow the
Smithsonian plans for the building.
The Sylvan Theater, the lower approach way to the Lincoln Memorial,
the D.C. War Memorial, and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial are currently
used for regularly scheduled performances and school programs.
Additional entertainment such as opera simulcasts, military concerts,
and ``Screen on the Green'' are also offered. The National Mall Plan
explores alternatives for additional or improved performance venues and
programs.
Additional recreational opportunities, such as kayaks, rowboats,
model boats, and lawn chairs have been suggested. A commercial services
plan would determine the feasibility of any service changes. The D.C.
Recreation Department issues permits for league use of some ball
fields. Informal games and recreation take place throughout the
National Mall. Some people have expressed a desire for more
entertainment opportunities.
Public Health, Security and Safety Improvements
The plan will address a number of issues, including public health,
safety and welfare. While alternative specifics vary the following
topics are included: pedestrian lighting; pedestrian street crossings/
crosswalk improvements; security perimeter completion; public address/
messages and emergency call boxes; basic services such as restrooms and
drinking water; services for people with disabilities; relief from heat
and humidity; providing first aid and emergency medical services;
emergency preparedness coordination; law enforcement presence, and
development of separate circulation systems for bicycles.
Transportation on the Mall
The NPS desires an affordable interpretive visitor transportation
system, with state of-the-art equipment integrated with the existing
urban transportation network to 1) serve the estimated 75 percent of
visitors who are open to using in-park transit services; 2) reduce
private vehicle congestion; and 3) meet the needs of disabled visitors.
The current operator, an authorized NPS concession-operated partner,
serves a million people annually.
An Environmental Assessment on a new visitor transportation system
was released in November 2006. It assessed conceptual routes, areas
served and methods of interpretation. Possible operation models include
concession contract(s) and public/private partnership(s). The
Environmental Assessment preferred alternative can be achieved via any
operations model. The planning process actively sought private industry
input, including Tourmobile, Gray Line/Martz Group, industry
associations, National Tour Association, Guild of Professional Tour
Guides, and Reason Public Policy Institute (focused on the provision of
public and privatized services), etc. The preferred alternative
reflects the following 2003 NPS visitor survey data:
Strong desire (53 percent) for convenience (easy to
understand, links to Metro/subway),
Metro widely used by visitors (61 percent); 25 percent of
visitors have difficulty walking,
Desire for range of transit services, including
interpretive tour services.
The time required to shift to the selected approach will depend
upon the selected management structure for future service. Current
estimates range from 6-24 months depending upon the complexity of the
transition. The current transportation concession contract has been
extended until December 31, 2008.
To preserve its treasured memorials and landscapes as well as our
freedoms, the NPS must efficiently use available resources to improve
resource conditions; raise the standard of care; establish a standard
of quality that invites respect and generates stewardship; prepare for
high levels of use; and provide for the physical needs, enjoyments and
convenience of visitors and park users on the National Mall. Planning
for the future will result in an experience that meets the expectations
of millions of visitors. We accept and embrace the challenge for
today's generation, which is to restore the National Mall so that it
will continue to symbolize the ideals and greatness of the United
States of America.
Mr. Chairman, this is an overview of the planning process we are
undertaking for the National Mall. We would be pleased to provide an
in-depth presentation on any or all aspects of the National Mall Plan
and remain available to provide updates as you may wish as the planning
process continues.
That concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other members of the subcommittee might have.
______
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, without objection. Let me just say
that I neglected to mention that the full testimony will be
made part of the record, and any additional materials that
would want to be included in that testimony will also be made
part of the record.
Let me now turn to our next panelist, Ms. Harriet
Tregoning, Director, Office of Planning, Government of the
District of Columbia.
Welcome, and thank you.
STATEMENT OF HARRIET TREGONING, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PLANNING,
GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Ms. Tregoning. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the House Committee
on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests,
and Public Lands. I am Harriet Tregoning, the Director of the
DC Office of Planning, and I am very pleased to present
testimony on behalf of Mayor Adrian Fenty regarding the future
of the National Mall.
The Mall has long been an important space in the District
of Columbia. Pierre L'Enfant referred to it as the vast
esplanade, and intended it to be the symbolic heart of the
District of Columbia.
The Mall has indeed been the city's commons, its Central
Park, its ceremonial gathering place, its festival site, its
protest grounds.
It has also long been the southern boundary of the
districts downtown. With downtown's emergence over the past 10
years as both a real residential neighborhood and an
entertainment district, as well as the premiere office location
in the region, the Mall has been an important part of the
area's growing vibrancy.
However, the District of Columbia's downtown is expected to
be fully built out in the next five years. Mayor Fenty unveiled
the Development and Quality of Life Strategy earlier this year,
called the Center City Action Agenda, in order to continue to
capture the growing demand for office, retail, culture,
entertainment, and residential demand in our city.
The Center City Agenda identifies an area nearly three
times the size of the current downtown that will be home to
future vibrant, green, and sustainable mixed-use development
served by transit, but also designed to be walkable and
bikeable. Several emerging neighborhoods surrounding downtown
are part of the strategy.
But the important thing is that it moves the center of the
city south and east, to include the southeast and southwest
waterfronts. It crosses the river into Anacostia. So it makes
the National Mall no longer the lower boundary of downtown, but
literally the center of Center City Washington.
So we have a deep interest in the future of the Mall. We
have been collaborating with our Federal partners on a series
of efforts to enhance circulation and the quality of experience
for residents, workers, and visitors to our city.
Since 2006, several DC Government agencies, including the
Office of Planning, the State Historic Preservation Office, and
the District Department of Transportation, have been engaging
with the National Park Service as it develops its 50-year
comprehensive vision statement for the National Mall.
Throughout this planning process, discussions have focused on
preservation and the necessary evolution of the Mall in
response to opportunities created in part by the revitalization
of surrounding city blocks, waterfront destinations, and
emerging neighborhoods.
Another district collaboration with the Federal planning
agencies resulted in a framework document called, ``Planning
Together for Central Washington,'' that Mr. Cogbill will be
talking to you more about, so I will leave that part.
And for the past two years, we have been working with the
National Capital Planning Commission, the District's Department
of Parks and Recreation, and the National Park Service on an
effort called Capital Space. It is an effort designed so that
local and Federal agencies can develop a comprehensive system
to manage all the parks and open spaces in the District.
While the National Mall is certainly an icon in the
nation's capitol city, it is also a vital city park that
provides both positive and active recreation for local and
regional workers and residents. The facilities and programs
provided on the Mall, including more than 6 volleyball courts,
22 baseball diamonds, 2 football fields, 3 rugby fields, and
many more active recreational spaces, they are a big part of
helping us meet the challenge of active recreation facilities
in the District, and making the city one of the most livable in
the world.
In addition, we are currently involved in one other
collaboration with the Park Service related to the need for
improvements to floodplain protection in the District.
Recently, FEMA highlighted concerns that they and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers had about an increased risk of flooding on
the Mall, as well as the Federal triangle, because of
deficiencies in the existing Potomac Park Levee, particularly
at the 17th Street closure.
With the Park Service and our other Federal partners,
particularly the National Capital Planning Commission, FEMA
itself, and GSA, we have organized an unprecedented cooperative
effort that allows us to move very rapidly toward an immediate
remedy that will protect the National Mall, Federal buildings,
and private property, and result in construction of an improved
levee system we hope in the next 18 months.
These collaborative efforts have several things in common,
including recognizing the need to relieve some of the pressure
for monuments, memorials, and the increasing number of
activities on the Mall, by making other important locations in
the city visible, well-known, convenient, and easily
accessible. And a high-performing transportation system is very
important to that, providing convenient, safe, and equitable
access to the National Mall, and allowing residents and
visitors to experience the city by foot, by bike, by transit.
And that is a goal that we all share.
We are proud of the fact that for many of our city's
visitors, their very first experience on transit is in the
District of Columbia. We aspire to enhance our transit system
with cutting-edge transportation technology, and really make it
possible for a walkable urban character way-finding, green
infrastructure, and transit to support strong and inviting
connections between the Mall and the center city areas.
Together, I think we can do all of these things, realize
all of our ambitions for the Mall, and be a model of green and
sustainable development.
We would like to support the vision of a management plan
that emerges for the Mall that will afford great opportunities
for enhancements to event programming, transportation, parking,
visitor information systems and amenities, so that the city can
realize its vision as a globally competitive, green and
sustainable capitol city, as well as continue the Mall's legacy
as a permanent world's fair, demonstrating to the United States
citizens and visitors what it is like to experience 21st
century transportation and green and sustainable development
practices.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony on
behalf of the District of Columbia and Mayor Adrian Fenty. I
would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Tregoning follows:]
Statement of Harriet Tregoning, Director, DC Office of Planning
Good morning members of the House Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands. I am Harriet
Tregoning, Director of the District of Columbia Office of Planning and
I am pleased to present testimony on behalf of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty
regarding the future of the National Mall.
Pierre L'Enfant referred to the Mall as ``the vast esplanade,'' and
intended it to be the symbolic heart of the District of Columbia. The
National Mall has been the city's common, its central park, its
ceremonial gathering place, its festival site, and its protest grounds.
Through the years, the Mall has hosted an incredibly diverse array
of activities. In the late 19th century, activities on the Mall
included farming, canal transport, and a train depot. In the early 20th
century, people could be found strolling in romantic gardens,
picnicking on the grass, and studying botanical displays. Now, on any
given day one can find families ice skating, playing ball, listening to
blues, jogging, bicycling, flying kites, watching fireworks, or viewing
monuments by moonlight.
The Mall has also hosted an amazing range of events--from the Solar
Decathlon, the Smithsonian Folk Life Festival, and the Memorial Day
concert, to marches in support of AIDS research, a breast cancer cure,
climate change action or an end to famine. These events create a
vibrancy that makes living in the nation's capital a unique experience,
with the Mall an inspiring and evolving place of exploration,
education, and ideas.
The Mall has long been the southern boundary of the District's
Downtown. With Downtown's emergence over the past 10 years as both a
real residential neighborhood and entertainment district, and as the
premiere office location in the region, the Mall has been an important
part of the area's growing vibrancy. However, the District of
Columbia's Downtown will be fully built out in the next five years.
Mayor Adrian Fenty unveiled a development and quality of life strategy
earlier this year--the Center City Action Agenda--in order to continue
to capture the growing demand for office, retail, culture,
entertainment, and residential space. The Center City Action Agenda
identifies an area nearly three times the size of the current Downtown
that will be home to future vibrant, green, and sustainable mixed-use
development served by transit, but also designed to be walkable and
bikeable. Several emerging neighborhoods surrounding downtown are part
of the strategy, including NoMA, the area north of Massachusetts where
NPR and the Department of Justice recently announced their relocation;
the Capital Riverfront, where the new LEED-certified Nationals baseball
stadium recently opened; Hill East, along the Anacostia, east of the
Capitol Hill neighborhood; the Southwest Waterfront; Mount Vernon; and
Poplar Point/Anacostia. This strategy moves the center of the city
south and east to include the southeast and southwest waterfronts and
crosses the river into Anacostia. No longer the lower boundary of
Downtown, the Mall becomes the literal center of Center City
Washington.
The District of Columbia has a deep interest in the future of the
Mall. We have been collaborating with our federal partners on a series
of efforts to enhance circulation and the quality of experiences for
residents, workers, and visitors to our city.
Since 2006, several DC Government agencies, including the DC Office
of Planning, the State Historic Preservation Office (as one of the
Section 106 review consulting parties) and the District Department of
Transportation, have been engaging with the National Park Service as it
develops a 50-year comprehensive vision statement for the National
Mall. Throughout this planning process, discussion has focused on
preservation and necessary evolution of the Mall in response to
opportunities created by the revitalization of the surrounding city
blocks, waterfront destinations, and emerging neighborhoods.
Another of the District's recent collaborations with federal
planning agencies resulted in a vision framework document called
``Planning Together for Central Washington,'' which gives voice to the
shared collective goals of the District and the federal agencies with
responsibility for the stewardship and development of Central
Washington, including the Mall. The DC Office of Planning, the National
Park Service, the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission
of Fine Arts, and the Architect of the Capitol envision a Central
Washington that achieves:
Welcoming Atmosphere
Well-Connected Public Space
Distinctive Places
Green and Sustainable Development
21st Century Transportation
Also, for the past two years, the DC Office of Planning and the
District's Department of Parks and Recreation have been working with
the National Park Service and the National Capital Planning Commission
on a collaborative planning effort called CapitalSpace so that local
and federal agencies can develop a comprehensive system to manage parks
and open space located in the District. While the National Mall is an
icon in our nation's capital city, it is also a vital city park that
provides both passive and active recreation for local and regional
workers and residents. The CapitalSpace project has identified a
deficiency in District-owned recreation facilities in Center City and
other close-in neighborhoods. A significant challenge exists in an area
like ours with significant growth and few land resources. The
facilities and programs provided on the Mall--including more than six
volleyball courts, 22 baseball diamonds, two football fields, and three
rugby fields--play a big part in helping meet this challenge, as well
as making the District one of the most livable cities in the world.
In addition, we are currently involved in another collaboration
with the National Park Service related to the need for improvements to
floodplain protection in the District. Recently the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) highlighted concerns they and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers had about an increased risk of flooding on the Mall,
as well as the Federal Triangle and adjacent areas because of
deficiencies in the existing Potomac Park Levee, particularly at the
17th Street closure. With NPS and our other federal partners including
NCPC, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, FEMA, and General Services
Administration, we have organized an unprecedented cooperative effort
that has allowed us to move very rapidly towards immediate remedies
that will protect the National Mall, federal buildings, and private
property. We are very appreciative of our federal partners, especially
NPS, for the spirit of cooperation, and the quality of the resources
that they have dedicated to this effort, which we expect to result in
construction of an improved levee system in the next 18 months.
These collaborative efforts have several things in common,
including recognizing the need to relieve some of the pressure for
monuments, memorials, and the increasing number of activities on the
Mall by making other important locations in the city visible, well-
known, convenient, and easily accessible. In order to realize this
vision, the parties agree that key investments in a few streets and
avenues are essential. A high-performing transportation system that
provides convenient, safe, and equitable access to the National Mall
and allows residents and visitors to experience the city by foot, bike,
or transit is a goal that is shared among the entities responsible for
stewardship of the National Mall. We are proud of the fact that for
many of our city's visitors, their first experience with transit is in
Washington, DC. We aspire to enhance our transit system with cutting
edge transportation technology. Enhancing the ability for residents and
visitors to get to and from the National Mall via 4th Street, 7th
Street, 14th Street, Constitution and Independence Avenues on foot,
bicycle, and transit is a priority. A walkable urban character, way-
finding information systems, green infrastructure, and transit support
strong and inviting connections between the Mall and surrounding Center
City areas. Along existing vehicular routes across the Mall, improved
pedestrian access, additional street trees, ground-level retail, and
cultural activity can encourage residents to intimately experience on
foot the nation's most important civic space and venue for expression
of democratic events and ideals.
Part of the legacy of the Mall, dating from the McMillan plan, is
the notion of that grand civic space as a kind of permanent world's
fair, an exposition that showcases the latest technology and industry,
the finest art and cultural achievements, as well as the history of
this country and the world. We think the Mall should continue to be
that place--but now also showcasing the best in 21st century
transportation, and in green and sustainable development practices--in
keeping with the General Services Administration's leadership and with
the District's own Green Building Act, the most ambitious in the
nation. Transportation around the nation's premier civic space in
particular should be a model for the rest of the country. This entails
designing ``Complete Streets'' that provide for the mobility of
pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders, and drivers in an attractive and
safe environment. This also means a road infrastructure designed using
``Green Highway'' principles, such as use of recycled materials,
watershed-based stormwater management, and shared space for motorized
and non-motorized travel. In addition, 21st century energy-efficient
vehicles should be provided as options for visitors to travel among
tourist sites along the National Mall, as well as other popular
destinations throughout the city, such as Georgetown, Dupont Circle,
and Union Station. This also means re-thinking management of the Mall
to support a strong presence of the District's SmartBike program on the
National Mall. Bike sharing has a host of benefits for the environment
in and around the National Mall. It is carbon-free and has no negative
impact on air quality. It combats climate change, supports green collar
jobs, reduces congestion, decreases noise pollution, requires no
parking spaces, provides healthy exercise, and offers residents,
workers, and tourists a great way to experience and navigate the city.
As the National Park Service prepares to celebrate one hundred
years of stewardship and leadership in the management of some of the
nation's most treasured public spaces, we have arrived at an important
crossroads in the history of the National Mall. We are transitioning
from a period where the citizens of our nation primarily experienced
national parks by visiting our country's important wilderness areas.
Today some of our most visited national parks are in urban communities
like Golden Gate Park in San Francisco or the National Mall in
Washington. These urban park sites are very intensely used--overused,
some may say. Today, visitors have much higher expectations about the
quality, programming, and management of urban parks than in previous
eras. The Sculpture Garden at the National Gallery of Art is one park
that seems to fully meet those higher expectations. Highly utilized, it
is programmed for a variety of seasonally-appropriate activities,
features a prominent and lovely restaurant, offering not just
sustenance, but cuisine, and it is meticulously maintained. However, we
should examine how we might enhance the existing resources allocated to
our national parks and the current guidelines for the use and
management of the National Mall to meet the new expectations of its 25
million annual visitors. Other urban parks have used public-private
partnerships to provide for the unique and evolving needs of urban park
users, including the Central Park Conservancy in New York City and the
Golden Gate National Park Conservancy in San Francisco.
Together, I think we can continue to do all this and even more. We
can take further steps to be a model of green and sustainable
development. In the Summer of 2007, the Mall was host to the Solar
Decathlon and recently the U.S. Botanic Garden constructed a
Sustainable Schoolyard exhibit to demonstrate how green schoolyards can
lead to healthy, active, green, and livable communities. It is our hope
that the vision and management plan that emerges for the National Mall
will afford great opportunities for enhancements to event programming,
public transportation, parking, visitor information systems and
amenities in order that the city may realize its vision as a globally
competitive, green and sustainable capital city, as well as continue
the Mall's legacy as a permanent World Fair demonstrating to United
States citizens and visitors what it is like to experience 21st Century
transportation and green and sustainable development practices.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony on behalf
of the District of Columbia and Mayor Adrian Fenty. I am pleased to
answer any questions you may have.
______
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. Now I will ask our other
panelist, Mr. John V. Cogbill, III, Chairman, National Capital
Planning Commission.
Sir, your testimony.
STATEMENT OF JOHN V. COGBILL, III, CHAIRMAN,
NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Mr. Cogbill. Good morning, Chairman Grijalva and members of
the Subcommittee. I am John Cogbill, Chairman of the National
Capital Planning Commission, also known as NCPC. Our agency
serves as the Federal government's planning agency for the
National Capital Region.
I welcome the opportunity to speak to you about NCPC's role
as it relates to the National Mall and this great capitol city.
I am pleased to report that there is great cooperation taking
place among the key agencies responsible for the Mall and its
surrounding areas.
NCPC, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Park
Service, the District of Columbia Government, and the Architect
of the Capitol are closely collaborating with each other and
others who have a vital interest in the Mall.
Together we recently announced a joint endeavor planning
together for Central Washington. Our efforts are distinct, yet
reflect the shared objectives we have for the city and the
treasured open space of the Mall. We know that there are
continuing and increasing demands on the National Mall due to
its role as a preeminent symbolic landscape in the country. The
Mall is an historic terrain, as envisioned by Pierre L'Enfant
and the McMillan Commission; but it also is an evolving
landscape that must be adapted to meet the needs of the current
and future generations.
As part of its ongoing work to preserve and protect the
Mall, NCPC and CFA joined forces in May of 2006 to develop the
National Capitol Framework Plan, a comprehensive study of
predominantly Federal precincts immediately surrounding the
Mall. This initiative is one of four of the planning together
projects.
The Framework Plan will identify opportunities to create
new and exciting cultural destinations beyond the Mall for
memorials, museums, and public gatherings.
The plan is being developed with the input of important
stakeholders that include key Federal and local agencies, as
well as the public. The Framework Plan seeks to preserve the
open space, grace, and beauty of the National Mall, create
desirable settings for new cultural destinations, and enhance
the appearance and function of our public spaces; improve
connections to existing and new destinations, and contribute to
the growth and sustainability of our capital city.
The initiative focuses on these key objectives:
establishing the Federal triangle and northwest rectangle as
high-quality workplaces, and workable cultural destinations;
strengthening Pennsylvania Avenue's image as Washington's main
street; transforming the Southwest Federal Center Precinct into
a distinguished workplace and a welcoming cultural hub. And
finally, establishing East Potomac Park as an easily accessible
destination that offers expanded opportunities for
commemorations, celebration, and recreation.
By expanding the setting for new memorials and museums,
enhancing the function and beauty of public space, and linking
destinations, the Framework Plan can be a valuable tool to
preserve the Mall. The Framework Plan builds upon NCPC's
extending the legacy and the memorials and museums master plan.
Legacy is the visionary guide for long-term growth in the
Capitol for the next 50 to 100 years. It calls for recentering
the city on the U.S. Capitol by distributing memorials,
museums, and other new development on an axis with the Capitol
and in emerging areas along the waterfront.
The 2001 Memorials and Museums Master Plan aims to protect
the Capitol city's open space, and ensure future sites for
commemoration. It identifies 100 sites throughout the city for
memorials and museums, and called for a reserve or no-build
zone on the Mall, which Congress enacted in 2003.
Since its release, the Plan has guided five memorials to
sites off the Mall. The success of the Master Plan supports the
Framework Plan's premise that memorial sponsors will be
attracted to sites off the Mall, as long as these are appealing
locations. Creating new destinations throughout Washington will
ease pressure on the Mall, stimulate activity in other parts of
the city, and encourage visitors to see more of our capitol
city.
The opportunities identified in the Framework Plan supports
NCPC's earlier efforts, and complements the work of our
partnering agencies. Shared goals include preservation of the
Mall, expanding the city center to the waterfront, creating
distinguished and accessible public places, and achieving a
livable and sustainable capitol city.
Achieving a sustainable capitol will, in fact, be the focus
of an NCPC conference in September, assembling planners from
around the globe to explore the leadership role of capitol
cities in creating a more sustainable community.
The Framework Plan supports efforts to increase visitor
support facilities on or near the Mall. We are working with the
Park Service as a cooperating agency on its National Mall Plan,
and we are participating with their efforts to identify an
interpretive transportation system. We are also working with
the District on its Center City Action Agenda, which supports
our efforts to draw memorial and museum sponsors to locations
off the Mall.
Further, the NCPC, the Park Service, and the District have
joined together to develop a permanent levee location solution
for the National Mall that is sensitive to the historic
landscape.
Since 1936, a levee system in the vicinity where temporary
buildings were located on the Mall during World War II, has
helped to protect Washington's Federal buildings and downtown
business district from river flooding. However, the Army Corps
of Engineers identified a need to make the levee more reliable
and effective against a 100-year floor. The partnering agencies
recognized the Mall as an evolving landscape that must be
adapted to meet current and future needs.
In closing, thank you for inviting me to brief you on our
continuing efforts to preserve the National Mall. We welcome
the opportunity to keep you informed on the progress of the
Framework Plan, and I work to improve the experience of those
who visit, live, and work in our nation's capitol.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cogbill follows:]
Statement of John V. Cogbill, III, Chairman,
National Capital Planning Commission
Good morning, Chairman Grijalva and Members of the Subcommittee on
National Parks, Forest and Public Lands. My name is John Cogbill. I am
the Chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission, also known as
NCPC. The agency serves as the federal government's central planning
agency for the National Capital Region.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak with you about
NCPC's role in enhancing the future of the National Mall and burnishing
Washington's image as a great capital city.
This is an ideal time to focus on the future of the Mall and
central Washington. Currently, there is extraordinarily good
coordination taking place among key agencies responsible for the Mall
and its surrounding areas.
NCPC, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Park Service,
the District of Columbia Government, and the Architect of the Capitol
are closely collaborating with each other and others who have a vital
interest in this open space. Together, these agencies announced a joint
endeavor in February--``Planning Together for Central Washington.'' Our
coordinated efforts are distinct; yet reflect the shared objectives we
have for the city and the treasured open space of the Mall that is
recognized by millions of Americans as a premier symbolic site in the
nation's capital.
NCPC recognizes that there are continuing and increasing demands on
the National Mall due to its role as the preeminent symbolic landscape
in our country. The Mall is an historic landscape, as envisioned by
Pierre L'Enfant and the McMillan Commission, but it also is an evolving
landscape that must be adapted to meet the needs of current and future
generations.
In recognition of the needs of the Mall, NCPC and CFA joined forces
to develop the National Capital Framework Plan, a comprehensive study
of predominantly federal precincts immediately surrounding the Mall.
This initiative is one of four of the Planning Together projects. The
other three include the Park Service's National Mall Plan, the city's
Center City Action Agenda, and the Architect of the Capitol's Capitol
Complex Master Plan. NCPC's and CFA's Framework Plan will identify
opportunities to create new and exciting cultural destinations beyond
the Mall for memorials, museums, and public gatherings. Launched in May
2006, the plan is being developed with the input of important
stakeholders that include key federal and local agencies as well as the
public.
The Framework Plan seeks to
Preserve the open space, grace, and beauty of the
National Mall;
Create desirable settings for new cultural destinations
and enhance the appearance and function of public spaces, streets,
parks, and plazas for workers, visitors, and residents;
Improve connections to existing and new destinations; and
Contribute to the growth and sustainability of the
capital city.
The initiative focuses on the enhancement of five key areas: (1)
establishing the Federal Triangle and the Northwest Rectangle as high-
quality workplaces and walkable cultural destinations that are
connected by beautiful and engaging public spaces; (2) strengthening
Pennsylvania Avenue's image as Washington's main street; (3)
transforming the Southwest Federal Center precinct into a distinguished
workplace and a welcoming cultural hub and visitor destination; and,
(4) establishing East Potomac Park as an easily accessible destination
in Washington's iconic landscape, offering expanded opportunities for
commemoration, celebration, active recreation, and leisure activities.
By expanding the setting for new memorials and museums, enhancing
the function and beauty of public space, and linking destinations
within the city, the Framework Plan can be a valuable tool to preserve
the Mall. To achieve these goals, the plan explores beautification of
public spaces; infrastructure changes; mixed-use development
opportunities in precincts around the Mall; the use of federal land and
facilities in the monumental core, and transit options between
downtown, the Mall, and the waterfront.
The Framework Plan respects the foundation laid by Pierre L'Enfant,
designer of the capital city. It is an action plan that builds upon
NCPC's Extending the Legacy and the Memorials and Museums Master Plan.
Legacy is a visionary guide for long-term growth in the capital for the
next 50 to 100 years. It is the result of a multi-year collaboration
with federal landholding agencies, Congress, the public, preeminent
architects, planners, historians, and other experts. Legacy called for
re-centering the city on the U.S. Capitol by distributing memorials,
museums, and other new development on axis with the Capitol and in
emerging areas along the waterfront.
The Memorials and Museums Master Plan, released in 2001, aims to
protect the capital city's open space and ensure future sites for
commemorative works by identifying 100 appropriate sites throughout the
city. The Master Plan was the first tool designed to bring the visions
outlined in Legacy to fruition. In addition to identifying alternative
sites for commemorative works, the Master Plan called for the
establishment of a Reserve or no-build zone on the Mall, which Congress
enacted in 2003. Since its release, the Memorials and Museums Master
Plan has been instrumental in guiding five commemorative works to sites
off the Mall. These include the U.S. Air Force Memorial overlooking the
Pentagon, the Memorial to Victims of Communism (intersection of New
Jersey and Massachusetts Avenue), the Thomas Masaryk Memorial (at
Massachusetts and Florida Avenue), and two future memorials--one
honoring President Eisenhower (to be located near the Air & Space
Museum) and another honoring American Veterans Disabled for Life (along
2nd Street, SW across from Washington Avenue).
The success of the Master Plan in locating commemorative works off
the Mall supports the Framework Plan's premise that memorial sponsors
will be attracted to sites off the Mall, as long as there are appealing
and exciting destination spots elsewhere in the city. Creating new
destinations throughout Washington will ease pressure on the Mall,
stimulate activity in other parts of the city, and encourage visitors
to see more of central Washington. Collectively, this will broaden the
public's image of the nation's capital and improve the visitor's
experience.
The opportunities identified in the Framework Plan support and
complement the work of the National Park Service, the District of
Columbia, and the Architect of the Capitol, which have undertaken major
initiatives for central Washington, DC. Shared goals include
preservation of the Mall, expanding the city center to the waterfront,
creating distinguished and accessible public places, and achieving a
liveable and sustainable capital city.
The National Park Service's Mall Plan is a necessary tool to both
preserve the Mall's historic landscape and manage its physical
development. As America's symbolic front yard, the Mall must
accommodate high levels of use, both in numbers of visitors, the volume
of special events, and commemorative needs. The Mall, roughly 650 acres
in size and framed by historic landscape, should exemplify model
practices in environmental sustainability. We are working with the
National Park Service as a cooperating agency on the National Mall
Plan, and we have collaborated with NPS throughout the development of
our Framework Plan.
NCPC also is an active participant in the National Park Service's
identification of a new interpretive transportation system. We strongly
support an easy-to-use and affordable system that is integrated with
the city's urban transportation network to serve visitors, residents
and workers. One potential future transit service that could be
considered for the Mall is the successful DC Circulator system, first
proposed in NCPC's Legacy Plan. The city's Circulator system offers
frequent, affordable, and easy-to-use service that has the flexibility
to accommodate the changing needs of the National Mall. NCPC, in
collaboration with its partners, also seeks to improve vehicular,
bicycle, and transit options between the monumental core and the center
city, and along the waterfront.
In addition to the Park Service's Mall Plan, the Framework Plan
also complements the District's Center City Action Agenda, which
strives to improve downtown DC and advances Washington's identity as a
world-class city. The District's work to enhance the capital city
supports our efforts to draw memorial and museum sponsors to locations
away from the Mall, by creating vibrant and attractive destinations
that feature a variety of mixed-uses such as retail, restaurants,
offices, and residential dwellings.
Further, NCPC, the Park Service, and the District have joined
together to develop a permanent levee solution for the National Mall
that is sensitive to the historic landscape. Since 1936, a levee
system--in the vicinity where temporary buildings were located on the
Mall during World War II--has helped to protect Washington's federal
buildings and downtown business district from river flooding. However,
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers identified a need to make the levee
more reliable and effective against a 100-year flood. The partnering
agencies recognize that the Mall is an evolving landscape that must be
adapted to meet current and future needs. We are committed to
collaborating with our federal and local stakeholders to design and
construct an interim fix to this problem and to identify potential
permanent solutions.
NCPC shares the concerns voiced by Congressional members, the
National Park Service, and the American people regarding the need to
protect this historic terrain and ensure the availability of visitor
support facilities on or near the Mall. The Framework Plan supports
efforts to increase food service, restrooms, seating, and signage on
the Mall and in adjacent areas in order to help create a world-class
experience for the millions of annual visitors from home and abroad.
Americans take proud ownership of the National Mall for many reasons,
and we must ensure that they are inspired by their visit.
NCPC and CFA are currently preparing a draft of the Framework Plan
for public review and comment. The plan has benefited from public input
at several public meetings and from coordination with many federal and
District of Columbia agencies. A 16-member interagency Steering
Committee also is providing oversight to the planning process. We
intend to present the draft to the interagency Steering Committee on
June 2. A final draft will then be presented to both Commissions and
released to the public for review and comment. Following public
comment, staff will refine the plan as appropriate and seek final
approval from NCPC and CFA.
Thank you for inviting me to share NCPC's work on the National Mall
and to brief you on our continuing efforts to develop the National
Capital Framework Plan. We welcome the opportunity to keep you informed
of our progress on the Framework Plan and as well as our collaborative
efforts with our partners to improve the image of the nation's capital
and the experience of those who visit, live, and work in Washington,
DC.
______
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. Let me begin with you,
Mr. Cogbill, and comment that you made in your testimony.
Since establishing the reserve and shepherding all the new
memorials into other areas of the city, how have these new
memorial locations been, throughout the city, been received by
those seeking to establish the new memorials, number one? And
number two, is there a member of the city under these new
guidelines that seems to be more popular in the establishment
of these memorials?
Mr. Cogbill. Well, we had great success with the 2-M Plan.
We actually had five memorials that have come before us, and
have now been considered, and are actually going to be located
off the Mall, three currently in existence. The Air Force
Memorial at the Pentagon is one. The Victims of Communism
Memorial, which was established in 2007 at New Jersey and
Massachusetts Avenue; the Thomas Masaryk Memorial, who was the
first president of Czechoslovakia, has been established. And we
currently have looked at plans and are working with those who
would propose to build the monument to President Eisenhower,
and also the veterans disabled for life. Both of those have a
picked site, all of those have picked sites from the 2-M Plan.
And we have continuing interest in people coming before us.
The second part of your question, we believe this has been
well received. What has the effect of is making people focus on
areas outside of the reserve, realizing that there are very
distinguished sites available within the city that can be used.
And by having this book available to them, they understand and
appreciate the viability of these sites. And it enhances the
visitor experience in Washington.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. Ms. Tregoning, let me, a couple of
questions.
Do you think that the needs of local residents are in
conflict with, as we talk about this planning process and the
future of the Mall, are they in conflict with the need of
visitors, tourists?
Ms. Tregoning. Mr. Chairman, I don't think that they are in
conflict. If you ask me could they be better integrated, could
the means of the visitors and the residents be better
integrated, I would have to say yes, they could, particularly
where it concerns transportation.
Right now we do have more or less separate transportation
systems for visitors with interpretive services, versus the
transit that serves other parts of the city. We have a
relatively new premium transit service called the DC
Circulator, and we have designated a new route that goes to the
Mall, particularly on weekends, to try to accomplish some of
our common planning goals, which includes getting people to
experience other parts of the city than just the Mall, which
helps to relieve some of that pressure to always be there on
the Mall. And frankly, enjoy the many revitalizing and exciting
neighborhoods around the city. And I think there is opportunity
to do more of that integration.
Mr. Grijalva. Then back to that same question. So do you,
is the Mall seen by local residents as more, as more important
as an urban green space? Or as more important as a memorial
landscape?
Ms. Tregoning. I would have to say, Mr. Chairman, that even
for long-time Washington residents, I think it is important as
both of those things. That, you know, people are very, very
proud of the nationally significant events that happen on the
Mall, and participate in a lot of them. And that is really a
source of great pride and inspiration about living here in
Washington.
But it is also true that, you know, being able to have a
Saturday morning softball game, or do some recreational
activities after work, or jog along the Mall, that is an
important part of the quality of life that Washington citizens
enjoy, and that visitors also get to take part in. So I would
hate to savor one thing at the exclusion of the other.
Mr. Grijalva. As a non-Federal entity working with all
these Federal partners in this process, how would you
characterize the level of collaboration and cooperation of all
these agencies involved in the planning process?
Ms. Tregoning. I would have to say, Mr. Chairman, that I
have only been with the District Government for about a year
and a half; but from everything that I understand, I think that
we are enjoying a time of unprecedented cooperation and
collaboration, and a great commonality in some of our goals,
some of our planning goals. And particularly our transportation
goals.
So I would have to say it is a very favorable climate.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. My time is winding down.
If I have an opportunity to ask some questions of the
superintendent.
Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. Are these new mics? You guys are
spending money all over the place, aren't you, here? It is a
good thing it wasn't in the supplemental.
Mr. Cogbill and Ms. Tregoning--is that proper? Good. As I
have heard your oral testimony, you have talked about the
vision of expanding sites so that people are visiting other
areas rather than the Mall, as well as the cooperation. I would
just congratulate you on that. It sounds as if the cooperative
nature between the Federal government and the city is working
well, and you have a good vision.
I think the idea of expanding to other sites and
emphasizing other sites within Washington is a marvelous plan.
And I appreciate the testimony you have given so far. It is one
that I think is very positive. So thank you for your
presentation, and I urge you to push forward with that vision
you have enunciated today in your oral testimony.
Ms. O'Dell, the public comment needs that you recited from
the Mall area seems to be the same needs that I have heard on
every, every national park that we have. Are you treating this
Mall differently than any other national parks, as far as this
public process or this planning process?
Ms. O'Dell. I believe that we are following the National
Park Service process for planning, and that we are putting a
heavy emphasis on public involvement. And we have chosen to
extend public comment periods to let more people put their
voice forward for our planning effort. And we intend to go
forward with more public involvement and public comment periods
as the plan develops.
So I believe we are on track with the National Park
Service's approved planning process, and that we will always
err on the side of more public involvement than less.
Mr. Bishop. The 41 seasonal employees that you have added,
what kinds of jobs are these?
Ms. Tregoning. We have maintenance employees, basically
laborers. We have resource management employees who are doing
more specific maintenance at monuments and memorials. And then
we have park rangers to do interpretation and education.
Mr. Bishop. How many rangers of that 41 would there be,
roughly?
Ms. Tregoning. About 20.
Mr. Bishop. About half and half, then.
Ms. Tregoning. Yes. Approximately, yes, sir.
Mr. Bishop. I appreciate that very much. I just have two
other comments. In fact, in the morning I brought seven members
of the German Bundestag to one of the national parks; we flew
in late last night.
The things that you all need to work on in the future are
what you have already identified: that is, access to the malls.
Ms. Tregoning. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bishop. You know, parking abilities, or those
alternatives for parking, that has to be there. And the second
is obviously the condition of the Mall.
I am on the softball league, and I enjoy playing out there.
So I would urge you not to take our fields during the summer,
and I would urge the Chairman to make sure votes don't go later
than 6:00 on a Wednesday night.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Bishop. For the months we would get off at 3:00, and
all of a sudden softball season starts and you screwed me over
three weeks in a row. There better not be a fourth, that is all
I can say.
Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Grijalva. Mr. Kildee.
Mr. Kildee. Thank you for having this hearing this morning.
I have been in Washington for 32 years, and have a great love
of the open spaces of the Mall. And I commend all of you for
working together. I think it takes a great cooperative effort.
And all I can say right here is to encourage you to continue
that. You are not competitors; you are people who want to
enhance everyone's experience on the Mall, and maintain the
nature of the Mall with some of the additions that we do put
there. And I think I just want to commend you for that
cooperative attitude among yourselves, and urge you to continue
that in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grijalva. Mr. Brown, do you, any questions? Thank you,
sir.
Mr. Holt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have a couple of--
the Mall is, obviously has many, many different kinds of uses,
and that have been tough on the landscape. And what I want to
ask is, what is going into the plan that will look after the
maintenance of the trees? One particular area that I have in
mind is Constitutional Gardens, at the, I guess it is the west
end of the Mall. At the time of the Bicentennial in 1976, that
area was designed in keeping with the event planned. Those
trees are now more than 30 years old. They are all stunted, and
it does not look like the mature forest that it should be
turning into.
Our colleague, Ms. Holmes Norton, spoke about the need for
shade, and to appreciate the Mall. It really is at a premium.
And part of the problem is that the drainage, the soil
preparation, and the maintenance simply has not been done in
Constitutional Gardens, as one example.
And I wanted to know, in addition to all the attention to
the memorials and the buildings, what attention is being paid
to the trees? And that will be for all three of you.
Ms. O'Dell. May I begin? I believe that as part of the
planning process for the Mall, as we look at other places
around the country and around the world, we look at their best
practices of how they maintain their turf, how they maintain
their trees, and how they maintain their monuments and
memorials.
And we are trying to learn from other places that have
better results than we are currently having on the National
Mall. So we are looking for better practices.
And as the Superintendent of the National Mall, that is
where I need to start. I need to question our assumptions about
the maintenance program that we currently have, and try and
figure out how we can do better with the resources that we
currently have.
And the Natural Resources is a very strong point of
conversation with the planning team and with our consulting
parties, who all share the desire to maintain that historic
landscape, those historic trees; who provide the amenities for
visitors as they visit the National Mall.
Mr. Holt. Ms. Tregoning?
Ms. Tregoning. Thank you, Mr. Holt. We don't have the
jurisdictions to plant trees on the Mall, but I can tell you
that the tree canopy in Washington, D.C. is a very important
issue for us. And we are, we have efforts underway right now,
in collaboration with some important non-profit partners,
including the Casey Trees Foundation, to restore the tree
canopy in Washington, D.C. because of the many benefits, as I
believe you know, trees provide, including stormwater
management, reducing the urban heat island effect, carbon
sequestration, and simply providing important shade and, and
traffic calming, if you will, if you want to look at the effect
that trees have helping to create a street edge along our major
city streets. So we are certainly very supportive of any
efforts of the Park Service or our other Federal partners to do
tree planting, and to maintain and nurture their trees.
Mr. Holt. Mr. Cogbill?
Mr. Cogbill. I will respond in three different areas. First
on the Mall. The National Capital Planning Commission worked
closely with the construction of the World War II Memorial to
make sure that the elm roots were trimmed back. That was part
of the plan, overseen by the Park Service; and that was very
helpful in keeping those trees alive.
The same advice had been given to the Vietnam Veterans'
visitor folks to do the same things, to make sure that we
preserved those trees.
With respect to other spots in the city, we were actually
working, when we did Pennsylvania Avenue and did the
improvements there, we specifically went out and purchased
disease-resistant elms so that we would have a much better
likelihood of them surviving.
And finally, we did also work with the city in the Casey
Foundation in doing the tree inventory for the city. And that
would also be reflected in what we are working with now through
Capital Space.
Mr. Holt. Let me just also ask the Park Service, as you
plan events or issue permits for events, that you steer those
events that are incompatible with preservation of trees, and
that might damage the tree roots, to areas, to areas that are
better suited for those activities.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grijalva. Mr. Sarbanes.
Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really don't have
any questions. I am here to learn. I don't envy the task you
have before you in terms of coordinating all the different
perspectives and demands there are for use of the Mall. It is
obviously not just a treasure for the District, but it is a
treasure for the nation. To balance those continued demands is
no small feat. So I will continue to listen with interest.
Thank you.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, sir. Ms. Holmes Norton, questions,
comments?
Ms. Norton. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Just a
few questions.
The Mall has always been crime-free. There was a terrible
exception a couple years ago when there were a number of
assaults on the Mall, specifically with handguns, walking and
talking to the Park Police, one of the bad assets of the
nation's capitol also as neglected as the Mall itself is. And
one of the reasons for these assaults is lighting frankly. In
fact, I think that was the major reason for the assaults.
Let me ask you about some specific lighting. What was
astonishing to me, and I think there was some effort made to
put temporary lighting, was that in this long, beautiful,
beautiful walkway between the Lincoln Memorial and the World
War II memorial, it was absolutely dark. Not a single light.
Now, of course, the assaults didn't happen there. They
happened where the lights were dim and there were bushes also.
I hope you are not waiting for the Trust to get lighting on the
Mall as we get to the tourist season and as we face the
possibility that we can have more crime going on. Is there
permanent lighting between those two great memorials?
Ms. O'Dell. The lighting that was installed right after
those assaults is still in place, Congresswoman, and it is
functional. And----
Ms. Norton. But it is not permanent yet.
Ms. O'Dell. No, ma'am, it is not permanent yet. We do have
funding requests in place to create permanent lighting as well
as improve the landscape between Lincoln and the World War II
Memorial. But we do make certain that those temporary lighting
that were installed are functioning.
Ms. Norton. There was a knifing apparently yesterday at
Third and Jefferson Street, very close to the Capitol. I don't
know if those were teenagers or what in the world happened. Can
you give us a report on that assault?
Ms. O'Dell. Yes, ma'am. I heard from the U.S. Park Police
this morning. They were juveniles. The stabbing apparently
happened at a Metro station, and the victim, who was stabbed,
chased his assailants into the National Mall, where the Capitol
Police, the Metropolitan Police and the U.S. Park Police, were
able to work the incident.
Ms. Norton. Well, I congratulate them for, that it didn't
happen right on the Mall.
And Ms. O'Dell, you have a very heavy burden with respect
to what are the proposals that you have, that the Park Service
has come forward with.
First of all, the first burden is apparently to pave over
the reflecting pool. Is that right? Is that what you are going
to do?
Ms. O'Dell. There is an alternative in one of the plans to
make the reflecting pool by the Capitol drainable, so they can
use it for hard space, or it can have water in it.
Ms. Norton. Well, they do have a reflecting pool, but you
drain the water out sometimes?
Ms. O'Dell. Yes, ma'am, that is an alternative.
Ms. Norton. I think you have to be very careful about that
alternative. But I am concerned that the ruckus that has been
kicked up about why they are doing this, why do you wish to
confine many of these to a drained reflecting pool? And will
you assure me that the drained water, the water would be
promptly put back in the reflecting pool?
Ms. O'Dell. I think a lot of the concern about events was
articulated by members of the committee, that events are hard
on the turf. And we are trying to find ways and look at
alternatives that will preserve the turf, as well as allow for
large-scale events.
There have been no proposals in any of the draft
alternatives that would limit activities to any certain places
on the ground. We are looking at whether or not a hardscape
location would be beneficial for events, or whether or not it
would not be beneficial. And that is why it is a proposal and a
draft alternative, so that we can hear the public's thoughts
and comments on that, have it be considered by the planning
team and determine if there is benefit to create space like
that or not.
Ms. Norton. Ms. O'Dell, I couldn't somehow ignore the
initial upkeep on the turf, but the events that do the most
damage are the events that tourists, residents, perhaps most
come to see. What are you going to do? Move the Folklife
Festival or the Seymour Holmes Decathlon to the reflecting
pool? That is where the turf--I mean, you have, we can't have
more than--you tell me, how many demonstrations do we have each
year that make use of the grounds? Large demonstrations.
Ms. O'Dell. We have roughly 3,000 events that are permitted
on the National Mall.
Ms. Norton. I want to know how many large events.
Ms. O'Dell. There is probably 10 to a dozen large-scale
events that happen in----
Ms. Norton. Well, I think the burden on you is to show
that. Are you going to move the Folklife Festival or not? Are
you going to move the Seymour Holmes Decathlon or not? Is there
a proposal to do that as well?
Ms. O'Dell. There is not a proposal at this moment in time
to relocate any of those current events to different locations.
Ms. Norton. Well, in many running events, they dig into the
earth. If you want to know what really, in fact, causes damage,
I think you ought to look there first. I think paving over is a
very radical thing to do. And, of course, it seems to me that
if you look at the cost of draining it and putting it back,
putting the water back, and let me go to transportation if I
could, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to ask, I guess this is also, this is for Ms.
Tregoning, and it is also for you, Ms. O'Dell. We have this
long alternative bill, of course, that was approved, that was
the carbon footprint phase. Is that the kind of vehicle we have
to continue to use for tourists on the Mall, or are you
considering smaller, perhaps alternative-fuel vehicles among
the nonstandard?
Ms. O'Dell. We would be very interested in sustainable and
green technology as we move forward with transportational----
Ms. Norton. What is the state of, what is the state of the
contract?
Ms. O'Dell. The contract will expire in December of 2008.
And we are considering what we will consider alternative
transportation vehicles, and we are in the process of studying
the transportation needs, working with our colleagues on NCPC
and the District to determine how better to connect with
existing public transportation, and how to have affordable
transportation for visitors who want to get around the Mall. As
well as maintain our interpretive educational function that is
part of our current transportation offering.
Ms. Norton. Ms. Tregoning, these buses, these huge buses
along the Mall, they park in the Mall, they let people off at
the Mall. And if you talk with them, they will say the District
of Columbia doesn't provide them with anyplace to park, so what
are they to do? What is your response to that? And do we have
the same problem with the convention, with the opening of the
new, of the new park and the Capitol?
Ms. Tregoning. Congresswoman, we are absolutely looking for
places in the city where we could consolidate the tour bus
parking, because I think it is problematic in many different
parts of the city.
But I will emphasize what Ms. O'Dell just stated, that we
think that there is an opportunity to provide a lot more
choices to visitors on the Mall. The Tourmobile has been a
great thing for people who want to have a tour of the monuments
and want that interpretive service. But for a lot of visitors,
especially a lot of frequent visitors to Washington, they don't
necessarily need to have those interpretive services on every
trip, but they would love to be able to get to a lot of
destinations around the Mall, and also to be able to integrate
those Mall trips and visits to museums with more of an
experience of city life, at DuPont Circle, or at Georgetown, or
in Penn Quarter or Gallery Place, or many of the other emerging
neighborhoods, the Southwest waterfront.
So we think that there is an opportunity to do a much
better job of integrating those transportation services. And
because the 25 million visitors that come to Washington every
year, a lot of them come from places that don't have our level
of transportation services. So we are starting something called
Smart Bikes next month, where you can basically do bike-
sharing, take a bike trip for an hour. That is the perfect way
to see sites along the Mall.
So we are really looking----
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. Thank you, and I hate to
interrupt----
[Electronic interference.]
Mr. Grijalva.--allocated for questions.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. And let me turn to, I don't have
any follow-up questions. I will, Ms. O'Dell, submit my
questions in writing so we can--I didn't have a chance to ask
you--it has to do with staffing, has to do with park rangers
and safety issues, has to do with the social and the floor
plans. There is a mutual exclusivity to them, and I would like
you to respond to that assertion.
I don't have any follow-ups. Mine will be in writing. And
Mr. Bishop?
[No response.]
Mr. Grijalva. Does anyone on the panel have any follow-up
questions?
[No response.]
Mr. Grijalva. With that, let me thank you very much, and
welcome the next panel.
Ms. O'Dell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Pause.]
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. Let me welcome our last
panel, and thank you for your patience. Five minutes of
testimony, and your full testimony will be submitted, will be
part of the record, as well as any additional material you feel
you need to provide for us.
Let me begin with Mr. Arthur Spitzer, Legal Director,
American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area.
Welcome, sir. Your testimony.
STATEMENT OF ARTHUR B. SPITZER, LEGAL DIRECTOR, AMERICAN CIVIL
LIBERTIES UNION OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL AREA
Mr. Spitzer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. We appreciate the invitation to testify here today.
Our focus really is a much narrower one than those of the
other witnesses. And I have learned a lot already by listening
to what they have had to say.
The Mall is obviously a place of many important uses, and
has many challenges confronting it for the next several
decades. We have heard about the need for better access, better
signage, better restrooms, protecting the turf, better
lighting. The ACLU certainly has no quarrel with any of those
needs and goals. Speaking as an American citizen and a local
resident, I am in favor of all of those things. I am a regular
visitor to the Mall not only in my capacity as an ACLU lawyer,
but as a local citizen.
But our particular focus, of course, is on the use of the
Mall as a form for free expression and First Amendment
activity; and our, the point we wanted to emphasize here this
morning is just that that particular use of the Mall is one
that must be kept firmly in mind as a primary and
Constitutionally protected use of the Mall area.
As the Courts have recognized over many years, the Mall is
perhaps America's premiere First Amendment forum. Groups of all
kinds and sizes and shapes have come here, local groups and
groups from around the country, when they feel strongly the
need to communicate to their government with their presence;
not just by letters, not just by emails, not just by hiring a
lawyer, to be a lobbyist, but to actually come here and
demonstrate through their presence, through the efforts they
make through their travel, how important some issue is to them.
And the Mall is really the place for that kind of activity.
Of course, Lafayette Park and the White House sidewalk are
important places, the Ellipse Zone is an important place for
marches down Pennsylvania Avenue and Independence Avenue and
other places in the city, all of which are important and
Constitutionally protected.
But in particular for the very largest demonstrations,
ranging from Martin Luther King's march on Washington for jobs
and freedom back in 1963 with the famous ``I Have a Dream''
speech, to the Million Man march in 1995, the Promise Keepers
Rally in 1997, the Million Mom March against gun violence in
2000, and even the celebration of the Mass on the Mall by Pope
John Paul II back in 1979, the Mall is the only place where
these very large gatherings can be held. And we think it is
essential that everyone keep in mind the necessary purpose of
the Mall as a locus for those kinds of activities.
And I am happy to hear that no one seems to disagree with
that proposition. Of course, protecting the trees and the turf
is important, but as Congresswoman Norton just pointed out in
her questions a few moments ago, First Amendment activity is
not really the activity that poses the great danger to those
things, things like the Folklife Festival and the Solar Homes
Decathlon that lasts for weeks, that put tent stakes deep into
the ground, that cover large areas of the surface with food
service areas and dance floors and heavy equipment and
vehicles, are much more of a challenge.
I am happy to say that although back in the sixties and the
seventies there was a lot of conflict between the ACLU,
representing various demonstrators, and the National Park
Service about demonstrations in Washington, D.C., in recent
years the Park Service has been much more hospitable, welcoming
and facilitating to those kinds of activities. Our experiences
with them have been good, and we certainly hope and expect that
will continue. And we certainly hope that the committee will
keep carefully in mind, as all these processes go forward, the
important need to protect First Amendment activity in the
National Mall.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Spitzer follows:]
Statement of Arthur B. Spitzer, Legal Director,
American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area
Chairman Grijalva and members of the subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting me to testify today. I am the Legal Director
of the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area,
which is the local affiliate of the ACLU, a nationwide, nonprofit
organization representing more than 500,000 Americans who believe that
the protection of civil liberties and civil rights--including the
freedoms of speech and petition enshrined in the First Amendment--are
among our Nation's proudest achievements.
Those achievements are not self-protecting, however. As we have all
learned, they must be actively guarded against the constant pressure of
competing interests. As the National Park Service considers a new long-
term plan for the National Mall, it must therefore bear in mind the
essential role the Mall has played in the life of our democracy as a
location for First Amendment expression.
Americans have a constitutional right ``peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'' As the
Founders recognized, freedom of speech and the right to assemble
peacefully are indispensable characteristics of a government of, by and
for the People. When Americans feel the need to communicate
emphatically with their government, they have the right to come here,
to the Seat of Government, to communicate in person, with their bodies.
No one can deny that an assembly of thousands, or hundreds of thousands
of people communicates a powerful message about the breadth and depth
of feeling behind an issue, in a way that letters or e-mails, or even
hiring a lobbyist, simply do not.
Public parks in Washington, D.C., and throughout the nation, serve
as vital public forums for the exchange of ideas and public discourse.
The Supreme Court recognized that fact, and its constitutional
dimension, nearly seventy years ago: ``Wherever the title of streets
and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the
use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of
assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing
public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from
ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and
liberties of citizens.'' Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496, 515 (1939). Such
``traditional public forums'' receive the highest level of First
Amendment protection: ``In such places, the government's ability to
permissibly restrict expressive conduct is very limited.'' United
States v. Grace, 461 U.S. 171, 177 (1983) (striking down ban on
demonstrations on the sidewalks surrounding the Supreme Court).
The Nation's Capital is a location where the exercise of these
historic liberties is particularly appropriate and essential. There is
both symbolic meaning and functional practicality in the People's
ability and right to voice their concerns in the place where political
decisions are made and public policy is enacted and carried out. As the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has
noted, ``the general concepts of First Amendment freedoms are given
added impetus as to speech and peaceful demonstration in Washington,
D.C., by the clause of the Constitution which assures citizens of their
right to assemble peaceably at the seat of government and present
grievances.'' A Quaker Action Group v. Morton, 460 F.2d 854, 859 (D.C.
Cir. 1971). Indeed, the exercise of these rights in proximity to the
Capitol or the White House is ``of undoubted importance in the
constitutional balance,'' for this is ``where a petition for redress of
national grievances must literally be brought.'' Women Strike for Peace
v. Morton, 472 F.2d 1273, 1287 (D.C. Cir. 1972).
Thus, the courts have consistently upheld the First Amendment right
to demonstrate peacefully in public areas in the nation's capital,
including the Ellipse, Women Strike for Peace v. Morton; Lafayette Park
and the White House sidewalk, A Quaker Action Group v. Hickel, 421 F.2d
1111 (D.C. Cir. 1969); the Supreme Court sidewalk, United States v.
Grace, supra, the Capitol Grounds where we sit this morning, Chief of
Capitol Police v. Jeannette Rankin Brigade, 409 U.S. 972 (1972)
(summarily affirming 342 F. Supp. 575 (D.D.C. 1972)); and of course the
National Mall, ISCKON of Potomac v. Kennedy, 61 F.3d 949 (D.C. Cir.
1995); Henderson v. Lujan, 964 F.2d 1179 (D.C. Cir. 1992). The right to
assemble for First Amendment purposes in these places has been upheld
against governmental claims that such activity would create a risk of
terrorism, Lederman v. United States, 291 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2002),
impair presidential security, A Quaker Action Group v. Morton, 460 F.2d
854 (D.C. Cir. 1972), or interfere with the ```peace,' `serenity,'
`majesty,' maintenance of a `park-like setting,' and the `glorification
of a form of government through visual enhancement of its public
buildings.''' Jeannette Rankin Brigade, 342 F. Supp. at 585.
The National Mall stretches for nearly two miles between the U.S.
Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. ISKCON, 61 F.3d at 951. The National
Park Service refers to it as ``America's national civic space.'' NPS
National Mall Newsletter Fall/Winter 2007. While many public parks in
the nation's capital are utilized for the purposes of free speech and
assembly, the National Mall's size and central location make it ``an
area of particular significance in the life of the Capital and the
Nation,'' ISKCON, 61 F.3d at 951, where many of the nation's most
historic demonstrations have taken place. ``It is here that the
constitutional rights of speech and peaceful assembly find their
fullest expression.'' Id.
The Mall thus has a long tradition of use as a forum for speech and
assembly by a wide variety of groups with a diverse array of
viewpoints. A few examples will illustrate this breadth of this
impressive history.
In 1939, when African-American Marian Anderson was barred from
performing at privately owned Constitution Hall, First Lady Eleanor
Roosevelt and the NAACP organized an Easter Sunday concert on the
grounds of the Lincoln Memorial. More than 75,000 people turned out to
hear her sing, one of the largest crowds to have gathered on the Mall
up to that time.
In August 1963, the Lincoln Memorial was also the site of the March
on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, with more than 200,000 participants
hearing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s historic ``I Have a Dream''
speech.
In the 1971 ``Mayday'' demonstrations, more than 500,000 Americans
came to Washington to lobby Congress and protest against the Vietnam
War. Although the vast majority were peaceful, more than 13,000 were
arrested--arrests later declared unconstitutional in ACLU litigation.
Sullivan v. Murphy, 478 F.2d 938 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S.
880 (1973); Dellums v Powell, 566 F.2d 167 (D.C. Cir. 1977), cert.
denied, 438 U.S. 916 (1978).
In 1987, 1988, 1989, 1992 and 1996, the AIDS Memorial Quilt was
displayed in its entirety on the National Mall--the only place it has
ever been displayed in its entirety. The first display was during the
National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights, which drew
half a million participants. By the time of the last display, in
October 1996, the quilt covered the entire eastern half of the Mall,
from the Capitol to the grounds of the Washington Monument. There is
probably no other public forum in the nation that could have
accommodated it.
In October 1995, nearly four hundred thousand African-American men
gathered on the National Mall for the Million Man March, stretching
from the foot of the Capitol to the base of the Washington Monument.
In October 1997, the Mall was as the location of ``Stand in the
Gap,'' a gathering of perhaps a million Christian men organized by the
Promise Keepers organization.
On Mother's Day 2000, an estimated 500,000 people gathered for the
Million Mom March, organized after the shootings at Colorado's
Columbine High School, to foster handgun violence awareness.
Every January 22, the Mall serves as the starting place for the
March for Life, protesting the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade,
410 U.S. 113 (1973). On the other side of the same issue, the pro-
choice March for Women's Lives filled the Mall in April 2004.
The Mall has even hosted a celebration of the Mass by Pope John
Paul II on a Sunday in October 1979. Although that event was challenged
by individuals who alleged that it constituted a prohibited
``establishment'' of religion, that challenge was rejected by the
court, which explained that ``the National Mall is a public park that
has regularly been made available to all major demonstrations
presenting First Amendment values. That is the non-discriminatory
policy of the government, evolved in accordance with rulings of this
court. The government has applied this policy not only to purely
secular uses, but for uses by religious groups.'' O'Hair v. Andrus, 613
F.2d 931, 937 (D.C. Cir. 1979). (The ACLU of the National Capital Area
filed a brief in that case supporting the Pope's right to use the Mall,
as a public forum.)
Of course not all demonstrations on the Mall are of the same
magnitude. Each year the National Mall & Memorial Parks area hosts
nearly 3,000 events ``ranging from parades to national days of tribute
and observance to public demonstrations.'' NPS Park Spotlight,
available at http://www.nps.gov/parkoftheweek/. But every one is
important to those who participate, and to those who are exposed to new
ideas and opinions.
This is a history of which we should all be proud--and a tradition
that we should all wish to see continue undiluted.
The National Park Service is charged both with protecting the Mall
as a place of beauty and majesty, and with protecting its availability
for use by the American people for First Amendment activities and such
other uses as Congress sees fit to allow, such as motion picture
projections, kite-flying competitions, the Smithsonian Folklife
Festival, and displays of solar houses. We have no quarrel with any of
those activities, and we certainly have no quarrel with the Trust for
the National Mall's laudible goals of restoring and preserving the
Mall's structural elements and creating educational programs and events
to enhance the experience of visitors. But what the National Park
Service, the Trust for the National Mall, and the Congress, must not
ignore is the fact that, of all the activities that take place on the
Mall, only one is a matter of constitutional right.
It may be true, for example, that First Amendment assemblies can
cause some damage to the turf--but certainly not as much as such long-
running events such as the Folklife Festival or the solar homes
decathlon (see www.solardecathlon.org), which bring tens of thousands
of people to the Mall for days and weeks at a time, complete with heavy
equipment, enormous tents, stages, dance floors, food service areas and
the like. By comparison, a few hours' presence by even hundreds of
thousands of pedestrian demonstrators is not where the problem lies.
One option that the National Park Service reportedly has under
consideration is paving Union Square, at the west foot of the Capitol,
and making it a special venue for demonstrations. See Michael E. Ruane,
The Battle to Remold the Mall, Preservation Proposals Spark Debate Over
Protest Rights, The Washington Post, January 20, 2008. While some
groups might find such a venue appropriate, others may not--sitting for
hours on a shadeless concrete pad on a hot summer day seems more akin
to punishment than to freedom.
In our view, to the extent that public use of the Mall must be
limited for the purpose of protecting natural resources, the Mall's
availability as a forum for First Amendment assemblies must take
priority. There is no constitutional right to watch movies on the Mall,
to fly kites on the Mall, to display solar homes on the Mall, or to
erect food service tents and picnic tables on the Mall. There is a
constitutional right peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances on the National Mall.
The ACLU has registered as a consulting party in the Park Service's
planning process, and we hope to participate actively in that effort.
We know that this subcommittee will continue to provide legislative
oversight of that process, and we respectfully urge the subcommittee to
bear in mind, and to communicate to the Park Service, the primary
importance of the National Mall as the epicenter, so to speak, for the
American people's exercise of the vital First Amendment rights of
assembly and petition.
Thank you for your attention. I look forward to answering any
questions that you may have.
______
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you.
Judy Scott Feldman, Dr. Feldman, President, National
Coalition to Save Our Mall. Thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF JUDY SCOTT FELDMAN, Ph.D., PRESIDENT, NATIONAL
COALITION TO SAVE OUR MALL
Ms. Feldman. Good morning, Chairman Grijalva and committee
members.
I am Dr. Judy Scott Feldman, founding member and President
of the National Coalition to Save Our Mall, an independent
citizens' nonprofit formed in 2000 to provide an organized
voice for the public in Mall matters.
In 2007 our coalition created a new nonprofit, the National
Mall Conservancy, to fill gaps in Mall programming. Our
inspiration was New York City's Central Park Conservancy, where
they visited last week.
Some of our projects include our Friendly Mall Map and
Recreation Guide. We have copies for each of you, and programs
including the Mallwide Recycling Program, a visitors center and
education of tourists.
I was born and raised in Washington. My father worked in
the Senate as Staff Director in the Appropriations Committee.
The National Mall and Capitol Hill are part of my fondest
memories growing up.
With the committee's OK, I will submit my testimony for the
record, and summarize my main points.
As much as we welcome the flow of attention to the National
Mall by several NDC planners and the interest and good work of
Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, these efforts are
piecemeal, and lack any true vision for the future of this
nationally significant symbolic landscape.
In short, the Coalition is calling for a Congressionally
chartered commission of prominent Americans to prepare a vision
and framework plan for the National Mall, updating the 1901-
1902 McMillan Commission Plan, the last time there was a
serious look at the Mall as a whole.
Why a commission? The National Park Service claims sole
jurisdiction for the Mall. But in truth, management is
fragmented among six agencies, as shown in Illustration 1.
Oversight in Congress is divided among at least eight
Congressional committees, diagramed in Illustration 2.
Meanwhile, D.C. Mayor Fenty, in order for his Center City
Action Agenda to succeed, needs the Mall to be revitalized in
new ways, but he lacks any real planning authority for the
Mall.
Congress in 2003 declared them all completed, and imposed a
moratorium, but already has made exceptions, and more may
follow. The National Park Service calls its Mall plan a vision,
but it is little more than a typical management plan for grass
and restrooms.
Those of us participating in the public consultations for
this plan have been frustrated by the piecemeal approach and
the lack of clear scope and transparency in the planning
process.
The Coalition believes that the Mall cannot be completed
any more than American history will have stopped happening. It
is time for a radical rethinking of the Mall and its future as
one of our nation's most symbolic landscapes and civic spaces
in the heart of the Capitol and the nation.
This is not a task just for government agencies. As
mentioned, it requires the best creative minds in the country
to study the problems and needs and explore the exciting
possibilities for the future. At the turn of the 20th century,
the McMillan Commission understood what our burgeoning
democracy needed in its capitol: iconic locations for new
memorials, public buildings for growing government, a grand
expanded landscape that projected the image of the United
States as a world power.
Today, in an era when Americans don't know our nation's
history, how can we better utilize the Mall for civics
education? What is the vision of the Mall that speaks to us as
a people and a nation at this critical time in our history, and
in world history? What could a future vision look like?
The way to protect the Mall is to expand it again. Most
Americans don't appreciate that the original L'Enfant Mall,
what we call the First Century Mall, ended at the Washington
Monument; and that a century ago the McMillan Commission
expanded the Sexton Century Mall onto landfill, adding the
Lincoln Memorial and hundreds of acres of public parkland, as
shown in Illustration 3.
Today, the Third Century Mall can grow again, perhaps
incorporating East Potomac Park, L'Enfant Promenade, and other
public land, and provide new iconic locations for future
monuments and museums on the Mall. And the Mall can be
rejuvenated as a grand urban park, connected to the surrounding
city.
In Illustration 4 we show a sketched 10-year vision for the
Third Century Mall that includes a three-mile-long water park,
new pedestrian bicycle and shuttlebus routes connecting all
parts of the traditional and expanded Mall, new parking,
special venues for mega-events, and lively spaces for culture
and recreation.
In conclusion, imagine what a Third Century Mall could be
with the kind of leadership and vision that was applied by the
McMillan Commission, whose members included Daniel Burnham,
Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., Charles McKim, and Augustus Saint-
Gaudens, some of the nation's most creative minds.
Congress created that McMillan Commission at minimal cost
to the American taxpayer. We would urge Congress to once again
provide leadership by creating a Third Century Mall Commission.
We are pleased, Mr. Chairman, that you have taken a
leadership role in such an endeavor by having this hearing. I
will be willing to provide an expanded briefing for anyone on
the committee who would like to learn more about these ideas.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Feldman follows:]
Statement of Dr. Judy Scott Feldman, President and Chair,
National Coalition to Save Our Mall
Good morning, Chairman Grijalva and committee members. I am Dr.
Judy Scott Feldman, chair and president of the National Coalition to
Save Our Mall, an independent citizens nonprofit organization founded
in 2000 that works to protect and enhance the integrity of the National
Mall through education and advocacy. In 2007 we created a new
nonprofit, the National Mall Conservancy, inspired by New York City's
Central Park Conservancy, to fill gaps in programming for the Mall's
open space. With the Committee's okay, I would like to submit testimony
for the record and summarize my main points.
The Value and Limits of Current Federal and DC Government Planning
You've heard today about serious problems on the National Mall--
dead grass and crumbling walkways; flooding; sinking seawalls at the
Tidal Basin; numerous proposals for new museums and memorials despite
the Congressional moratorium; lack of visitor amenities and adequate
transportation--and about planning efforts by the National Park Service
and the National Capital Planning Commission to address these problems,
as well as Congresswoman Norton's proposed legislation aimed at
expanding the Mall. And you've learned that Washington, D.C., Mayor
Fenty's new Center City Action Agenda envisions the National Mall as a
lively urban park and the centerpiece of a revitalized ``center city''
stretching from Downtown to the Southwest Waterfront.
After years of trying to galvanize Mall planning, we are pleased to
see so much activity by the federal government and the city. As welcome
as this is, these efforts are insufficient and piecemeal.
While the National Park Service claims sole jurisdiction
for the Mall, in truth Mall management is fragmented among six agencies
including the Smithsonian Institution, the Architect of the Capitol,
the National Gallery of Art, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and DC
Government (See Illustration 1).
At the plan review level, the National Capital Planning
Commission and Commission of Fine Arts try to coordinate but tend to
defer to each agency's proposals.
We've identified at least eight congressional committees
with oversight, and we fear there is little communication among them
(see Illustration 2).
Some of these entities work in direct opposition; none
can agree on the Mall's definition or boundaries; none has the
authority to cut through the turf wars or the ad hoc development and
institutional neglect that have long characterized Mall management and
oversight.
And yet, visitors don't distinguish between the property
of the Park Service and the National Gallery, or a Senate or House
committee. They see the National Mall as a whole, from the Capitol to
the Lincoln Memorial, as an iconic landscape at the core of the
American psyche.
Even with all the ongoing planning activity, we don't see the kind
of visionary thinking and proposals we believe are warranted for this
great symbolic landscape.
NPS calls its plan the National Mall Plan and a
``vision,'' but in truth the scope is limited primarily to management
concerns--trees, grass, restrooms--and only to areas under park service
jurisdiction.
NCPC's Framework Plan addresses Congress' need for sites
for future museums and memorials off the Mall--certainly an urgent
problem as new museum and memorial proposals continue to proliferate--
but not the Mall itself.
With regard to the memorial siting challenge, we were
pleased to see Congresswoman Norton take a leadership role in proposing
to expand the Mall, which we have long advocated. We need to tell more
of the story of our country, through additional markers, memorials,
self guided tours, and the like. We simply cannot meet that need on the
traditional Mall, so expansion is essential. We would go further than
Congresswoman Norton.
Mall expansion needs to be about more than identifying
real estate for new monuments. It goes to questions of how the Mall's
value to the nation and the City of Washington as symbolic landscape
and urban park can be improved and enriched. And this is a conversation
we believe requires Congress to create a new, independent National Mall
Commission in the tradition of the McMillan Commission a century ago,
about which we will speak more in a moment.
DC's Center City Action Agenda Needs a Lively Urban Park
Adding to the complexity of how we look at The Future of the
National Mall is Mayor Fenty's new economic development action agenda,
which seeks to create a new, expanded ``center city'' with the National
Mall as the ``centerpiece.'' The Mall at long last could realize its
full potential as a lively urban park in the heart of our nation's
capital.
But DC government is confronted by a dilemma. Congress has declared
the Mall a ``substantially completed work of civic art'' and NPS and
other federal agencies are planning in ways that accept the status quo.
DC's Center City Agenda can only succeed, however, if the Mall can be
transformed into a lively urban park that serves and connects
neighborhoods and commercial areas around it. The status quo won't do.
The Mall has to be considered more than a national park such as
Yellowstone. It needs to be reconceived in ways that go beyond NPS
management policies, with their emphasis on preserving natural
resources, in favor of a vision for a grand urban park created to serve
people--25 million visitors annually from around the country and the
world, as well as local residents and workers. In other words, the Mall
cannot be ``completed'' if the Mall is to be part of the revitalization
of the nation's capital.
Compounding the problem for the city, DC Government is effectively
shut out of Mall planning. Again with the NPS's latest planning effort,
its National Mall Plan, there seems a reluctance by NPS to engage the
District government even as the adjacent neighborhoods, including the
area around the new ballpark, begin to attract business and new
residents for whom the Mall will be their ``local'' park. Those of us
representing citizens groups and nonprofits in NPS's National Mall Plan
consultation process are finding that the public has little opportunity
to influence NPS thinking and instead is asked to react to NPS
priorities (more about the NPS plan below).
A McMillan-type National Mall Commission
How to get beyond the fragmented jurisdictions, conflicting
priorities, and policy differences to plan the future of the entire
National Mall--for the nation, DC, and the American public?
We believe that only a congressionally chartered commission of
prominent Americans would be able to prepare a vision and framework
plan for the Mall as a whole, updating the 1901-1902 McMillan
Commission Plan, the last time there was a serious look at the entire
Mall. The commission could work with NPS and NCPC to identify federal
lands for Mall expansion; collaborate with the DC Government in
reconnecting the federal and DC interests for the Mall and the city as
a whole; and consult with the American public--local residents and
citizens around the country--to find ways to make the National Mall
newly relevant for all of us in coming years and decades.
The Coalition and Conservancy and a Public Voice
A Citizens' Vision for the 3rd Century Mall
For several years now, the Coalition has been proposing the
exciting possibilities for a 3rd Century Mall vision. Because we are an
independent citizens group, and not bound by Congressional or DC
policies and priorities, we have been able to focus our attention
exclusively on the Mall's history, problems, and future. We call our
concept a ``citizens' vision'' for the 3rd Century Mall.
We saw that in the years since declaring the Mall ``completed'' in
2003, Congress has made exceptions to its own moratorium. We realized
the Mall can't be ``completed''--any more than American history will
stop happening. As new projects continue to be authorized or proposed--
a Vietnam Veterans Memorial visitor center, a Museum of African
American History and Culture, and most recently a Latin American
Museum--and as our society continues to evolve, the call for monuments
and memorials will continue to grow, and the available space will
continue to shrink.
The Mall today has become ``the people's place,'' the stage for our
democracy. The American people feel that they own it. The Mall is a
place where our history continues to unfold, where our democracy can be
continually rejuvenated. It is poised as never before to become a
lively destination not only for visitors from around the country and
the world, but also for local residents, office workers, and businesses
that are bringing new life to downtown Washington and nearby
neighborhoods.
We call our concept a ``citizens' vision'' for the 3rd Century
Mall. It calls for a new vision that enlarges and builds upon the
historic L'Enfant Plan of 1791 (what we call the 1st Century Mall) and
the expanded McMillan Plan of 1901-02 (the 2nd Century Mall) and makes
them newly relevant to the 21st century--the 3rd Century Mall.
What could that vision entail (see Illustration 3)?
The Mall can be expanded. Most Americans don't appreciate
that the Mall originally ended at the Washington Monument, or that the
Lincoln Memorial is built on landfill. A century ago, the McMillan
Commission expanded the Mall with landfill, more than doubling its size
to create sites for the Lincoln Memorial and huge expanses of public
parkland. Today the Mall can grow again--perhaps incorporating such
public land as East Potomac Park, Theodore Roosevelt Island, L'Enfant
Promenade, the South Capitol Street corridor (for the most part, land
identified by NCPC and NPS for future memorials and museums)--to
accommodate more museums, more memorials, more civic and recreational
space.
What would an expanded Mall look like? We have created a sketch of
a ``10-Year Vision'' for the 3rd Century Mall that illustrates that
(see Illustration 4):
Expansion areas could be connected to the traditional
Mall and the surrounding neighborhoods in a continuous loop of
pedestrian, bicycle, and shuttle bus routes, including new bridges
across Washington Channel, and could encompass a three-mile-long
waterfront park;
New circulation patterns could unfold along the Potomac
route, starting at the Lincoln Memorial at the west and punctuated by
the FDR, Jefferson, and memorials yet to come, before crossing the
Washington Channel and ascending Capitol Hill along the majestic new
Gateway Boulevard;
Parking, new venues for mega events such as the
Smithsonian's Folklife Festival, and new recreational space could be
created beyond the Mall's traditional main vista.
We realize that our ideas are only the first step in moving toward
creating a 100-year vision on the scope and scale of the historic
L'Enfant and McMillan plans. The next step belongs to Congress and a
3rd Century Mall Commission.
The Limitations of the National Park Service's National Mall Plan
The National Coalition to Save Our Mall is participating as a
``consulting party'' in the Historic Preservation Act Section 106
public consultation for the National Mall, along with several other
nonprofit organizations and citizens groups. There have been a number
of public meetings and listening sessions where NPS planners have
presented and solicited comments.
The scope of the NPS planning effort has been a matter of some
confusion and concern among ``consulting parties'' in the Historic
Preservation Act Section 106 public meetings. It is still not clear how
NPS's study area relates to the historic L'Enfant Plan and McMillan
Plan. Instead, NPS focuses on planning for individual ``cultural
landscapes'' such as the Washington Monument grounds, Union Square (the
panel at the foot of the Capitol), but not for the National Mall as a
unified whole based on the historic L'Enfant Plan and McMillan Plan.
Nor has NPS explained adequately why critical topics such as
transportation and circulation--right now a major problem for visitors
and residents alike--and visitor amenities, such as good food options,
are not included in the scope of study and seem to be determined more
by the needs of NPS concessionaires than by public need. Several
participants in the Section 106 process have raised concerns about the
lack of transparency, insufficient consultation in developing
alternatives, listening sessions that revealed little about NPS
thinking and intent, and the piecemeal approach to different parcels of
the Mall and lack of an overall vision as a whole in the tradition of
the McMillan Commission. There is concern that NPS's management
priorities could set in motion changes that instead of showing the way
to the future could enshrine the status quo and inhibit needed
improvements.
Creating a Vision for the 3rd Century Mall
It's easy today to throw around the words ``vision'' in planning.
But none of the current federal and DC efforts--with their focus on
natural resources, memorials, and economic development--constitute a
vision for this iconic landscape. We would like to make our point about
the kind of vision needed--and why only an independent commission of
prominent Americans can achieve this--by looking back a hundred years
to the McMillan Plan of 1901-1902, the last successful long-range plan
for the Mall.
The McMillan Commissioners had a clear understanding of what our
burgeoning democracy needed in its capital city at the turn of the 20th
century: We needed sites for memorializing our heroes including Abraham
Lincoln. We needed great public buildings in the Federal Triangle to
house the growing civil service for our growing country. We needed to
restore L'Enfant's vision of the Mall as the people's place, by
clearing away the trees and clutter, and to tie it effectively to a
system of parks and recreational places throughout the capital city. We
needed to project an image in landscape, architecture, and majestic
vistas of our nation as a world power and shaper of history. The
Commission was blessed with land to grow into through the Corps of
Engineers project to drain the marshlands along the Potomac shore,
which resulted in creating hundreds of acres of new land contiguous to
the original Mall.
They gave us a plan that we have grown into over the past century
and that now, once again, needs renewal. We need to seize this
opportunity. The possibilities for the nation, the city, and the
American public are exciting.
This is not a task to be assigned to existing government agencies
each with its own parochial interests and turf. As in 1901, it is the
task of assembling a few of the best creative brains in the country to
study the problems and--with assistance from federal and DC agencies as
well as the public--plan how can best expand and rejuvenate our central
public space.
Here are some of the questions the new commission might want to
explore that would help shape the Mall during the next century:
Our country continues to produce national heroes and to
honor them on the Mall, including the recent FDR Memorial and the
coming MLK Jr. Memorial. In what places could we honor yet unknown
greats of the 21st century?
We are suffering collective amnesia about our national
history, especially among young people. How can we develop sites and
programs that better utilize the Mall--both the traditional Mall and
expansion areas--for civics education and activities?
If the federal agencies continue to decentralize and move
away from the Monumental Core area, what kind of new uses could the
Federal Triangle (where GSA is already aware of vacancies) and other
buildings serve?
As the city's urban core expands southward towards the
waterfront, the Mall will be come the center of an increasingly dense
residential and commercial city filled with citizens who will want
places to meet and recreate. How can we develop a 3rd Century Mall that
meets the needs that will arise as the population and function
diversifies?
We have never fully developed our riverfronts. As we deal
with global warming, how can we best deal with potential flooding while
making the riverfront more of a destination? Half the Mall already lies
in a flood zone. We are blessed with hundreds of acres of largely
undeveloped land left over from the Army Corps of Engineers landfill
project. How can this land best be used?
Most important, our nation's role in the world has
changed dramatically since 1902 and the last vision. How can the
National Mall best symbolize our concept of who we are as a people and
nation and where we hope to be a century from now?
When Congress declared the Mall ``a substantially completed work of
civic art'' with the intention of protecting the Mall from
overcrowding, it failed to couple its action with a program for long-
term expansion as the McMillan Commission did. Now Congress needs to
take leadership once again and charter a new McMillan-type commission
to imagine how we can best imagine the future of our National Mall, to
allow the Mall to grow creatively to serve its role as a stage for our
ever-evolving democracy.
The National Mall Conservancy Filling Gaps
The National Coalition to Save Our Mall and the National Mall
Conservancy are dedicated to helping fill the existing gaps in Mall
management and programming and in developing a structured public voice
to make this happen.
The National Mall Conservancy is working with government agencies
and other citizens groups on a number projects:
There is no comprehensive recycling program on the Mall,
each agency and building does its own thing. We've studied this and
I've approached the Federal Environmental Executive about taking this
on for the Mall as a whole
Transportation and circulation are limited. Tourmobile
provides interpretive tours at $25 a day for an adult but the
Circulator runs only during the week and peak hours and doesn't serve
the western Mall area. Nor does Metro with bus service. A graduate
course in transportation policy planning at George Mason University
undertook for us and just completed a review at our request and there
are serious gaps. It is not easy, especially for older people,
children, and those with disabilities to get around the long expanses.
The GMU report and PowerPoint presentation are posted at http://
policy.gmu.edu/programs/programs_tpol_practica.html>http://
policy.gmu.edu/programs/programs_tpol_practica.html
There is no Mall visitors' center, which we think could
be nicely provided in the Smithsonian's Arts & Industries Building,
with information, maps, a police substation for security, snacks,
restrooms. (I give tours on the Mall and the most frequent question I
get is where are the restrooms.)
Until the Coalition produced a map, there was no overall
map and historical guide. We prepared the first ever recreation guide
to the Mall as there is confusion over who has jurisdiction over the
ballfields that are well utilized by DC residents for softball, soccer
and so on.
Sustainable landscaping will be critically important in
the future and we've been in conversations with the USDA which is
moving forward with a creative sustainability landscape for its
building on the Mall, conceived as an open-air classroom of USDA
policies for stormwater, recycling, sustainable plantings, and so on.
While new FEMA flood maps have spurred DC and federal
agencies to work on urgent flood control problems, the challenges of
stormwater and flooding will require sustained, long-term creative
solutions. We have compiled an extensive bibliography of resources that
can be useful in future development of a larger regional approach to
flooding and global warming.
What Stands in the Way?
When I present these ideas to groups throughout the city and
region, audiences regularly ask me, ``What's standing in the way?'' I
can speak from experience that the public, and even many federal and DC
planners, are excited by our vision and the great opportunity for
creating a 3rd Century Mall vision.
But let's not fool ourselves. This will not be easy. Before a
Senate hearing on The Future of the National Mall in 2005, Chairman
Craig Thomas said he intended to create a Mall Commission. But he then
changed his mind after the NPS, NCPC, and Commission of Fine Arts
discouraged him, claiming that it would simply add another layer of
bureaucracy. And besides, they would do the visionary planning
themselves. Three years later, we see that's not so.
The need is more urgent than ever. Sustainability is a top priority
but no one of the agencies can tackle it adequately, nor can their
collective efforts rise to the level needed to confront the rising
problems of flooding and stormwater. Sinking seawalls at the Tidal
Basin can be repaired, but we need to rethink the whole character of
the hundreds of acres of landfill along the shores of our rivers.
Moreover, DC urgently needs a voice in shaping the Mall of the
future, as do local residents and the American public. Only Congress
can make that future happen.
Imagining a Visit to the 3rd Century Mall
Imagine what the 3rd Century Mall could be with the kind of
leadership and vision that was applied by the McMillan Commission--
whose members included Daniel Burnham, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr.,
Charles McKim, and Augustus Saint-Gaudens--some of the nation's leading
designers. In case you are not aware, the McMillan Commission conducted
its research by touring some of the great urban spaces and parks of
Europe. I'd happily join in any future research endeavors of this sort.
Seriously, with more than half the Mall built on landfill and
suffering effects of flooding and failing infrastructure, we need to go
beyond repairing problems to rethinking them. The Mall could be a
showcase of the most innovative and state-of-the-art approaches to
modern challenges of climate change. It could be transformed into an
open-air classroom that engages residents and visitors of all ages,
with demonstration projects for restoring turf grass, native
vegetation, historic streams and wetlands, as well as recycling and
whatever new solutions emerge in coming years and decades. Mall
expansion could include rethinking and reconfiguring the landfill on
both sides of the Potomac and Anacostia rivers.
I would be willing to follow up with anyone on the Committee who
would like to learn more about these ideas.
Attachments: 4 Images
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2475.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2475.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2475.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2475.004
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you very much. Our final witness, John
Akridge, III, Chairman, Trust for the National Mall.
Mr. Akridge.
STATEMENT OF JOHN E. ``CHIP'' AKRIDGE, III, CHAIRMAN, TRUST FOR
THE NATIONAL MALL
Mr. Akridge. Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee
on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, I want to thank
you for the opportunity to come and speak with you today and
tell you about the Trust for the National Mall.
My name is Chip Akridge. I am Chairman of Akridge, which is
a local commercial real estate development and property
management fund. But I am here today in my capacity as Chairman
of the Trust.
We have some written testimony, and I trust it will be
included in the record.
I am a Tennessean, I am a Vietnam veteran. And I also go
jogging. I am a runner, I jog on the Mall, and it is a hallowed
space. I don't know if any of you have been down there with the
sun coming up, moving west across 5th Street and watch the sun
come up over the Capitol, it makes the hair on the back of my
neck stand up. I am proud to be an American, proud to be here.
We could have been born anywhere in this world, but we were
born here in America, with the rights to choose our successes
as we have been able to do.
But I don't know if any of you have been down to the Mall
lately, in the past few days, past year, or whatever. But I am
here to report to you that it is a disgrace. It is in a state
of disrepair.
Do you all have these--you should have a copy of these
books we have passed out. I wouldn't mind you flipping through
those as I continue my testimony, because a few pictures are
worth a million of my words.
In fact, there is a $350 million deferred maintenance
backlog on the Mall, which is part of the National Park Service
nationwide system's $5 billion deferred maintenance backlog,
which I am sure you gentlemen are familiar with those numbers.
This backlog does not include any physical improvements to
the structure down there to handle the 25 million people who
currently visit the Mall. That is more people than Yosemite,
Yellowstone, and the Grand Canyon, the next three most busy
parks together. The park as it was originally designed, and has
been improved over the years, is not capable of handling the
people that is down there.
It also doesn't include any educational programs to educate
people as to what the American experience is and what freedom
is all about in this country.
I think that the Park Service has done a good job with the
budget that they have had, the limited budgets that they have
had, to keep them all in as good a shape as it is. But again,
the budget has just been woefully inadequate.
I use as an example the Washington Monument. If you look at
that monument, it has undergone renovation recently, primarily
for security reasons; but at the same time, that space was
upgraded to world-class space, which is what we are looking to
try to accomplish for the entire Mall.
While this space may be somewhat backyard to us here in our
backyard in Washington, it is America's front yard, and the
Park Service cannot, we don't believe, do this alone through
public funding. So we felt that a created public-private
partnership was a potential solution to solving this funding
gap.
We looked around the country and found the Central Park
Conservancy in New York which 30 years ago took Central Park,
which is an 800-acre park--the north half was closed because of
crime, the entire park was greatly run-down--and they have
raised about $500 million and brought that park back to world-
class status.
We formed the Trust with the idea of doing basically the
same thing to the National Mall. Our goal is to produce the
best park in the world, where visitors have the best park
experience in the world. It should be the best of the best.
We held our first public event on May 8, just about 12 days
ago, where 500 like-minded individuals turned out and
contributed over $600,000 toward this cause, which shows you
there is a willingness in the American public to support this
effort.
Last November Secretary Kempthorne rolled us out as the
sole fundraising partner for the National Park Service for the
Mall. Since then, Secretary Kempthorne and Director Beaumont
have been great supporters of that partnership, and it is
flourishing.
You just heard Superintendent O'Dell testify as to all the
efforts that are going on in terms of planning, and I won't go
back into that. But we estimate that $500 million is needed for
the Mall today: the $350 million I already mentioned, probably
$100 million for the beefed-up infrastructure, and $50 million
to establish educational and interpretive programs to tell the
story of what American democracy is all about, to our visitors
and to our children.
Our mission is simple. It is to support the National Park
Service mission, and I quote, ``to preserve and restore the
natural and cultural resources and values for the enjoyment,
education, and inspiration of this and future generations.''
As I said, the process which is underway, I will not
reiterate that there were, you know, over 500 professionals
would have reviewed the plan before it is approved, and over
23,000 Americans have already made their views known on what
should be done with the plan. The publishers made known that
their three main issues they are interested in, one was First
Amendment rights, which was just spoken to, and freedom of
expression. There was increase the number of toilets and food
facilities. They want to improve the fiscal meaning of the
space.
This space is the staircase of democracy through the
speech, leadership, sacrifice, and heroism. It is America's
front yard. It needs our help, and it needs it now.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Akridge follows:]
Statement of John E. ``Chip'' Akridge, III, Chairman,
Trust for the National Mall
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on National Parks,
Forests and Public Lands, I am Chip Akridge, Chairman of Akridge, a
local commercial real estate development and management firm.
I am here today in my capacity as Chairman of the non-profit
organization, the Trust for the National Mall. The Trust for the
National Mall is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting the
National Park Service mission to ``preserve--unimpaired the natural and
cultural resources and values ``for the enjoyment, education, and
inspiration of this and future generations.'' As the official funding
partner of the National Park Service for the National Mall, the Trust
has a long term goal to raise over $500 million to help return the Park
to a landscape of extraordinary beauty and to better connect visitors
to its unique and important history as the platform of our democracy.
After years of deferred maintenance on the National Mall, the
current cost of restoring ``America's Front Yard'' is a staggering $350
million. This figure does not include physical improvements to handle
the current volume of 25 million annual visitors or money for
educational programs.
The Park Service cannot restore ``America's Front Yard'' with its
current budget. This urgently needed work can be funded and completed
only through a creative public-private partnership, which is what the
Trust for the National Mall is proposing.
Over the last twenty years, I've enjoyed regular jogs through
downtown D.C. and across the National Mall. I started this routine to
check on my properties throughout the District and ended each run with
a scenic reminder of why I love this city, and a reminder of why I am
proud to be an American.
While I would look at the amazing icons on the National Mall: the
sun coming up over the Capitol, the flags circling the Washington
Monument, and the Jefferson, Lincoln and war Memorials, I rarely looked
at the National Mall as a property manager. Over four years ago,
someone challenged me to look closer at the condition of the park, and
sadly what I saw did not make this American proud. The National Mall,
``America's Front Yard,'' was and is a disgrace.
So with the help of several Washingtonians, I founded the Trust for
the National Mall in an effort to restore the National Mall to a place
of beauty befitting our nation's Capitol. We knew that we wouldn't be
alone in our efforts since there were many people in this community who
cared about this sacred and historic space. We were right.
We've modeled the Trust after the Central Park Conservancy in New
York. Thirty years ago, half of Central Park was closed and its 800
acres were completely run down. In 1980, Mayor Koch asked Bill
Beinecke, former Chairman of S&H Green Stamps, to lead a private effort
to restore that park, and a successful public-private partnership was
born.
More than 25 years later and with close to $500 million raised,
Central Park is truly a world-class urban space. We hope to follow
their lead, raise a similar amount, and restore the National Mall to a
place of beauty and pride for visitors and future generations.
Last November, the Trust held its national launch when Secretary of
the Interior Dirk Kempthorne announced the Trust's designation as the
official partner of the National Park Service (NPS) to raise private
funds to be added to Federal funds for execution of the National Mall
Plan. Under the leadership of the Secretary and NPS Director Mary
Bomar, our partnership is flourishing. They, along with the new
National Mall and Memorial Parks Superintendent, Peggy O'Dell, truly
see the value in creating productive public-private partnerships to
restore our national parks and have been terrific leaders in moving the
Trust forward because they are committed to this American treasure.
Today, with budget cuts and a deferred maintenance bill of $5
billion in the NPS system, the work cannot be done by the government
alone. The National Mall carries a $350 million deferred maintenance
deficit, and with 25 million annual visitors (more visitors than
Yellowstone, Yosemite and the Grand Canyon parks combined) the decay
from this wear and tear is massive and continues to grow. The NPS has
done an outstanding job with the funds available to them, but those
funds have been woefully inadequate to enable the NPS to properly
maintain the park.
The National Park Service is working diligently pursuing the
critical work of preparing the National Mall Plan which will determine
the future of the National Mall and will be the blueprint for our work.
The NPS is working with over twenty cooperating agencies and thirty
consulting parties to prepare the National Mall Plan. In all over 500
professionals will have reviewed and commented on the plan by the time
it is approved. Additionally, during the plan scoping phase NPS held
press conferences, issued media releases, published a newsletter
requesting participation, and held a symposium and public meetings.
More than 23,000 Americans from across the country have submitted their
comments to the plan. The most important messages from the public have
been to protect the space for First Amendment rights and freedom of
expression demonstrations, increase the number of toilets and food
facilities, and improve the physical beauty and quality of the area.
The National Park Service leadership and staff have taken very
seriously the guidance and vision of these organizations and the
thousands of Americans in developing the final plan. The NPS is
diligently pursuing the critical work of preparing the National Mall
Plan which is due to be released at the end of 2008 and will serve as a
blueprint for the NPS and the Trust's work.
In addition to the estimated $350 million needed for the deferred
maintenance backlog, approximately $100 million is needed for
infrastructure improvements like repairing or building additional food
and restroom facilities and $50 million is needed for educational
programming, to tell the story of our country's rich history found in
the park to all its visitors.
The National Mall, the 700-acre stretch of hallowed ground located
between the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial and from Constitution
Avenue to the Jefferson Memorial, has come to be known worldwide as a
symbol of democracy and America's heritage. It encompasses the strength
and proud history of our nation, symbolizes the democracy that our
forefathers worked so hard to secure, and memorializes the sacrifices
of so many who have given their lives to preserve. It is ``America's
Front Yard.''
Our project is unique: restore and preserve one our greatest
American icons for all visitors and future generations. For some of us
the National Mall is our backyard, but its real reach and purpose is
without boundaries. Because of this, we know our efforts must be far-
reaching in scope and require the support of volunteers ranging from
gardeners and academics to individual and major donors from across the
country. Our efforts will include outreach and education to all
Americans, including students and parents, community leaders and
patrons, educators and historians.
As a real estate developer and property manager, I know what an
immensely difficult and ongoing task it is to maintain the National
Mall in world-class condition given the enormous usage of the space.
But its purpose is to honor our forefathers and all the people who have
made our country what it is today. It must be fixed and maintained and
protected for First Amendment use in perpetuity.
We believe--and are certain that you will agree--that the National
Mall is one of the Nation's chief cultural assets. There is no other
place in the United States that celebrates our democracy, freedom of
speech, leadership, and heroism like the National Mall, America's Front
Yard. And it needs all of our help now.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2475.005
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. Let me thank all the panelists.
Mr. Spitzer, you know, your idea, or the concept of
funneling off free speech activities into one site-specific
venue I agree is unacceptable. And that shouldn't be the intent
of the planning, and that shouldn't bog down what I think is a
very important planning process by raising that issue.
Let me ask you, the discussion of providing amenities--
i.e., speakers, all those in various locations along the mall
to facilitate entertainment, activities, and possibly also
demonstrations--what is your reaction to that concept?
Mr. Spitzer. I think that could be a very positive thing,
Mr. Chairman. I think making the Mall a more user-friendly
place for demonstrators, as well as tourists and local
residents, I think that those are not conflicting goals
necessarily at all.
I think many demonstrators would appreciate having a prime
location, with the Capitol Dome in the background of their
speaker stand for their own viewing, and for photographs and
television; and having restroom facilities and benches and
water and electrical outlets for their use. I think all those
things could be very positive things, which could obviously be
available for non-demonstrators at other times.
We are not necessarily opposed to the possibility, and I
gather it is only a possibility, of having a multi-purpose use
for the Union Square area at the foot of Capitol Hill. I don't
know what kind of costs would be involved in having that
reflecting pool being a drainable and refillable area; that is
obviously something that others can study. As long as
demonstrators are not being told here is your sort of
demonstrator-specific and that is where you have to go.
Many demonstrators, especially some of the smaller ones,
might be happy to have such a location.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. Dr. Feldman, quickly, if I may, an
example of why you feel that the public has had little
opportunity to influence National Park Service thinking on this
National Mall Plan. And just quickly follow up why the
Commission idea would deal with that issue of lack of
participation in a much broader way. You mentioned that
McMillan Commission idea.
Ms. Feldman. The National Coalition to Save Our Mall, we
have been involved in consultations, public consultations, with
the Smithsonian, the Architect of the Capitol, the Park
Service, and other agencies for the past eight years. And we
can compare and see how the different processes work.
First of all, we represent a public voice, not an agency
voice. So in all cases, we are dealing with, based on five
public forums we had in 2004, a point of view that is a little
different from the priorities of the government agencies.
In the case of the Park Service, we have been participating
in the Mall planning issues. But what happens is the Park
Service puts together information and matrices and
alternatives, but none of us participating for nonprofits
really had a clear understanding of where the choices are
coming from.
So we have tried, and we are doing, we are participating.
Five thousand comments have come in from others, as well as
from us. But when we see the matrix, then we do not see the
issues, primarily transportation, good food, and the bigger
question of the Mall as a whole, which is not being addressed
by the Mall Plan. That, I think, is why the Mall Commission
idea comes out.
In 1899 the Mall was divided up into different areas under
different jurisdictions, and even some of the land had been
sold off to private interests. They were confronted, the
Congress, the Senate Park Commission, and the McMillan
Commission were confronted with very similar issues. They
needed a place for the Lincoln Memorial. They needed
essentially Mall expansion. They needed to clean up what was
already there. But they also needed to consolidate all the
different planning that was going on by different agencies,
because the Mall is a symbol as a whole of the nation.
And we were looking at then and what we are looking at now
is government agencies are doing their planning, and that is
fine; but their priorities are agency priorities. Whereas the
big question of the Mall, as a symbol of our national identity,
and a place where our monuments should continue to unfold, we
shouldn't be forcing people off the Mall, in our view.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. And let me indulge in extra time
so I can finish my question.
Mr. Akridge, you stated what is and was a disgraceful
condition of the Mall that you mentioned in your testimony. To
stop this continuing disgracefulness, for lack of a better
word, and to change that, what kind of activities do you feel
are leading to creating the disgraceful condition? Is it the
intensity of visitation and activity on the Mall? Is it the
lack of proper resources for the maintenance, upkeep, safety
issues?
And you know, I understand the private sector contribution,
how important that is going to be. Do you feel, you know, they
are not glamorous--the sprinkler system, turf restoration,
restrooms--they are not the glamorous things that people like
to put their names on when they donate. But nevertheless, those
two questions in terms of if you would quickly respond to them,
I would appreciate that.
Mr. Akridge. Yes, Mr. Chairman. You need a roadmap to get
from where we are today to the best park in the world, that is
a fact. And we see the National Mall Plan, which is presently
being undertaken by the Park Service, as producing that roadmap
as a result of that process.
And I think that all the issues that you, which you
mentioned, the infrastructure just seems inadequate to handle
the people, the uses out there are being looked at as to how to
manage those. All aspects of the operation of the Mall are
being looked at in this plan.
And we see that the plan, once finished, which we hope will
be finished late this year or next year, will provide that
roadmap to bring us from our present situation to world-class
status.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Akridge. Yes, sir.
Mr. Grijalva. Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. I have no specific questions, but
Mr. Akridge, I certainly want to thank you for the information
you provided. And I hope it is within our ethics standards if I
keep this? OK, good.
Dr. Feldman, I appreciate the written testimony.
Mr. Spitzer, I was especially impressed with the passionate
defense you had for multiple use on the Mall. Lest your
organization be considered hypocritical in any way, I certainly
hope you have that same passionate defense for multiple use of
public lands in the West as you do here in Washington, D.C. And
also the passionate defense for all Constitutional rights in
public spaces. So I appreciate your testimony from all of you.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. Mr. Sarbanes.
Mr. Sarbanes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess, Ms. Feldman
and Mr. Akridge, this question is for you.
What do you have the most anxiety about, in terms of
solving the problem? I mean, is it trying to coordinate
competing visions that all these different groups have for the
Mall? Is it trying to coordinate competing jurisdiction and
authority that the six or more different entities you referred
to have? Is it worrying that the resources won't be there in
the end, even for a coordinated vision that is eventually
rolled out? I mean, is it a combination of all three?
But what are the thing that you see as the most significant
obstacle to getting moving on this?
Ms. Feldman. I think what we have found over eight years,
it has been fragmented management and jurisdiction. Even if a
government agency expresses a certain amount of interest, then
there is a committee in Congress with oversight of a different
agency that sees this as potentially impinging on their
authority.
We are concerned with ways, already in a Senate hearing in
2005, that essentially went like today. The government agencies
all said things were taken care of that we are planning. This
is three years later, and everyone is planning.
But again, we are dealing with fragmented priorities. And
even though everyone is planning, everyone is staying to their
turf and planning with their own priorities. And our fear is
that with the Latino-American Museum coming, with at least 30
museums and other projects coming, we can't keep saying no, the
Mall is finished, we are just going to fix the grass. We have
to say our vision has always been evolving.
We need to rise above the division and above the
fragmentation. We really have to see the changes required that
we have to look forward, and we have to give our children that
doesn't say they don't have a place in the Mall.
It is hard because everyone is protecting their turf. But
as the public keeps saying, the Mall is not a collection of
agencies. To the American people it is this grand symbol of who
we are. We want it to remain growing, evolving, beautiful, and
inspiring.
Mr. Sarbanes. Mr. Akridge referred to what happened with
Central Park as kind of a model of what you can do, but I don't
know how many different jurisdictions are involved there. I
presume less than what you are dealing with here, so that may
not be the best model from a practical standpoint.
Ms. Feldman. Well, we just went up last week and met with
both Adrian Benepe, the head of the New York City Parks, and
the President of the Central Park Conservancy, Dr. Blonsky.
They certainly sympathize with our condition in Washington
because we have so much divided management.
But what they found is what the conservancy did is, it is a
citizen-based independent group originally. It was not tied to
any one agency. And so it could create a constituency that
wasn't tied to one entity or another, collect money--and of
course, they have a lot more on Fifth Avenue than we may have.
But because it was citizen-based and public-spirited, the
city--and it took 20 years--but the City Parks Department
eventually made a contract with the conservancy as the
citizens' voice.
And so yes, that is one reason why we created our
conservancy, to be an independent, unconnected citizens' voice.
And eventually, you know, taking baby steps now, but we are
doing projects. And the projects we are working with on the
USDA on the sustainable landscape, and George Mason University,
a study on transportation.
We are trying to build a citizens' constituency that also
the government can talk to, and as another voice beyond the
Federal agencies in the city.
Mr. Sarbanes. Mr. Akridge, do you have a comment on
obstacles?
Mr. Akridge. Yes, I think that is what my biggest fear was
in terms of getting on with this. And that is, is it simply
comes along that knocks back the conclusion of the National
Mall Plan.
We need to complete this plan. I think that you have heard
we have certainly seen unprecedented cooperation amongst these
various agencies, and I think there is a strong desire amongst
the agencies to come up with a single plan that takes into
account the various organizations' interest to the best that
they can.
Obviously there has to be compromise on a lot of different
fronts. We have a lot of different entities involved. But this
plan explaining your place, what roadmap we need to get started
on bringing the Mall back to world-class status needs to begin.
And it cannot begin until it is approved.
So my biggest fear is that something will come along to
knock that approval process back or to delay it, so that we
can't get started.
As in any 30-year plan, it is not going to be written in
stone. Obviously the plan will be reviewed on a periodic basis
against the goals and against the changing times to make sure
that we are doing the right thing. Thirty years ago we didn't
have computers, I mean, so the idea has to be a living plan; I
think it will be.
So yes, my biggest concern is that, that we don't get
started.
Mr. Sarbanes. Mr. Chairman, also a real quick question
about this. Would you hazard a guess, or try to quantify, how
much of what we see and hear that was disgraceful would you say
would be different if the $350 million backlog of repairs and
other infrastructure, upgrades and other things which you
alluded to, had been dealt with?
In other words, if there was $350 million that had gone
into the Mall when it should have, would you say, you know, 70
percent of what you are depicting here would be different? Or
would there only be 50 percent because there are other things
at work? Can you just----
Mr. Akridge. I would say the large majority of it. Probably
the one thing that would not have gotten done, and it is not in
that $350 million, is the seawall and the tidal basin at the
Jefferson Memorial, which has just recently come into view as
being a big problem in and of itself.
But I would say the majority of the things that you see,
you know, the Constitution Gardens, which was completed 30
years that was mentioned earlier, there has been virtually no
maintenance done on that particular area of the park in 30
years.
Mr. Sarbanes. OK, thank you.
Mr. Grijalva. Congresswoman, any questions, comments?
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have three
questions. I will try to stay within----
Mr. Grijalva. That is fine.
Ms. Norton. I want to thank all three of you. This is an
important testimony for all of us to hear.
Mr. Akridge, I am going to just say you are performing a
magnificent public service. Mr. Akridge has led a very public-
spirited development in the District of Columbia. But to take
this on, which is essentially the work of government itself--
and that is what you are doing. You seem to be dealing with the
maintenance and the kinds of backlogs that one would expect if
the Park Service had money, it would have done itself.
And I see the importance, because I am a race-walker along
the Mall. I love it, even in its decrepit condition. Even
though I agree with you, it is a disgrace.
Mr. Akridge, you heard the testimony of Ms. O'Dell. It
looks like a lot is going to depend on the Trust. I mean, I was
flabbergasted to hear that, you know, with signage, for
example, we are waiting for the Trust. We are waiting for the
Trust. And we are not waiting for Godot, but the notion is, you
know, all of this is going to have to be done with the Trust.
So I therefore must ask you what the timetable is for
raising funds; when it is raised, can it be disbursed as
raised? Or how does the fundraising mechanism work, given the
extraordinary means even for basics of the Park Service?
Mr. Akridge. Well, it is a two-part question. The signage
issue was given to us actually by, it was this committee as
part of the Centennial Challenge, with the public-private
disbursement, $1.1 million from the Federal government, $1.1
million from the private sector. And we were given the award
three weeks ago I guess now.
We have already begun raising the money, and we will have
money raised by the end of September, the end of this fiscal
year, which I don't see a problem with that.
As far as other members are concerned, the Park Service is
not going to spend money on the Mall until the Mall plan is
finished, is the short answer to that question. So once the
plan is finished and we are implementing the plan, which is----
Ms. Norton. Well, can it wait until you raised all $500
million?
Mr. Akridge. No, it can be expended as raised.
Ms. Norton. If I could just put in a plug for restrooms. I
just think that is the most basic amenity. And if the museums
aren't open, and they are always crowded, on our race-walks,
then----
Mr. Akridge. Part of the plan is to prioritize the needs.
Ms. Norton. I am just asking that it be given priority. I
don't know what you do with a kid when he says, Mommy, I have
to go. Where, if the museums are closed?
I have a question for each of you. I just want to be
clearer on Mr. Spitzer. You see, I have two kinds of
objections. One, don't take away our reflecting pool; if you
do, you are going to have each time put it back. And of course,
any First Amendment objections that you have, I would be
inclined to have.
This is the place in the country, the premiere place where
American citizens of every background come for their own use
and protests. And you have heard the testimony. She was telling
only about 10 major events. And I appreciate the difference
between the other events, which of course are not First
Amendment at all, but which people, like the Folklife Festival.
She says in her testimony, Ms. O'Dell says that they are
not considering any alternatives that are not in keeping with
the First Amendment and Federal regulations. And there was
perhaps some confusion between protests and demonstrations, and
you would be able to protest anywhere.
And of course, as you know, under the First Amendment, a
demonstration could always be, you can find time, place, et
cetera.
Do you think that you and the Park Service are going to be
on the same page when this is all done, and that your concerns
have been addressed?
Mr. Spitzer. Well, I hope we will be on the same page when
this is done. I guess that remains to be seen.
But what I have heard and what I have heard in some private
discussions before today's hearing makes me more optimistic
about that then I was when I read some stories in the paper a
few months ago.
There doesn't seem to be any desire to confine First
Amendment activity to a demonstrator's pit someplace. I mean,
the idea of demonstrators sitting in a, you know, in a paved
square under the scorching summer sun, rather than being able
to sit on grass or under a tree, would not be very welcoming or
inviting. And I hope that is not what is in anybody's mind.
On the other hand, the possibility of providing improved
amenities for demonstrators, along with others, is certainly
not a negative thing. And I think as long as the Park Service
and the other organizations that are involved in this effort
are aware that this committee and Congress care very much about
protecting the First Amendment use of the Mall, then the
chances that we will all be on the same page at the end of the
process will be greatly improved.
Ms. Norton. Well, this is, this is another piece for Mr.
Akridge's plate. If this were private, if the Mall was a
private enterprise, having demonstrations on the Mall, just
like having the Smithsonian like that would be a cost of doing
business. So to say to the American people we can't have your
demonstrations and protests on the Mall because we don't have
the money raises very, very, it seems to me, very serious
issues.
But they do have maintenance problems when people use the
Mall. And when we talk about backlog, we are really talking
about extra funds so that when damage occurs, it can be
repaired without saying to the American people, I am sorry, you
can't go on the grass.
Ms. Feldman, I just want to thank you publicly for your
extraordinary, visionary work on the Mall when nobody was
listening. You and I would have meeting after meeting. The Park
Service wasn't activated and there was no one else, but you and
your commission were active and have been wonderfully, it seems
to me, imaginative in all of this, and I just wanted to clarify
a couple of parts of your testimony. The Chairman has had
beforehand all of the agencies involved in planning, but there
is a part of your testimony that talks about multiple
jurisdictions in the west. I wouldn't let them off that easy,
Ms. Feldman.
There is no question that this is an important hearing. The
Chairman was able to call beforehand everyone. I can't think of
any other committee that either would do that, or would have
the jurisdiction to do that. And the notion about the
Smithsonian and the National Gallery, I can say to you without
fear of contradiction that the Smithsonian could care less
about the Mall. They have a far greater backlog, maintenance
backlog, than the Park Service. Thus, I do not believe that the
National Gallery of Art or the rest of them tend to the Mall,
have an interest in the Mall.
I now regard this as a jurisdictional matter. I believe
this committee has the authority it seems to take the authority
to do what it can to move this matter. Maybe in some world
where Congress does not live, you know, you could put
everything under a Czar and get things done, wearing the
frustrations out from being in the Congress is had the monk
work with the beast.
And this is the beast. And I think this beast is far easier
to handle than the ones I have seen on other committees, where
indeed the multiple-jurisdiction committees fight for
jurisdiction. The problem I have had is that nobody has been
fighting for this jurisdiction.
I would like to ask you, though, about forcing people off
the Mall, and the Mall is not a finished work. Because I think
we are playing with words here.
Is it not the case that when the Mall was declared by
somebody, it may have been NCPC, to be a finished work of art,
they were really talking about every Tom, Dick, and Harry
wanting his own memorial on the strip between the Capitol and
the Lincoln Memorial. And it got so overcrowded and so
unmanageable that they, on their own, went to other places, and
have had some success in going to other places around the Mall.
As I understood it, you were for an expanded space. You
were for these spaces other than on that strip. So I wasn't
sure what you meant by forcing people off the Mall, or that the
Mall is not a finished work of art. It seems to me that you are
playing on words there, because I don't believe they meant to
say that you don't, you don't have an evolving kind of
masterpiece here. It just means that, it seemed to me, that you
were destroying the masterpiece by having to fight off every
small and large memorial that came along.
So I would like you to clarify what you had in mind.
Ms. Feldman. First of all, I think that what has come out
today is that everyone understands that the Mall needs a lot of
work, and it is going to need some financing, whether it is
government or private. We all support the notion of raising
funding to improve the infrastructure, the monuments and
memorials. That is all very important.
Our issue has to do with something other than Mall
management and maintenance. What we are trying to get at is the
concept of a vision. When NCPC came up with the notion that the
Mall was completed, absolutely, and then Congress went along,
the notion was we have run out of space for new memorials and
museums.
And what is happening, and what has been happening for the
past several years, is we are actually locating new monuments
on existing monumental grounds. That happened with the Vietnam
Veterans Memorial Visitors Center, which is going to go
actually on the Lincoln Memorial grounds, and now the African-
American History Museum is going to go on part of the
Washington Monument grounds.
So we are starting to build on top of already-dedicated
zones. We support that notion that the Mall, the existing Mall,
can't take on more memorials that take over the public open
space, which was the original purpose of the Mall. That is why
we support expansion, as you have proposed.
Expansion, however, is not a question of real estate, of
not just identifying new real estate where new monuments can
go. The Mall concept is one of the public promenade, going back
to 1791, the expression of this open space as the we, the
people, place between the Executive and the White House, and
the Legislative and the Capitol. It is the symbolic quality of
it that requires more than a real estate approach, or a
prohibition, or limitations, or a management plan.
We don't argue that all of these other plans are absolutely
important, including the Center City agenda. But what we need
now is a way to reconnect the National Mall, which has become a
Federal enclave, to the lively city around it, and which really
depends on the Mall becoming something other than a tourist
venue.
It really means something, and this is something that we
have uncovered. The Park Service has a mandate, through the
Organic Act, to preserve natural resources. The problem with
the Mall is it was intended as a lively urban park. So we had,
in essence, contrasting priorities----
Mr. Grijalva. We are going to have to wrap this part of it
up. And we have one additional set of questions from Mr.
Inslee, and I apologize for that. And then we are running
against some schedule deadlines for not only myself, but other
members.
Mr. Inslee, do you have any questions?
Mr. Inslee. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. A concern I have is
to the extent sort of our generation is using up the Mall,
every generation, you know, throughout American history is
going to have some claim on the Mall.
I had a concern that our generation was claiming it a lot
more rapidly than other generations. And it is an end-use
finite real estate.
I am just asking for comments how we should figure out how
much claim each generation should have on the Mall, and how do
we decide that. I don't want our, the Baby Boomer generation,
to be seen as being overly greedy about this precious real
estate.
Ms. Feldman. Well, I would just say that that is exactly
how we came about the notion of a National Mall Commission.
If we have people like historians like David McCullough, or
if we have college presidents that are used to dealing with
divided management and fractious points of view; if we could
get big thinkers, real creative minds to help us answer these
questions. Then instead of saying, the way we do now, that
whoever has the money and the political power to get a monument
on the Mall gets one, a bigger question is what belongs there,
and how we can make it a better place.
But that, I think we need help to do that.
Mr. Inslee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. And before I wrap, thank all the
panelists and excuse myself, and apologize for interrupting
mid-sentence or mid-paragraph, I don't know where I
interrupted.
You know, sometimes when I vote on the Floor, I feel like I
am in a demonstrators' pit, but that is another story.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Grijalva. I wanted to say the 50-year plan is probably,
for our national identity for the Mall, one of the most
important undertakings that this Congress and this nation has
in front of them. And I think the issue, as I saw it today, is
how do you integrate the vitality of city residents with the
need to promote that national identity for visitors and
tourists, as well.
And I think that can be done, but it can be done with
transparency, with inclusion, and with the eye toward this
being a lasting memorial. And also redefining what we mean by
Mall, and defining what was appropriate for that Mall.
Those are difficult questions. And I think the National
Park Service has an undertaking in front of them that is very,
very serious. And certainly this committee will not only
monitor, but, thanks to the Congresswoman, provide additional
oversight as that process begins. And one of the oversight
issues is the inclusion issue. And I want to thank this last
panel for making that a very important part of this hearing.
And with that, let me adjourn the meeting. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]